General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Disabled after taking STATIN

Started by Zee · · Last activity · 88 posts · 2,829 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
19 March 2004
Last activity
18 April 2004
Original author
Zee
Posts
88
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,829
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 88
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. tw.us.publicus.comarticle

    January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer product a
    quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents experience
    adverse reactions

    By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson looks
    like he is recovering from a stroke.

    His speech is slurred, he has difficulty walking in a
    straight line, and he can't sign his own name. By afternoon,
    he is so fatigued he has to sit down for the rest of the
    day. When asked his age, Peterson says he is 52. His wife
    Karla, standing nearby, corrects him. He is 53.

    Doug has never had a heart attack, and until the onset of
    the symptoms almost three years ago, was an active skier,
    biker and scuba diver. Now he is limited to walks on the
    treadmill. Doug traces his problems to a drug he started
    taking almost three years before his health began
    deteriorating - Lipitor. Two other Tahoe City locals have
    also experienced negative side effects from taking Lipitor
    or other statins, the name for a family of cholesterol-
    fighting pills.

    While there is no concrete evidence linking Doug's health
    problems to Lipitor, after doing years of research, meeting
    with doctors and talking to other statin sufferers all over
    the world online, he and Karla are convinced of the
    connection. Pfizer, the maker of Lipitor, claims the drug is
    effective in lowering cholesterol and has minor side-
    effects. But as Doug and others would ask, is it worth it?

    WONDER DRUG OR DANGEROUS PILL?

    Doug, who has hereditary high cholesterol, was first
    prescribed Mevacor, a statin made by Merck, in 1998. Six
    months later, his doctor had him switch to Lipitor, which
    comes in higher doses, and upped his dosage from 10 to 20
    mg. His cholesterol dropped from 285 to a low of
    160.

    "The doctor was very pleased," said Doug, "but meanwhile the
    symptoms started."

    In the fall of 2000, Doug began having restless sleep
    patterns. His twitching and flying arms got so bad that
    Karla had to sleep in another room. One time, Doug even fell
    out of bed. The couple didn't think anything was seriously
    wrong until a few months later when Doug started slurring
    his words. This was followed by a loss of balance and the
    beginning of what Doug calls the "statin shuffle" - a slow,
    wobbly walk across a room. Next to slide was Doug's fine
    motor skills. It took him five minutes to write four words,
    much of which was illegible. Finally, he tired easily and
    his cognitive memory processing diminished. He had trouble
    following books with complex plots.

    Confounded by Doug's illness, over the next two years the
    Petersons traveled all over California meeting with
    neurologists, internists and acupuncturists. Doug had MRIs,
    brain scans and neurofeedback tests done. Last February,
    Doug's doctor suggested he go off Lipitor to see if the
    drug was causing his health problems. After three weeks,
    the symptoms persisted, so the doctor put Doug back on the
    pill. Since Doug wasn't exhibiting the most common side
    effect, muscle cramps, and his liver function tests came
    back normal, the physician was doublly sure that Lipitor
    was not to blame.

    Finally, last spring, a doctor in Pasadena suggested Lipitor
    could be the culprit. Doug went off the drug in May, and
    since then his symptoms have stopped their downward spiral
    and his health has slowly started to improve. According to
    Karla, his mind is sharper, his balance is better and his
    speech is more clear in the mornings, before he gets tired.
    But he still has a long way to go.

    "Before, I was a good father and family person," said Doug,
    who has two children with Karla. "At this point, I can't do
    that much."

    A former Navy diver and owner of Sierra Tahoe Computers, a
    repair and service business, Doug has had to cut down his
    work schedule because of his fatigue and loss of hand
    coordination. He is considering going on disability, but
    Karla remains optimistic.

    "We are hoping he is going to get better. That's our number
    one goal," she said. "Anger is a waste of energy at this
    point. We are trying to recover and get the word out."

    DID PFIZER DO ENOUGH STUDIES?

    Since Parke-Davis (later acquired by Pfizer) developed
    Lipitor in 1997, it has become the number one prescribed cholesterol-
    lowering drug in the United States, with more than 18
    million Americans having been prescribed the drug. New York
    City-based Pfizer, the world's largest pharmaceutical
    company, derives a quarter of its $32 billion in annual
    sales from Lipitor, according to an article in SmartMoney.
    With sales expect to top $10 billion this year, Lipitor is
    poised to become the largest-selling pharmaceutical in
    history, surpassing

    Lipitor is proven to lower total cholesterol by 29 to 45
    percent. As with any prescription, it comes with a list of
    possible side effects, such as muscle pain or weakness and
    liver dysfunction. Pfizer's Web site states, "The most
    commonly reported side effects are gas, constipation,
    stomach pain and indigestion. They are usually mild and tend
    to go away." In a nine-month study of 2,502 patients, Pfizer
    found that more serious side effects, such as facial
    paralysis, colon inflammation and gallbladder pain, occurred
    in less than 2 percent of those treated.

    Pfizer was unable to commment on reported adverse side
    effects in time for the Tahoe World's deadline.

    The problem, say the Petersons, is that Pfizer has not
    conducted any long-term studies. Doug's health issues didn't
    start for two and a half years after he started taking
    Lipitor. Similarly, Tahoe City psychologist John Altrocchi,
    75, was on Mevacor for around three years when he started to
    develop calf pain that became so severe he could hardly
    walk. He also experienced a case of temporary memory loss
    called transient global amnesia (TGA), which has been linked
    with statins. A day after watching the 1998 Super Bowl game,
    Altrocchi had no memory of the event.

    "There's no way you could prove that Mevacor was responsible
    for the TGA, but it's very possible," said Altrocchi, who
    stopped taking the drug about three years ago and convinced
    his brother, a retired neurologist, to go off Lipitor.
    "Especially for older men, I think it's wise to get off
    statins right away. There is very little evidence they do
    much good."

