Health Affairs, 25, no. 5 (2006): w368-w374 (Published online 15 August 2006) doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.25.w368 © 2006 by Project HOPE	New Online   McAllen, TX & Beyond: An Expert Roundtable   Geography & Reform   Medicaid or Insurance Exchange?   Siren Song of New GME   Public Plan Option: Pro & Con

This Article Full Text (HTML) Reprint (PDF) Submit a response to this article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services E-mail this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Archive Download to Citation Manager Reprints & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Puckrein, G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Puckrein, G.

Web Exclusives

BiDil: From Another Vantage Point

In a recent Health Affairs Web Exclusive, Pamela Sankar and Jonathan Kahn argue against the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of BiDil as a new drug for the treatment of heart failure in African Americans. Their paper questions the existence of disparities between African American and other heart-failure patients and the motivations of BiDil’s developers and manufacturer. The disparities are confirmed and persistent, however, and BiDil’s effectiveness is proven. If the authors’ logic were to prevail, patients would be denied life-saving therapy. Continued investigation will likely narrow identification of patients who will benefit.

                      What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. E. Roberts Is race-based medicine good for us?: african american approaches to race, biomedicine, and equality. J. Law Med. Ethics, September 1, 2008; 36(3): 537 - 545. [PDF]

				J. Kahn and P. Sankar Being Specific About Race-Specific Medicine Health Aff., September 1, 2006; 25(5): w375 - w377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]