There has been yet another loose but totally unsubstantiated claim of an adverse effect from taking isotretinoin (Accutane), a miracle medicine for acne.

An article by reporter Shari Roan, published in the Nov. 7 Los Angeles Times, reported on a paper given at the recent meeting of the American College of Gastroenterology.

The paper, by Dr. Seth Crockett, has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal (which supposedly weeds out the suspect studies, but not always). It was “presenting evidence” (his interpretation) that showed a higher rate of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in a group of people who had taken isotretinoin.

The study compared 8,189 people who have IBD with 21,832 healthy subjects. They calculated that the “odds” (always a crap shoot, eh?) of developing IBD were 1.68 times higher among isotretinoin takers. The two main IBDs are ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. These completely unrelated diseases long have been thought to derive from infectious agents we cannot yet identify. The statement from this article was that ulcerative colitis occurrence was 4.36 times higher in the isotretinoin group.

Saying that two things that happen at the same time have a causal relationship is how witchcraft — not science — spreads. In the information I have read, the flaws of the claim are many and deep.

Crockett is quoted as saying that only 5 to 10 people per 100,000 are diagnosed with IBD each year in the U.S., and the absolute risk of getting IBD is very low. The article does say that a similar study published in the American Journal of Gastroenterology by University of Manitoba researchers found no such association.

So, is there proof, let alone agreement, on the cause-and-effect relationship? No. But, the ambulance-chasing attorneys have plundered an estimated $33 million for their plaintiffs over this very assertion. (Yes, there are ethical lawyers, and there are some unethical doctors.)

The article’s headline reads, “Signs of new risks might be last blow for acne treatment.” God willing, that is way off the mark. Without dissecting the article here, it seems to read in a tacky, sensationalistic tone, a la “yellow” journalism.

Some journalism has to be suspect, such as CNN, first on the scene with “breaking news,” after a basket-carrying balloon in Colorado.

The benefit that isotretinoin has yielded in medical terms is inestimable. Much of it is the psychological relief from the burden society has put on people with acne. The negative connotation of the disease and its scars are deep and lasting. Just this week, a woman told me how grateful she was that “I gave her” Accutane some 20 years ago to stop her acne. The material manifestation of the burden of acne is the quantity of coins spent trying to surgically correct acne scarring.

In good science, the comparison groups need to be matched well. People who contract IBDs have accompanying conditions as well. And, the more we learn about maladies, the more we find microbes at the bottom of the mischief.

Speaking of bottoms, a study in a December 2006 issue of Nature showed that more than 4,000 types (not a typo) of bacteria can live in human intestines. No kidding. We still don’t know what we are or who lives with us.

Before jumping to conclusions, which a lot of folks do for exercise, we need more proof (but maybe not if you are suing someone). To me, the substance of this study as presented in the paper is less than scientific and perhaps a bit scatologic.

Frank A. Bures is a dermatologist in Winona.