    While most symptoms seem to start after a few years, Ed
    Ontiveros of Homewood began having physical problems within
    30 days of taking Lipitor. After experiencing muscle aches
    and weakness for a few days, the 75-year old fell in the
    bathroom and didn't have the strength to get up. Since going
    off the drug, he's had no problems.

    "It [reduced cholesterol] is not worth it with the side
    effects," said Ontiveros. "You may not live as long, but you
    sure don't want to die earlier."

    Doctors are quick to prescribe Lipitor, says Karla, because
    they perceive it as a magic bullet in the battle against
    cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death for
    Americans, and it's easier than prescribing a long-term
    regime of healthy diet and exercise. But the evidence that
    high cholesterol leads to heart disease is not conclusive,
    said Altrocchi, and there is even speculation that
    cholesterol provides protection for the brain and spine.

    THE ROAD TO RECOVERY

    The Petersons say Pfizer is too powerful to take on alone,
    but would consider joining a class-action lawsuit against
    the company. However, lawyers have told them a lawsuit is
    only possible if Lipitor gets recalled by the Food and
    Drug Administration. (Another statin, Baycol, was recalled
    by Bayor in 2001 after 31 people died of kidney failure
    while on the drug.) The Petersons filled out a complaint
    on the FDA Web page and encourage other Lipitor sufferers
    to do the same.

    Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection between
    Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons are awaiting the
    results of a study being conducted by Dr. Beatrice Golomb, a
    neurologist at the University of California-San Diego, on
    the effects of statin drugs. As reported by the Wall Street
    Journal this week, Golomb found that 15 percent of statin
    patients developed some cognitive side effects. In the
    meantime, the couple is focusing on Doug's recovery and
    staying positive.

    "At this point, I consider myself lucky I'm not in a
    wheelchair," said Doug, who is currently in phsyical
    therapy. "There are no guarantees in life. Your birth
    certificate doesn't come with a warranty."

    For more information, contact Doug Peterson at
    [email hidden] or visit Drug Information Technologies at
    www.ditonline.com.

  2. (Zee) said:

    tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    129/NEWS/401290101

    January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer product a
    quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents experience adverse
    reactions

    By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson looks
    like he is recovering from a stroke.

    His speech is slurred, he has difficulty walking in a
    straight line, and he can't sign his own name. By
    afternoon, he is so fatigued he has to sit down for the
    rest of the day. When asked his age, Peterson says he
    is 52. His wife Karla, standing nearby, corrects him.
    He is 53.

    Doug has never had a heart attack, and until the onset of
    the symptoms almost three years ago, was an active skier,
    biker and scuba diver. Now he is limited to walks on the
    treadmill. Doug traces his problems to a drug he started
    taking almost three years before his health began
    deteriorating - Lipitor. Two other Tahoe City locals have
    also experienced negative side effects from taking Lipitor
    or other statins, the name for a family of cholesterol-
    fighting pills.

    While there is no concrete evidence linking Doug's health
    problems to Lipitor, after doing years of research, meeting
    with doctors and talking to other statin sufferers all over
    the world online, he and Karla are convinced of the
    connection. Pfizer, the maker of Lipitor, claims the drug
    is effective in lowering cholesterol and has minor side-
    effects. But as Doug and others would ask, is it worth it?

    WONDER DRUG OR DANGEROUS PILL?

    Doug, who has hereditary high cholesterol, was first
    prescribed Mevacor, a statin made by Merck, in 1998. Six
    months later, his doctor had him switch to Lipitor, which
    comes in higher doses, and upped his dosage from 10 to 20
    mg. His cholesterol dropped from 285 to a low of
    160.

    "The doctor was very pleased," said Doug, "but meanwhile
    the symptoms started."

    In the fall of 2000, Doug began having restless sleep
    patterns. His twitching and flying arms got so bad that
    Karla had to sleep in another room. One time, Doug even
    fell out of bed. The couple didn't think anything was
    seriously wrong until a few months later when Doug started
    slurring his words. This was followed by a loss of balance
    and the beginning of what Doug calls the "statin shuffle" -
    a slow, wobbly walk across a room. Next to slide was Doug's
    fine motor skills. It took him five minutes to write four
    words, much of which was illegible. Finally, he tired
    easily and his cognitive memory processing diminished. He
    had trouble following books with complex plots.

    Confounded by Doug's illness, over the next two years the
    Petersons traveled all over California meeting with
    neurologists, internists and acupuncturists. Doug had MRIs,
    brain scans and neurofeedback tests done. Last February,
    Doug's doctor suggested he go off Lipitor to see if the
    drug was causing his health problems. After three weeks,
    the symptoms persisted, so the doctor put Doug back on the
    pill. Since Doug wasn't exhibiting the most common side
    effect, muscle cramps, and his liver function tests came
    back normal, the physician was doublly sure that Lipitor
    was not to blame.

    Finally, last spring, a doctor in Pasadena suggested
    Lipitor could be the culprit. Doug went off the drug in
    May, and since then his symptoms have stopped their
    downward spiral and his health has slowly started to
    improve. According to Karla, his mind is sharper, his
    balance is better and his speech is more clear in the
    mornings, before he gets tired. But he still has a long
    way to go.

    "Before, I was a good father and family person," said Doug,
    who has two children with Karla. "At this point, I can't do
    that much."

    A former Navy diver and owner of Sierra Tahoe Computers, a
    repair and service business, Doug has had to cut down his
    work schedule because of his fatigue and loss of hand
    coordination. He is considering going on disability, but
    Karla remains optimistic.

    "We are hoping he is going to get better. That's our number
    one goal," she said. "Anger is a waste of energy at this
    point. We are trying to recover and get the word out."

    DID PFIZER DO ENOUGH STUDIES?

