"Zee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:"Bill" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
So Bill, I read the following to say:1.The goal of statin therapy is to reduce the odds of dying of a heart
attack or stroke, not just lower cholesterol numbers.2. Despite millions spent on clinical trials, researchers could not
prove lowering cholesterol had any effect on life expectancy.
You are outdated, the latest two studies involving patients with heart
disease and diabetes which is bringing about the changes in the guidelines
did just that.
Quoted message said:3. Pharmas need only prove to FDA the drug lowers cholesterol.
No, they have to prove safety, dosage and effectiveness.
You intentionally lie and misled people. The FDA acts with hard evidence
something of which you have none. Bacol was removed from the market beause
of this, so again you are a twisted individual which knows nothing about
medicine trying to impose your will on others.
Quoted message said:Someone needs to take a big broom to the FDA. They don't seem to be
doing what you are paying them to do. Not that it's any different for
the Aussie, Kiwi or Canuck regulatory bodies.Please note, Bill: Dr. Wright is with the Cochrane Collaboration. "Dr.
Wright and his colleagues at the University of British Columbia
contacted the authors of the three trials that did not publish the
number of serious adverse events suffered by their study participants.
The reviewers have yet to receive the requested data. "Do you not see the truth of Wright's reasoning, and think if you were
he, or part of his team, you too (with your training) would be just as
suspicious?I am. Pityful English major that I am. I am suspicious.
But I await your correction.
Zee
http://www.medicalconsumers.org/pages/AlmostEverythingYouNeedtoKnowAboutStatinDrugs.html
Quoted message said:
"Given the emphasis on cholesterol "numbers," it is easy to lose sight
of the fact that the ultimate goal of drug therapy is not to lower
cholesterol but to reduce the odds of dying of a heart attack or
stroke. A pharmaceutical company seeking approval from the FDA,
however, need only prove its drug can lower cholesterol. The more
important, long-term studies are initiated many years later.When researchers began conducting clinical trials to prove that
lowering cholesterol will prevent cardiac deaths, they ran into some
major snags over the course of several decades. Despite millions of
dollars spent on clinical trials, researchers simply could not prove
that lowering people's cholesterol had any effect on life expectancy.
Whether the study participants lowered their cholesterol with diet,
exercise, smoking cessation, and/or drugs, the heart disease death
rate went down but the over-all death rate, that is, the death rate
from all causes, went up. In other words, their total death rate was
no different from that of the people who did not lower their
cholesterol.-------snip---------
". Only two of the five trials reported serious adverse events. "Based
on the two trials, we are suspicious that some serious adverse events
are being increased by statins and that this appears to be canceling
the benefit of the reduction in heart attacks and strokes,"The analysis of the five trials was conducted by a team of researchers
at the University of British Columbia led by James M. Wright, PhD, who
came to the alarming conclusion that statins harm as many people as
they help. True, the combined results of the five trials did, in fact,
show a lower rate of non-fatal heart attack and stroke. However, once
serious adverse events* were taken into account, the results were not
so positive. The statin users did have 1.4% lower rate of heart attack
within the next five years, compared with untreated people, but that
small benefit was offset by a 1.8% rate of serious adverse events
associated with the drug.Dr. Wright and colleagues might be the first reviewers to step back
and look at the big picture--assessing the serious risks as well as
the benefits of statins. Only two of the five trials reported serious
adverse events. "Based on the two trials, we are suspicious that some
serious adverse events are being increased by statins and that this
appears to be canceling the benefit of the reduction in heart attacks
and strokes," Dr. Wright wrote in an e-mail interview. The new
analysis was published in the April-June 2003 issue of Therapeutics
Initiative, an evidence-based drug therapy newsletter ("Do Statins
Have a Role in Primary Prevention?" Available free at www.ti.ubc.ca).Dr. Wright is associated with the Cochrane Collaboration, an
international network of experts who conduct systematic reviews of the
supporting evidence for drugs and other medical, surgical or
behavioral interventions. In a move that distinguishes many Cochrane
reviewers, Dr. Wright and his colleagues at the University of British
Columbia contacted the authors of the three trials that did not
publish the number of serious adverse events suffered by their study
participants. The reviewers have yet to receive the requested data.Quoted message said:"Zee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:[email hidden] (Pete C.) wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...Quoted message said:> "Don" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...Quoted message said:> > You are talking about Simvastatin and Lipitor.
