Medicine in black and white: BiDil®: race and the limits of evidence-based medicine

  1. George Ellison

Article first published online: 23 AUG 2006

DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-9713.2006.00181.x

Issue

Significance

Significance

Volume 3, Issue 3, pages 118–121, September 2006

Additional Information

How to Cite

Ellison, G. (2006), Medicine in black and white: BiDil®: race and the limits of evidence-based medicine. Significance, 3: 118–121. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-9713.2006.00181.x

Author Information

  1. Professor of Health Sciences at St George's, University of London and collaborates on statistical issues with Mark Gilthorpe and colleagues at the University of Leeds. His work on the use of racial and ethnic categories in biomedical research has been funded by two grants from the Wellcome Trust's Biomedical Ethics Research Programme (057182 and 073524/2/03/2/AW/HH)—the latter with Richard Tutton and Paul Martin from the University of Nottingham, Andrew Smart from Bath Spa University, and Richard Ashcroft from Queen Mary's, University of London. See: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/igbis/reg/.

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 23 AUG 2006
  2. Article first published online: 23 AUG 2006

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

Get PDF (1178K)

When the US Food and Drug Administration licensed the drug BiDil® in June 2005 it was hailed as a significant step towards “personalised prescribing”. This is because BiDil® had been patented, tested and approved for use by just one group of patients: those “of African descent”. George Ellison examines the statistical evidence that underpinned the development of BiDil® as a “racial drug” and finds it less than satisfactory.

Get PDF (1178K)