    Since Parke-Davis (later acquired by Pfizer) developed
    Lipitor in 1997, it has become the number one prescribed
    cholesterol-lowering drug in the United States, with more
    than 18 million Americans having been prescribed the drug.
    New York City-based Pfizer, the world's largest
    pharmaceutical company, derives a quarter of its $32
    billion in annual sales from Lipitor, according to an
    article in SmartMoney. With sales expect to top $10 billion
    this year, Lipitor is poised to become the largest-selling
    pharmaceutical in history, surpassing

    Quoted message said:


    Lipitor is proven to lower total cholesterol by 29 to 45
    percent. As with any prescription, it comes with a list of
    possible side effects, such as muscle pain or weakness and
    liver dysfunction. Pfizer's Web site states, "The most
    commonly reported side effects are gas, constipation,
    stomach pain and indigestion. They are usually mild and
    tend to go away." In a nine-month study of 2,502 patients,
    Pfizer found that more serious side effects, such as facial
    paralysis, colon inflammation and gallbladder pain,
    occurred in less than 2 percent of those treated.

    Pfizer was unable to commment on reported adverse side
    effects in time for the Tahoe World's deadline.

    The problem, say the Petersons, is that Pfizer has not
    conducted any long-term studies. Doug's health issues
    didn't start for two and a half years after he started
    taking Lipitor. Similarly, Tahoe City psychologist John
    Altrocchi, 75, was on Mevacor for around three years when
    he started to develop calf pain that became so severe he
    could hardly walk. He also experienced a case of temporary
    memory loss called transient global amnesia (TGA), which
    has been linked with statins. A day after watching the 1998
    Super Bowl game, Altrocchi had no memory of the event.

    "There's no way you could prove that Mevacor was
    responsible for the TGA, but it's very possible," said
    Altrocchi, who stopped taking the drug about three years
    ago and convinced his brother, a retired neurologist, to go
    off Lipitor. "Especially for older men, I think it's wise
    to get off statins right away. There is very little
    evidence they do much good."

    While most symptoms seem to start after a few years, Ed
    Ontiveros of Homewood began having physical problems within
    30 days of taking Lipitor. After experiencing muscle aches
    and weakness for a few days, the 75-year old fell in the
    bathroom and didn't have the strength to get up. Since
    going off the drug, he's had no problems.

    "It [reduced cholesterol] is not worth it with the side
    effects," said Ontiveros. "You may not live as long, but
    you sure don't want to die earlier."

    Doctors are quick to prescribe Lipitor, says Karla, because
    they perceive it as a magic bullet in the battle against
    cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death for
    Americans, and it's easier than prescribing a long-term
    regime of healthy diet and exercise. But the evidence that
    high cholesterol leads to heart disease is not conclusive,
    said Altrocchi, and there is even speculation that
    cholesterol provides protection for the brain and spine.

    THE ROAD TO RECOVERY

    The Petersons say Pfizer is too powerful to take on alone,
    but would consider joining a class-action lawsuit against
    the company. However, lawyers have told them a lawsuit is
    only possible if Lipitor gets recalled by the Food and Drug
    Administration. (Another statin, Baycol, was recalled by
    Bayor in 2001 after 31 people died of kidney failure while
    on the drug.) The Petersons filled out a complaint on the
    FDA Web page and encourage other Lipitor sufferers to do
    the same.

    Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection between
    Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons are awaiting the
    results of a study being conducted by Dr. Beatrice Golomb,
    a neurologist at the University of California-San Diego, on
    the effects of statin drugs. As reported by the Wall Street
    Journal this week, Golomb found that 15 percent of statin
    patients developed some cognitive side effects. In the
    meantime, the couple is focusing on Doug's recovery and
    staying positive.

    "At this point, I consider myself lucky I'm not in a
    wheelchair," said Doug, who is currently in phsyical
    therapy. "There are no guarantees in life. Your birth
    certificate doesn't come with a warranty."

    For more information, contact Doug Peterson at
    [email hidden] or visit Drug Information Technologies at
    www.ditonline.com.

    I guess you don't trust us to read your links. (?)

    You posted this earlier.

    L.

  3. (Zee) said:

    Doctors are quick to prescribe Lipitor, says Karla,
    because they perceive it as a magic bullet in the battle
    against cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of
    death for Americans, and it's easier than prescribing a
    long-term regime of healthy diet and exercise. But the
    evidence that high cholesterol leads to heart disease is
    not conclusive, said Altrocchi, and there is even
    speculation that cholesterol provides protection for the
    brain and spine.

    Perhaps this worrisome trend is the result of a successful
    marketing department.

    --
    Winning against heart attack and stroke
    sonoscore.comsonoscore.com

  4. It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:

    January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer product a
    quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents experience adverse
    reactions

    Quoted message said:

    By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:

    At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson looks
    like he is recovering from a stroke.

    [...]

    Quoted message said:

    Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection between
    Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons are awaiting the
    results of a study being conducted by Dr. Beatrice Golomb,
    a neurologist at the University of California-San Diego, on
    the effects of statin drugs. As reported by the Wall Street
    Journal this week, Golomb found that 15 percent of statin
    patients developed some cognitive side effects. In the
    meantime, the couple is focusing on Doug's recovery and
    staying positive.

    Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this your
    language?

    I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's study
    found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I posted here
    several weeks ago, the study that cited earlier for that
    figure actually says that she estimates that 15% of *her*
    patients (not study patients) show such symptoms. Since she
    is a University professor of medicine I questioned at the
    time how representative her own patients were of the general
    population. I also wonder if she has other than subjective
    observations to support her estimate.

    Collecting a number of anecdotal reports doesn't seem to me
    to overcome the statement early in the report: "While there
    is no concrete evidence linking Doug's health problems to
    Lipitor, after doing years of research, meeting with doctors
    and talking to other statin sufferers all over the world
    online, he and Karla are convinced of the connection."

