what's the response to studies such as this?

[peter s]

I know one could bash the integrity of the Oxford doctor and claim she is beholden to drug companies and just swallowing the KoolAid etc. but that doesn't strike me as terribly meaningful. For any of you who have read the complete document (I cannot locate it without paying for it), what is the response on the merits?

1: Lancet. 2007 Nov 24;370(9601):1781-90. Links
The safety of statins in clinical practice.Armitage J.
Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, Oxford, UK. *jane.armitage@ctsu.ox.ac.uk

Statins are effective cholesterol-lowering drugs that reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease events (heart attacks, strokes, and the need for arterial revascularisation). Adverse effects from some statins on muscle, such as myopathy and rhabdomyolysis, are rare at standard doses, and on the liver, in increasing levels of transaminases, are unusual. Myopathy--muscle pain or weakness with blood creatine kinase levels more than ten times the upper limit of the normal range--typically occurs in fewer than one in 10,000 patients on standard statin doses. However, this risk varies between statins, and increases with use of higher doses and interacting drugs. Rhabdomyolysis is a rarer and more severe form of myopathy, with myoglobin release into the circulation and risk of renal failure. Stopping statin use reverses these side-effects, usually leading to a full recovery. Asymptomatic increases in concentrations of liver transaminases are recorded with all statins, but are not clearly associated with an increased risk of liver disease. For most people, statins are safe and well-tolerated, and their widespread use has the potential to have a major effect on the global burden of cardiovascular disease.

PMID: 17559928 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

[Brian C.]

The extent of corruption in science is truly shocking. The effects of venality and psychopathy at the highest levels of any hierarchy are reinforced by the willingness of those further down the food chain to believe that their superiors are all just ordinary, decent, morally-motivated human beings like they believe themselves to be.

I did say ANY hierarchy.
I could say ALL hierarchies.

Watch very closely what is happening right now in the United States.
A severe cognitive shock is likely to be experienced by all and sundry over the next few weeks.

Brian.

[peter s]

With due respect to that point of view, I am hopeful someone who has read the study and is familiar with the details could offer a substantive critique. I find it hard to dismiss the whole world on the theory that it is venal, tempting as that point of view is sometimes.

[Brian C.]

Peter, there is enough testimony here to give lie to the claims in that synopsis.

I cannot access that Lancet article either but as a layman I have struggled through enough studies and reports to convince me of my position.

Any relevant study that does not incorporate the required confession as to the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of statins in the synopsis, irrespective of actual findings, does NOT get published. As simple as that.

Read some of the comments from the statinated at

*http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/investigate-statins/signatures.html

That is the reality.

I speak as someone who was on Zocor followed by Lipitor for 17 years and count myself extremely lucky to suffer "only" from myopathy and chronic-fatigue-syndrome-like symptoms. I have been off Lipitor (80mg) for 18 months and am swallowing a small fortune in supplements in an attempt to approach (so far unsuccessfully) the level of strength and fitness of an average 70 year old, let alone someone of my age (64 years).


Are you on a statin or a loved one?


Brian.

[peter s]

Brian: I just had an MI on 9/7. I am 51. I was put on Lipitor 80 mg (which after 10 days or so I reduced to 20 on my own initiative as that dosage seemed insane given that my cholesterol was not that high, and I was having -- maybe due to drug maybe not -- pretty annoying palpitations). It is my nature to research, and discuss with people who post in forums such as these, any drug I or a family member is given, and much to my dismay I have encountered far more seemingly conflicting information and views with respect to statins than anything I had previously encountered (e.g. psych drugs). I am still trying to sort it all out and figure out what do long term but am not there yet. Although anything is possible, I am calculating that taking that dose for a month or two -- whilst supplementing with CoQ10 and a bunch of other stuff I have learned about thanks to the wonder of the internet AND the generosity of people on this forum and elsewhere -- will not be life altering, and that FOR THE MOST PART (I understand there are exceptions, but there always are, for anything) adverse effects are dose and time related.

[Darrell]

"reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease events"
Yes, for about one person out of every hundred treated, putting the other 99 at risk of side effects for no benefit.
*www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_04/b4068052092994.htm?chan=t

"Myopathy--muscle pain or weakness with blood creatine kinase levels more than ten times the upper limit of the normal range--typically occurs in fewer than one in 10,000 patients"
This alone discredits the guy. It is well-established in the literature that many patients with statin muscle side effects have NO increase in creatine kinase (CK) levels. And what's special about "ten times" other than it puts the rate below one in 10,000? Finally, most people who develop muscle problems quit their statins and never get a CK test anyway.
*www.annals.org/cgi/content/abstract/137/7/581

"usually leading to a full recovery"
Yes, even car accidents usually lead to full recovery, but I wouldn't advise reckless driving.

