The Power of a Study - FORD BREWER MD MPH
939 views · Published 13 August 2018 · 12:37 · Indexed 20 September 2026
Channel: Dr. Ford Brewer MD MPH · 2018 · Science & Technology
Want to learn one of the basics of heart attack & stroke prevention... for free? Get free access to the CV inflammation course by completing this form: https://care.prevmedhealth.com/FreeOnlineCourse. Learn how to predict & prevent heart attack & stroke: https://care.prevmedhealth.com/How-To-Predict-a-Heart-Attack. Learn how to reduce & reverse arterial plaque: https://care.prevmedhealth.com/How-To-Reverse-Arterial-Plaque. -- ABOUT DR. BREWER Dr. Brewer started as an Emergency Doctor. After seeing too many preventable heart attacks, he went to Johns Hopkins to learn Preventive Medicine. While there, he went on the run the post-graduate training program (residency) in Preventive Medicine. From there, he made a career of practicing and managing preventive medicine and primary care clinics. His later role in this area was Chief Medical Officer for Premise, which has close to 1,000 primary care/prevention clinics. He was also the Chief Medical Officer for MDLIVE, the second largest telemedicine company. More recently, he founded PrevMed, a heart attack, and stroke prevention clinic. At PrevMed, we focus on heart attack, stroke, and cognitive decline. We serve patients who have already experienced an event as well as those who have not developed a diagnosis or event. Dr. Brewer provides services via telemedicine or in person if you're in the Lexington, KY area. We find a lot of undiagnosed Pre-Diabetes or Insulin Resistance. Treating unrecognized risk factors like Pre-Diabetes allows reduction of risk and prevention of disease. If you are interested in becoming a patient, please visit our website: https://prevmedheartrisk.com/ ABOUT THIS VIDEO: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa0808431 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc090262 The VA Diabetes Trial was criticized in a letter to the editor for being underpowered. Dr Banerer made the appropriate point that, " A negative finding in an underpowered study should not change the way we think about the importance of glucose control in the prevention of diabetes-related complications." Both the study and the editorial are available at the links below. They actually did get adequate study power through additional recruitment and follow-up. So, why didn't they describe this in the original study?