To the Editor: The lessons from the introduction of COX-2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), related by Kerr et al,1 have a corollary in the introduction of angiotensin-II-receptor antagonists 2 years previously. Both cases involved common conditions (osteoarthritis and hypertension), with extensive prescribing of newly developed and marketed agents, which blocked an enzyme further down the cascade of reactions to avoid adverse outcomes — the gastrointestinal upset and bleeding associated with non-selective NSAIDs, and the cough and angioedema caused by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. In both conditions, off-patent, low-cost alternative drug therapies were available — paracetamol and acetylsalicylic acid, and thiazide diuretics and β-blockers, respectively.

My quantitative investigation of general practitioners’ perceptions of newer versus older antihypertensive agents suggested that they thought newer agents were more efficacious, and were safer in the short term and long term, but were more expensive.2 These beliefs were held despite the lack of long-term safety data. Younger doctors were more likely to hold these beliefs. It is possible that the experience of using older medications permitted older doctors to maintain a healthy scepticism towards the marketing claims of medical representatives. It may be interesting for Kerr and colleagues to look at the demographics of GPs in the General Practice Research Network to see if these findings hold true for this cohort.