"For most people, statins are safe and well-tolerated, and their widespread use has the potential to have a major effect on the global burden of cardiovascular disease."
They've had over a decade -- where's the effect?
And why aren't the very dubious benefits for women -- half the population -- even addressed?
*www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080917145147.htm

I don't need to read the paper because the abstract is bull manure.

[Brian C.]

Thanks for sharing your situation Peter.

The trouble with statins is that individuals vary widely in their reaction. Some have genetic predisposition that makes them acutely vulnerable such that within days serious symptoms manifest and trigger alarm. Others are like my GP, who has been taking Lipitor for several years but last time I met with him had just completed a Himalayan trek! For me, just walking to the post office is trek enough.

Unfortunately, nobody is screened for genetic vulnerability before the prescription is written and my GP agreed that he and his colleagues are treated like mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed manure) but are obliged to follow the official line (for more on this, as presently pertains in the UK, go to *www.talkingstatins.com ).

So you see every time someone is put on this class of drug it is a gamble.

The published studies only quote relative risk, not absolute risk outcomes.
These (absolute risk outcomes) are MUCH less impressive, only showing a small degree of benefit for middle-aged males who have already suffered a myacardial infarction (heart attack). This benefit turned out to be due to an unexpected ant-inflammatory effect, NOT cholesterol reduction (there is no correlation between cholesterol level and heart disease until the level is way beyond normal). The reduction and elimination of arterial inflammation can be achieved using inexpensive supplements without side effects and for those, like me, diagnosed with a hyperlipidaemic condition lipid levels can be normalised to a significant extent by supplementation and a low carbohydrate diet, again without harmful side-efects.

I have come across statements by Dr Jane Jarvis before. You must remember that the prime function of the director of a research institute (and of the professor of a research department) is to enable flows of funding to support their work and, as the old saying has it, "He who pays the piper calls the tune".

Brian.

[Allen1]

Peter,

just take a look at:-
*http://www.askapatient.com/viewrating.asp?drug=19766&name=ZOCOR

That was my poison and I do mean poison.

1 M.I. 8-10 years of zocor then upped dose to 40mg 1triple bypass another 2 years of the statins before I found out why I was so ill for 12 years and still am after 18 months since stopping them.

All the BULLSH*T in the world will not make this stuff into what corrupted reviews claim it to be. You have seen what real people have to say about what actually happens, if you want to be hoodwinked again have a look at the British heart foundations comments about statins, I used to think they were a respectable organisation but I am now embarrassed to read what they say on this crap.

The decision on what you wish to do is yours to take but if you do want to maintain a statin regime then watch out for any unusual symptoms that may creep up on you. Me I would have thrown this stuff in the trash if I knew then what I know now!

[Ray Holder]

I wrote to Jane Armitage at the time and suggested that she come out from under the Oxford spires into the real world and note that statin damage is not the insigficant side effect, so rarely suffered, as she suggested, but a cause for real concern.

I have also written to another Dr ( Weissman??) in the BHF organisation, but with no reply.

Their home page lists 28 professors connected with heart research. As 70% of UK drug research is paid for by industry, I suggest that without such financial backing, the list of eminence would number about 8, so a lot of resistance to overcome.

The fact that my posting to Darrell in April 2006 about muscle pain and statins has now been viewed almost 30,000 times speaks louder than all the official statements about statin side effects!!!

Ray

[Allen1]

Ray,

I hope you get a better response than mine. I wrote to tell them that they should be ashamed of giving a false sense that this rubbish is very safe and that anything else they hear is not relevant or true or words to that effect, I also said what happened to me due to taking this prescribed drug. Here is the reply :-

Dear Sir
Thank you for your email to the Heart Help Online Team at The British Heart Foundation.

I am very sorry to hear about all your health problems.

Our position on statins is based on evidence from large clinical research studies, involving many thousands of people. A small minority of doctors disagree with the evidence but their views are at odds with virtually all informed medical opinion.


Please call our Heart Help Line for further information. The Heart Help Line is open from 9am to 5pm on Mondays, Tuesdays and Fridays and from 8am to 6pm on Wednesdays and Thursdays. The local rate number is 08450 708070.

This email is not a substitute for the advice your doctor or cardiologist (heart specialist), GP, or other qualified healthcare professional involved in your care may give you based on his or her knowledge of your condition.



Regards



*Hearthelponline@bhf.org.uk

Heart Help Line 08450 708070



Have you signed upto receive your FREE copy of heart health?

heart health is published every other month, so make sure you don't miss an issue by having it delivered direct to your door for FREE. If you are a health professional or group, why not sign up for extra copies to give away to patients?

Call the BHF on 0870 850 5281



Together we really can beat heart disease

[Brian C.]

We are only likely to see significant change of attitude when the last statin patent runs out (Pfizer's Lipitor in 2011, I thought it was 2010). To find out what is expected to happen then...

*http://www.giiexpress.com/products/dr38522/

Only $1112. Who's buying?


Brian.