    These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to invalidate
    the relatively low risk figures often quoted for the
    statins, considering the hundreds of thousands (?) of
    statin users..
    --
    Don [email hidden]

  5. On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 16:21:52 -0800, Don Kirkman <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    0129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:

    January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer product a
    quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents experience adverse
    reactions

    Quoted message said:

    By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:

    At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson looks
    like he is recovering from a stroke.

    [...]

    Quoted message said:

    Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection between
    Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons are awaiting
    the results of a study being conducted by Dr. Beatrice
    Golomb, a neurologist at the University of California-San
    Diego, on the effects of statin drugs. As reported by the
    Wall Street Journal this week, Golomb found that 15
    percent of statin patients developed some cognitive side
    effects. In the meantime, the couple is focusing on Doug's
    recovery and staying positive.

    Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this your
    language?

    I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's study
    found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I posted here
    several weeks ago, the study that cited earlier for that
    figure actually says that she estimates that 15% of *her*
    patients (not study patients) show such symptoms. Since she
    is a University professor of medicine I questioned at the
    time how representative her own patients were of the
    general population. I also wonder if she has other than
    subjective observations to support her estimate.

    In March, 2002 Dr. Golomb stated:

    "...the study will be completed in 2004. We will remain
    blinded to treatment assignment of subjects until that time,
    and no preliminary findings have been published. "

    I find it strange she would comment on the study before a
    formal announcement.

    Oddly, I did find this, however: usatoday.com2002 08 19
    statin_x.htm

    "The drugs, called statins, raise a person's risk of nerve
    damage by nearly 15%, or roughly one case for every 2,200
    patients age 50 or older, says lead author David Gaist of
    the University of Southern Denmark. The longer patients took
    the drugs, the more likely they were to suffer nerve damage.
    (Related Story: Statin side effect rare, but be aware)"
    ....... We should definitely sit up and take notice," says
    Beatrice Golomb, an assistant professor of medicine at the
    University of California, San Diego, who heads a federally
    funded study of the effects of statin drugs on thinking
    ability, mood and quality of life. "

    A coincidence? Perhaps the WSJ got things a bit
    screwed up....

    Quoted message said:

    Collecting a number of anecdotal reports doesn't seem to me
    to overcome the statement early in the report: "While there
    is no concrete evidence linking Doug's health problems to
    Lipitor, after doing years of research, meeting with
    doctors and talking to other statin sufferers all over the
    world online, he and Karla are convinced of the
    connection."

    These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to invalidate
    the relatively low risk figures often quoted for the
    statins, considering the hundreds of thousands (?) of
    statin users..

    How about Millions?! We are talking about an extremely
    small percentage who could possible experience severe
    side effects.

    BTW, before the crusaders against the use of statins get
    too excited, the researcher from the above usatoday article
    also states:

    "Despite the findings, Gaist says statin drugs have a clear
    benefit in reducing heart attacks and strokes. He urges
    patients to continue taking the medicine but to talk with
    their doctors if symptoms occur.

    "It seems the benefits far outweigh the potential for
    adverse reactions as far as (nerve damage) is concerned,"
    he says. "

    L.

  6. Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    40129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:

    January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer product a
    quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents experience adverse
    reactions

    Quoted message said:

    By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:

    At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson looks
    like he is recovering from a stroke.

    [...]

    No. He has been assessed as not having had a stoke.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection between
    Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons are awaiting
    the results of a study being conducted by Dr. Beatrice
    Golomb, a neurologist at the University of California-San
    Diego, on the effects of statin drugs. As reported by the
    Wall Street Journal this week, Golomb found that 15
    percent of statin patients developed some cognitive side
    effects. In the meantime, the couple is focusing on
    Doug's recovery and staying positive.

    Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this your
    language?

    This is from the Tahoe paper. tw.us.publicus.comapp
    s/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:


    I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's
    study found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I posted
    here several weeks ago, the study that cited earlier for
    that figure actually says that she estimates that 15% of
    *her* patients (not study patients) show such symptoms.

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    Since she is a University professor of medicine I questioned

    Quoted message said:

    at the time how representative her own patients were of
    the general population. I also wonder if she has other
    than subjective observations to support her estimate.

    Collecting a number of anecdotal reports doesn't seem to
    me to overcome the statement early in the report: "While
    there is no concrete evidence linking Doug's health
    problems to Lipitor, after doing years of research,
    meeting with doctors and talking to other statin sufferers
    all over the world online, he and Karla are convinced of
    the connection."

    These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to invalidate
    the relatively low risk figures often quoted for the
    statins, considering the hundreds of thousands (?) of
    statin users..

    If doctors don't know statins do this, dismiss the patient
    to further unnamed suffering often mitigated upon stopping
    the statin, and never report the incident to the FDA (or
    your country's eqivalent) as an adverse effect the number
    suffering is not likely accurate.

  7. It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer product a
    quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents experience
    adverse reactions

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson looks
    like he is recovering from a stroke.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    [...]

    Quoted message said:

    No. He has been assessed as not having had a stoke.

    Perhaps you should apprise Ms. Siig of that fact, since that
    is part of the article you cited--though you'll note she did
    write "looks like he is recovering." I wouldn't interpret
    that as a medical conclusion that he has had one.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection between
    Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons are awaiting
    the results of a study being conducted by Dr. Beatrice
    Golomb, a neurologist at the University of California-
    San Diego, on the effects of statin drugs. As reported
    by the Wall Street Journal this week, Golomb found that
    15 percent of statin patients developed some cognitive
    side effects. In the meantime, the couple is focusing on
    Doug's recovery and staying positive.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this your
    language?