> >
> > I did some research and Simvastatin is Zocor.
> >
> > Lipitor is Atorvastatin
> >
> > I'm confused. Maybe someone can please help.
> >
> > I'm taking Lipitor (Simvastatin).
> >
> > Don
>
> If you're taking Simvastatin then you are taking Zocor. Don't
listen
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:> to the BS stories about statins. Your doctor will follow up with
some
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:> blood tests to make sure the statin you are taking is not causing
> problems and is helping to lower your cholesterol.Don
Pete C must not be aware that statin induced mitochondrial myopathy
can occur independent of elevated CK levels. Ie) not detectible in a
blood test.
http://www.impostertrial.com/physician.htmPete:
Perhaps you should inform yourself of the facts before you give out
erroneous information about how statins' toxic effects are detected.You may also want to know these disabling and life-altering effects
not detectible by the tests you mention do not always go away.I'm not sure of that. In the site above and associated article, it seems
the
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:four patients they talked about reversed. And I think that is all Golomb
relied upon for information on people with negative CK tests.Quoted message said:In fact
the researcher/cardiologist whose website this is has people still
with mitochondrial myopathy up to four years after stopping them. He
will be publishing *another* couple studies on this topic this fall.
You can find his existing studies on Annals of Internal Medicine, and
www.pubmed.org.Phillips says only half of those in his study who had statin-induced
rhabdomyolysis had complete remission of symptoms. Those reporting, of
course, were the ones who lived."http://www.geriatrictimes.com/g040618.html
This article comes with a long list of citations from peer-reviewed
journals."Physicians are most familiar with rhabdomyolysis, and many suppose
that for muscle pain to be statin-associated, it must induce muscle
symptoms throughout the body coupled with elevation of CK levels.
However, this reflects only one manifestation of statin-associated
muscle symptoms. Some patients have only new focal pain or new
fatigue, and may have mild or no elevation in CK levels. In some
instances these symptoms progress to rhabdomyolysis--one reason to
take these symptoms seriously--but many times they do not."An important double-blind, crossover biopsy study showed that some
patients receiving statin therapy with non-CK-elevating muscle pain
have objectively documentable, partially reversible mitochondrial
myopathy (Phillips et al., 2002). Even in the absence of
rhabdomyolysis or CK elevation, major effects on function and quality
of life may occur (Golomb et al., 2003). It is important to note that
in both our experience and that of others, muscle symptoms
precipitated by statins may not in all cases completely recover; this
is consistent with the finding that, pathologically, the myopathy may
not completely reverse. more...."This study was done by the non-industry funded epidemiology group
Therapeutics Initiative (TI).http://www.ti.ubc.ca/pages/letter48.htm
Conclusions:
If cardiovascular serious adverse events are viewed in isolation, 71
primary prevention patients with cardiovascular risk factors have to
be treated with a statin for 3 to 5 years to prevent one myocardial
infarction or stroke.This cardiovascular benefit is not reflected in 2 measures of overall
health impact, total mortality and total serious adverse events.***Therefore, statins have not been shown to provide an overall health
benefit in primary prevention trials.***In this article, Dr. James Wright, head of TI, has more non-industry
funded comments on statins.
http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-dsrabin3881826jul06,0,473904,print.column
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:
Last year, scientists at the University of British Columbia's
Therapeutics Initiative came to a similar conclusion about the use of
statins in men who didn't have prior heart disease. Sure, they had
fewer heart attacks - but they still died at the same rate. "What
we're hypothesizing is that there was some other harm" associated with
the medication, said Dr. Jim Wright, the clinical pharmacologist who
did the study, funded entirely by a grant from British Columbia's
health department. "That really should concern people.""Before we prescribe this to millions of people who are basically
healthy, we should be proving that the overall benefits outweigh the
harms," he said. "And we don't think that's the case."Zee
For the moment, I agree with that except for, perhaps, for diabetics due
to
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:the recent study.
But to be fair, you should also cite the following comment from your
final
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:source:
Statins provide a cardiovascular and total mortality benefit for
patients with
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:clinically evident occlusive vascular disease (secondary prevention) and
a
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:cholesterol of >3.5 mM.
http://www.ti.ubc.ca/pages/letter49.htm
Bill