The implications of Methylphenidate use by healthy medical students and doctors in South Africa

Background: The use of medical stimulants to sustain attention, augment memory and enhance intellectual capacity is increasing in society. The use of Methylphenidate for cognitive enhancement is a subject that has received much attention in the literature and academic circles in recent times globally. Medical doctors and medical students appear to be equally involved in the off-label use of Methylphenidate. This presents a potential harm to society and the individual as the long-term side effect profile of this medication is unknown. Discussion: The implication of the use of Methylphenidate by medical students and doctors has not been fully explored. This article considers the impact of this use on the traditional role of medicine, society, the patient and suggests a way forward. We discuss the salient philosophy surrounding the use of cognitive enhancement. We query whether there are cognitive benefits to the use of Methylphenidate in healthy students and doctors and whether these benefits would outweigh the risks in taking the medication. Could these benefits lead to tangible outcomes for society and could the off label-use of Methylphenidate potentially undermine the medical profession and the treatment of patients? If cognitive benefits are proven then doctors may be coerced explicitly or implicitly to use the drug which may undermine their autonomy. The increased appeal of cognitive enhancement challenges the traditional role of medicine in society, and calls into question the role of a virtuous life as a contributing factor for achievement. In countries with vast economic disparity such as South Africa an enhancement of personal utility that can be bought may lead to greater inequities. Summary: Under the status quo the distribution of methylphenidate is unjust. Regulatory governmental policy must seek to remedy this while minimising the potential for competitive advantage for the enhanced. Public debate on the use of cognitive enhancement is long overdue and must be stimulated. The use of Methylphenidate for cognitive enhancement is philosophically defendable if long-term research can prove that the risks are negligible and the outcomes tangible

Estrogen-Eluting Stents

Coronary stenting is routinely utilized to treat symptomatic obstructive coronary artery disease. However, the efficacy of bare metal coronary stents has been historically limited by restenosis, which is primarily due to excessive neointima formation. Drug-eluting stents (DES) are composed of a stainless steel backbone encompassed by a polymer in which a variety of drugs that inhibit smooth muscle cell proliferation and excessive neointima formation are incorporated. DES have significantly reduced the incidence of restenosis but are also associated with a small (~0.5% per year) but significant risk of late stent thrombosis. In that regard, estrogen-eluting stents have also undergone clinical evaluation in reducing restenosis with the additional potential benefit of enhancing reendothelialization of the stent surface to reduce stent thrombosis. Estrogen directly promotes vasodilatation, enhances endothelial healing, and prevents smooth muscle cell migration and proliferation. Due to these mechanisms, estrogen has been postulated to reduce neointimal hyperplasia without delaying endothelial healing. In animal studies, estrogen treatment was effective in decreasing neointimal hyperplasia after both balloon angioplasty and stenting regardless of the method of drug delivery. The first uncontrolled human study using estrogen-coated stents demonstrated acceptable efficacy in reducing late lumen loss. However, subsequent randomized clinical trials did not show superiority of estrogen-eluting stents over bare metal stents or DES. Further studies are required to determine optimal dose and method of estrogen delivery with coronary stenting and whether this approach will be a viable alternative to the current DES armamentarium

The role of impulsivity in the aetiology of drug dependence: reward sensitivity versus automaticity

Journal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tCopyright © The Author(s) 2011.RATIONALE: Impulsivity has long been known as a risk factor for drug dependence, but the mechanisms underpinning this association are unclear. Impulsivity may confer hypersensitivity to drug reinforcement which establishes higher rates of instrumental drug-seeking and drug-taking behaviour, or may confer a propensity for automatic (non-intentional) control over drug-seeking/taking and thus intransigence to clinical intervention. METHOD: The current study sought to distinguish these two accounts by measuring Barratt Impulsivity and craving to smoke in 100 smokers prior to their completion of an instrumental concurrent choice task for tobacco (to measure the rate of drug-seeking) and an ad libitum smoking test (to measure the rate of drug-taking-number of puffs consumed). RESULTS: The results showed that impulsivity was not associated with higher rates of drug-seeking/taking, but individual differences in smoking uptake and craving were. Rather, nonplanning impulsivity moderated (decreased) the relationship between craving and drug-taking, but not drug-seeking. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that whereas the uptake of drug use is mediated by hypervaluation of the drug as an instrumental goal, the orthogonal trait nonplanning impulsivity confers a propensity for automatic control over well-practiced drug-taking behaviour.MR