    Quoted message said:

    This is from the Tahoe paper. tw.us.publicus.comap
    ps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    The same one you take exception to above. :-)

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's
    study found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I
    posted here several weeks ago, the study that cited
    earlier for that figure actually says that she estimates
    that 15% of *her* patients (not study patients) show such
    symptoms.

    Quoted message said:

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--fairly
    obvious, since the study still has some time to run before
    results are opened and analyzed.

    Quoted message said:

    Since she is a University professor of medicine I
    questioned

    Quoted message said:

    at the time how representative her own patients were of
    the general population. I also wonder if she has other
    than subjective observations to support her estimate.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Collecting a number of anecdotal reports doesn't seem to
    me to overcome the statement early in the report: "While
    there is no concrete evidence linking Doug's health
    problems to Lipitor, after doing years of research,
    meeting with doctors and talking to other statin
    sufferers all over the world online, he and Karla are
    convinced of the connection."

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to invalidate
    the relatively low risk figures often quoted for the
    statins, considering the hundreds of thousands (?) of
    statin users..

    Quoted message said:

    If doctors don't know statins do this, dismiss the patient
    to further unnamed suffering often mitigated upon stopping
    the statin, and never report the incident to the FDA (or
    your country's eqivalent) as an adverse effect the number
    suffering is not likely accurate.

    Doctors don't know that treatment (medication, manipulation,
    surgery) "does" anything until clinical experience provides
    credible evidence for good or for ill. ISTM that's what
    we're all waiting for (or should be). There is no risk free
    treatment, just as there is no risk free life. The questions
    are whether there is undue risk and whether potential
    benefits outweigh potential risks.
    --
    Don [email hidden]

  8. Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    >20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer product
    >a quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents experience
    >adverse reactions

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson
    >looks like he is recovering from a stroke.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    [...]

    Quoted message said:

    No. He has been assessed as not having had a stoke.

    Perhaps you should apprise Ms. Siig of that fact, since
    that is part of the article you cited--though you'll
    note she did write "looks like he is recovering." I
    wouldn't interpret that as a medical conclusion that he
    has had one.

    Neither would I. Nor did I.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection between
    >Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons are
    >awaiting the results of a study being conducted by Dr.
    >Beatrice Golomb, a neurologist at the University of
    >California-San Diego, on the effects of statin drugs.
    >As reported by the Wall Street Journal this week,
    >Golomb found that 15 percent of statin patients
    >developed some cognitive side effects. In the
    >meantime, the couple is focusing on Doug's recovery
    >and staying positive.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this your
    language?

    Quoted message said:

    This is from the Tahoe paper. tw.us.publicus.comtw.us.publicus.com
    apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    The same one you take exception to above. :-)

    No. I take no exception to the article.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's
    study found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I
    posted here several weeks ago, the study that cited
    earlier for that figure actually says that she
    estimates that 15% of *her* patients (not study
    patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--fairly
    obvious, since the study still has some time to run before
    results are opened and analyzed.

    I read it too. I don't know what she is referring to.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    Since she is a University professor of medicine I
    questioned

    Quoted message said:

    at the time how representative her own patients were of
    the general population. I also wonder if she has other
    than subjective observations to support her estimate.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Collecting a number of anecdotal reports doesn't seem
    to me to overcome the statement early in the report:
    "While there is no concrete evidence linking Doug's
    health problems to Lipitor, after doing years of
    research, meeting with doctors and talking to other
    statin sufferers all over the world online, he and
    Karla are convinced of the connection."

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to
    invalidate the relatively low risk figures often quoted
    for the statins, considering the hundreds of thousands
    (?) of statin users..

    Quoted message said:

    If doctors don't know statins do this, dismiss the
    patient to further unnamed suffering often mitigated upon
    stopping the statin, and never report the incident to the
    FDA (or your country's eqivalent) as an adverse effect
    the number suffering is not likely accurate.

    Doctors don't know that treatment (medication,
    manipulation, surgery) "does" anything until clinical
    experience provides credible evidence for good or for ill.
    ISTM that's what we're all waiting for (or should be).
    There is no risk free treatment, just as there is no risk
    free life. The questions are whether there is undue risk
    and whether potential benefits outweigh potential risks.

    Yes. That is the question. And in my opinion, the answer
    is there is undue risk and potential risks outweigh
    potential benefits. Not that that is how it has to be, or
    should be though.

    And also in my opinion--it's all just opinion. No matter
    what sophistry you try to lay on me, it's still just
    opinion. Yours. And mine.

    B'adant

  9. Clarification: "Don Kirkman" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message
    "]news:[email hidden]... <snip>

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's
    study found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I
    posted here several weeks ago, the study that cited
    earlier for that figure actually says that she
    estimates that 15% of *her* patients (not study
    patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--fairly
    obvious, since the study still has some time to run before
    results are opened and analyzed.


    Quote from the Wall Street Journal Article, January 26,
    2004:

    "There are clinicians out there who really are beginning to
    appreciate that these side effects are substantially more
    common than one would divine from reading the [medical]
    literature," says Beatrice Golomb, the University of
    California, San Diego, assistant professor leading the NIH
    study. Although the patient data in the NIH study is still
    secret, Dr. Golomb says that among other patients she has
    seen, about 15% have developed some cognitive problem
    related to statin use. Even so, notes Dr. Golomb, "there are
    still people who are persuaded ... that there are no
    cognitive effects from statins."

    There is nothing in this quote that specifies "from her own
    practice" - that is Don's unsubstantiated conclusion.

    My understanding is that Dr. Golomb practices at the
    Veteran's Hospital, and is not just a researcher. Her
    credentials are at: medicine.ucsd.edugolomb

    You can also gain an appreciation for her published research
    by doing a Pub Med search for "golomb b"

  10. (Zee) said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...
    > It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    > article
    > <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    > >tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    > >/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:

    > >January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer
    > >product a quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents
    > >experience adverse reactions

    Quoted message said:

    > >By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:

    > >At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson
    > >looks like he is recovering from a stroke.

