I posted this comment on ASA last week and there were no responses.
It's relevent to this topic.
I remember reading (not sure where but those interested can google to
find it) that uncoated ASA gave better results than enteric coated.
Also read that there have been findings (not yet studied on a large
scale) showing that some people are ASA "resistant" meaning that even
though they have been taking ASA regularly their blood did not have
the expected anti clotting properties.
This seemed to explain why some low risk people taking ASA still
suffer heart attacks. Look for upcoming publications on the efficacy
of ASA and ASA resistance.
One article I read said there was a controversy over whether there
should be standardized testing for clotting times (not sure the exact
test) to determine who is ASA resistant and who is not so those
resistant could be on other primary preventative drugs. Cost and lack
of proof were cited as to why this is not being done yet.
Uncoated ASA vs coated also seemed to affect asa resistance with
higher rates of resistance for people taking coated.
Of course this then stimulates the debate of the risk to the GI tract
using uncoated vs coated.
Anyone with more current information care to comment?