    Quoted message said:

    > [...]

    Quoted message said:

    No. He has been assessed as not having had a stoke.

    Perhaps you should apprise Ms. Siig of that fact, since
    that is part of the article you cited--though you'll
    note she did write "looks like he is recovering." I
    wouldn't interpret that as a medical conclusion that he
    has had one.

    Neither would I. Nor did I.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    > >Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection
    > >between Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons
    > >are awaiting the results of a study being conducted
    > >by Dr. Beatrice Golomb, a neurologist at the
    > >University of California-San Diego, on the effects of
    > >statin drugs. As reported by the Wall Street Journal
    > >this week, Golomb found that 15 percent of statin
    > >patients developed some cognitive side effects. In
    > >the meantime, the couple is focusing on Doug's
    > >recovery and staying positive.

    Quoted message said:

    > Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this your
    > language?

    Quoted message said:

    This is from the Tahoe paper. tw.us.publicus.com-tw.us.publicus.com-
    /apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    The same one you take exception to above. :-)

    No. I take no exception to the article.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    > I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's
    > study found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I
    > posted here several weeks ago, the study that cited
    > earlier for that figure actually says that she
    > estimates that 15% of *her* patients (not study
    > patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    run before results are opened and analyzed.

    I read it too. I don't know what she is referring to.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    Since she is a University professor of medicine I
    questioned
    > at the time how representative her own patients were
    > of the general population. I also wonder if she has
    > other than subjective observations to support her
    > estimate.

    Quoted message said:

    > Collecting a number of anecdotal reports doesn't seem
    > to me to overcome the statement early in the report:
    > "While there is no concrete evidence linking Doug's
    > health problems to Lipitor, after doing years of
    > research, meeting with doctors and talking to other
    > statin sufferers all over the world online, he and
    > Karla are convinced of the connection."

    Quoted message said:

    > These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    > definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to
    > invalidate the relatively low risk figures often
    > quoted for the statins, considering the hundreds of
    > thousands (?) of statin users..

    Quoted message said:

    If doctors don't know statins do this, dismiss the
    patient to further unnamed suffering often mitigated
    upon stopping the statin, and never report the incident
    to the FDA (or your country's eqivalent) as an adverse
    effect the number suffering is not likely accurate.

    Doctors don't know that treatment (medication,
    manipulation, surgery) "does" anything until clinical
    experience provides credible evidence for good or for
    ill. ISTM that's what we're all waiting for (or should
    be). There is no risk free treatment, just as there is
    no risk free life. The questions are whether there is
    undue risk and whether potential benefits outweigh
    potential risks.

    Yes. That is the question. And in my opinion, the answer
    is there is undue risk and potential risks outweigh
    potential benefits. Not that that is how it has to be, or
    should be though.

    And also in my opinion--it's all just opinion. No matter
    what sophistry you try to lay on me, it's still just
    opinion. Yours. And mine.

    B'adant

    Don,

    You've now joined the ever-expanding group of "sophists"
    here at sci.med.cardiology (i.e. anyone who questions the
    *truly* illogical reasoning of those whoe crusdae against
    the use of statins).

    Welcome. Be proud.

    :-)

    L.

  11. It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...
    > It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    > article
    > <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    > >/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer
    > >product a quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents
    > >experience adverse reactions

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson
    > >looks like he is recovering from a stroke.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > [...]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    No. He has been assessed as not having had a stoke.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Perhaps you should apprise Ms. Siig of that fact, since
    that is part of the article you cited--though you'll
    note she did write "looks like he is recovering." I
    wouldn't interpret that as a medical conclusion that he
    has had one.

    Quoted message said:

    Neither would I. Nor did I.

    Sorry. I read your comment as denying that he had been
    assessed as having a stroke, which was a statement
    nobody made.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection
    > >between Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons
    > >are awaiting the results of a study being conducted
    > >by Dr. Beatrice Golomb, a neurologist at the
    > >University of California-San Diego, on the effects of
    > >statin drugs. As reported by the Wall Street Journal
    > >this week, Golomb found that 15 percent of statin
    > >patients developed some cognitive side effects. In
    > >the meantime, the couple is focusing on Doug's
    > >recovery and staying positive.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this your
    > language?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    This is from the Tahoe paper. tw.us.publicus.com-tw.us.publicus.com-
    /apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The same one you take exception to above. :-)

    Quoted message said:

    No. I take no exception to the article.

    As I said, that's how I interpreted your comment. Otherwise
    why raise the issue of his diagnosis in the first place?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's
    > study found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I
    > posted here several weeks ago, the study that cited
    > earlier for that figure actually says that she
    > estimates that 15% of *her* patients (not study
    > patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    run before results are opened and analyzed.

    Quoted message said:

    I read it too. I don't know what she is referring to.

    Here's what I wrote in this newsgroup on February 10:

    "On January 26, 2004, Parker-Pope wrote of a number of
    "medical breakthroughs" expected in 2004. Regarding the NIH
    study of statins, she cited Beatrice Golomb, director of the
    study thus: "Although the patient data in the NIH study is
    still secret, Dr. Golomb says that among other patients she
    has seen, about 15% have developed some cognitive problem
    related to statin use. Even so, notes Dr. Golomb, 'there are
    still people who are persuaded ... that there are no
    cognitive effects from statins.'

    "Note that the 15% is not from the NIH study but is Dr.
    Golomb's estimate from her own practice. Also note that 15%
    could be three patients out of twenty, and that Dr. Golomb's
    clientele may not be typical, since she is associated with a
    university."

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Since she is a University professor of medicine I
    questioned
    > at the time how representative her own patients were
    > of the general population. I also wonder if she has
    > other than subjective observations to support her
    > estimate.

    [Re anecdotal reports]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    > definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to
    > invalidate the relatively low risk figures often
    > quoted for the statins, considering the hundreds of
    > thousands (?) of statin users..

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    If doctors don't know statins do this, dismiss the
    patient to further unnamed suffering often mitigated
    upon stopping the statin, and never report the incident
    to the FDA (or your country's eqivalent) as an adverse
    effect the number suffering is not likely accurate.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Doctors don't know that treatment (medication,
    manipulation, surgery) "does" anything until clinical
    experience provides credible evidence for good or for
    ill. ISTM that's what we're all waiting for (or should
    be). There is no risk free treatment, just as there is
    no risk free life. The questions are whether there is
    undue risk and whether potential benefits outweigh
    potential risks.

    Quoted message said:

    Yes. That is the question. And in my opinion, the answer
    is there is undue risk and potential risks outweigh
    potential benefits. Not that that is how it has to be, or
    should be though.

    And my opinion is that science proceeds on persuasive
    evidence. I have no opinion about the risks or effects of
    statin use, because the only evidence I have is my own
    history of six years on high dose statins without adverse
    effects. That is no more persuasive than your opinion that
    they are harmful--I'm waiting for peer reviewed evidence
    before I make up my mind.

    Quoted message said:

    And also in my opinion--it's all just opinion. No matter
    what sophistry you try to lay on me, it's still just
    opinion. Yours. And mine.

    One person's logic is another person's sophistry. (Well, not
    really, according to the dictionary.)
    --
    Don [email hidden]

  12. On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 01:12:10 GMT, "Sharon Hope" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Clarification: "Don Kirkman" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message
    "]news:[email hidden]... <snip>

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's
    > study found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I
    > posted here several weeks ago, the study that cited
    > earlier for that figure actually says that she
    > estimates that 15% of *her* patients (not study
    > patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    run before results are opened and analyzed.


    Quote from the Wall Street Journal Article, January
    26, 2004:

    "There are clinicians out there who really are beginning to
    appreciate that these side effects are substantially more
    common than one would divine from reading the [medical]
    literature," says Beatrice Golomb, the University of
    California, San Diego, assistant professor leading the NIH
    study. Although the patient data in the NIH study is still
    secret, Dr. Golomb says that among other patients she has
    seen, about 15% have developed some cognitive problem
    related to statin use. Even so, notes Dr. Golomb, "there
    are still people who are persuaded ... that there are no
    cognitive effects from statins."

    There is nothing in this quote that specifies "from her own
    practice" - that is Don's unsubstantiated conclusion.

    "Dr. Golomb says that among *other* patients she has seen,"

    In the context of that whole statement wouldn't *other* mean
    those NOT from the study??

    With the study results still secret it would be highly
    unethical for
    Dr. Golomb to discuss results.

    Everyone should wait for the study to be published in its
    entirety before assuming any conclusions.

    E.

  13. Quoted message said:

    Don,

    You've now joined the ever-expanding group of "sophists"
    here at sci.med.cardiology (i.e. anyone who questions the
    *truly* illogical reasoning of those whoe crusdae against
    the use of statins).

    Welcome. Be proud.

    :-)

    L.

    Sorry about the typo. Of course I meant "crusade". I've
    noticed a number of typos in my posts - I've got this older
    15" LCD monitor that is practically impossible to read. I'm
    gonna go shopping for a 17" or 19" tomorrow.....

    L.

  14. <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Sharon Hope said:

    Clarification: "Don Kirkman" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message
    "]news:[email hidden]... <snip>

    Quoted message said:

    >> I ask because it makes it look as though Dr.
    >> Golomb's study found


    15%

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> suffering from adverse effect. As I posted here
    >> several weeks ago,


    the

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> study that cited earlier for that figure actually
    >> says that she estimates that 15% of *her* patients
    >> (not study patients) show such symptoms.

    >I don't know what she is referring to.

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    run before results are opened and analyzed.


    Quote from the Wall Street Journal Article, January
    26, 2004:

    "There are clinicians out there who really are beginning
    to appreciate


    that

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    these side effects are substantially more common than one
    would divine


    from

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    reading the [medical] literature," says Beatrice Golomb,
    the University


    of

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    California, San Diego, assistant professor leading the
    NIH study. Although the patient data in the NIH study is
    still secret, Dr. Golomb


    says

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    that among other patients she has seen, about 15% have
    developed some cognitive problem related to statin use.
    Even so, notes Dr. Golomb,


    "there

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    are still people who are persuaded ... that there are no
    cognitive


    effects

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    from statins."

    There is nothing in this quote that specifies "from her
    own practice" -


    that

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    is Don's unsubstantiated conclusion.

    "Dr. Golomb says that among *other* patients she has
    seen,"

    In the context of that whole statement wouldn't *other*
    mean those NOT from the study??

    With the study results still secret it would be highly
    unethical for
    Dr. Golomb to discuss results.

    Everyone should wait for the study to be published in its
    entirety before assuming any conclusions.

    L.

    From the quote, obviously "other" means not from the NIH
    study of Statins and their Non-Cardiac Endpoints.

    Thank you for repeating what I just posted - a direct quote
    from WSJ. It is so rare that you agree with my posts.

    Difficult to disagree, because that is what the
    article says.

    However, the article does *not* say "from her practice" -
    Don's supposition or fabrication.

    The scope of "other" is not equal to "Practice + one
    NIH study".

  15. Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    >news:<[email hidden]>...
    >> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    >> article
    >> <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    >> >D=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer
    >> >product a quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents
    >> >experience adverse reactions

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson
    >> >looks like he is recovering from a stroke.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> [...]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >No. He has been assessed as not having had a stoke.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Perhaps you should apprise Ms. Siig of that fact, since
    that is part of the article you cited--though you'll
    note she did write "looks like he is recovering." I
    wouldn't interpret that as a medical conclusion that he
    has had one.

    Quoted message said:

    Neither would I. Nor did I.

    Sorry. I read your comment as denying that he had been
    assessed as having a stroke, which was a statement
    nobody made.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection
    >> >between Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons
    >> >are awaiting the results of a study being conducted
    >> >by Dr. Beatrice Golomb, a neurologist at the
    >> >University of California-San Diego, on the effects
    >> >of statin drugs. As reported by the Wall Street
    >> >Journal this week, Golomb found that 15 percent of
    >> >statin patients developed some cognitive side
    >> >effects. In the meantime, the couple is focusing on
    >> >Doug's recovery and staying positive.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this
    >> your language?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >This is from the Tahoe paper. tw.us.publicus.c-tw.us.publicus.c-
    >om/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The same one you take exception to above. :-)

    Quoted message said:

    No. I take no exception to the article.

    As I said, that's how I interpreted your comment.
    Otherwise why raise the issue of his diagnosis in the
    first place?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> I ask because it makes it look as though Dr.
    >> Golomb's study found 15% suffering from adverse
    >> effect. As I posted here several weeks ago, the
    >> study that cited earlier for that figure actually
    >> says that she estimates that 15% of *her* patients
    >> (not study patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >I don't know what she is referring to.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    run before results are opened and analyzed.

    Quoted message said:

    I read it too. I don't know what she is referring to.

    Here's what I wrote in this newsgroup on February 10:

    "On January 26, 2004, Parker-Pope wrote of a number of
    "medical breakthroughs" expected in 2004. Regarding the
    NIH study of statins, she cited Beatrice Golomb, director
    of the study thus: "Although the patient data in the NIH
    study is still secret, Dr. Golomb says that among other
    patients she has seen, about 15% have developed some
    cognitive problem related to statin use. Even so, notes
    Dr. Golomb, 'there are still people who are persuaded ...
    that there are no cognitive effects from statins.'

    "Note that the 15% is not from the NIH study but is Dr.
    Golomb's estimate from her own practice. Also note that
    15% could be three patients out of twenty, and that Dr.
    Golomb's clientele may not be typical, since she is
    associated with a university."

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Since she is a University professor of medicine I
    >questioned
    >> at the time how representative her own patients were
    >> of the general population. I also wonder if she has
    >> other than subjective observations to support her
    >> estimate.

    [Re anecdotal reports]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    >> definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to
    >> invalidate the relatively low risk figures often
    >> quoted for the statins, considering the hundreds of
    >> thousands (?) of statin users..

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >If doctors don't know statins do this, dismiss the
    >patient to further unnamed suffering often mitigated
    >upon stopping the statin, and never report the
    >incident to the FDA (or your country's eqivalent) as
    >an adverse effect the number suffering is not likely
    >accurate.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Doctors don't know that treatment (medication,
    manipulation, surgery) "does" anything until clinical
    experience provides credible evidence for good or for
    ill. ISTM that's what we're all waiting for (or should
    be). There is no risk free treatment, just as there is
    no risk free life. The questions are whether there is
    undue risk and whether potential benefits outweigh
    potential risks.

    Quoted message said:

    Yes. That is the question. And in my opinion, the answer
    is there is undue risk and potential risks outweigh
    potential benefits. Not that that is how it has to be, or
    should be though.

    And my opinion is that science proceeds on persuasive
    evidence. I have no opinion about the risks or effects of
    statin use, because the only evidence I have is my own
    history of six years on high dose statins without adverse
    effects. That is no more persuasive than your opinion that
    they are harmful--I'm waiting for peer reviewed evidence
    before I make up my mind.

    Quoted message said:

    And also in my opinion--it's all just opinion. No matter
    what sophistry you try to lay on me, it's still just
    opinion. Yours. And mine.

    One person's logic is another person's sophistry. (Well,
    not really, according to the dictionary.)

    Where does Dr. Golomb say that the 15 per cent is from her
    own practise? I only see "Dr. Golomb says that among other
    patients she has seen, about 15% have developed some
    cognitive problem related to statin use."

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    B'adant

  16. Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    >news:<[email hidden]>...
    >> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    >> article
    >> <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    >> >D=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >January 29, 2004 LIFE AFTER LIPITOR: Is Pfizer
    >> >product a quick fix or dangerous drug? Residents
    >> >experience adverse reactions

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >By Melissa Siig, Tahoe World Staff

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >At first glance, Tahoe City resident Doug Peterson
    >> >looks like he is recovering from a stroke.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> [...]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >No. He has been assessed as not having had a stoke.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Perhaps you should apprise Ms. Siig of that fact, since
    that is part of the article you cited--though you'll
    note she did write "looks like he is recovering." I
    wouldn't interpret that as a medical conclusion that he
    has had one.

    Quoted message said:

    Neither would I. Nor did I.

    Sorry. I read your comment as denying that he had been
    assessed as having a stroke, which was a statement
    nobody made.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >Frustrated by doctors who doubt the connection
    >> >between Lipitor and health problems, the Petersons
    >> >are awaiting the results of a study being conducted
    >> >by Dr. Beatrice Golomb, a neurologist at the
    >> >University of California-San Diego, on the effects
    >> >of statin drugs. As reported by the Wall Street
    >> >Journal this week, Golomb found that 15 percent of
    >> >statin patients developed some cognitive side
    >> >effects. In the meantime, the couple is focusing on
    >> >Doug's recovery and staying positive.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> Is this a quote from the Tahoe paper, or is this
    >> your language?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >This is from the Tahoe paper. tw.us.publicus.c-tw.us.publicus.c-
    >om/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The same one you take exception to above. :-)

    Quoted message said:

    No. I take no exception to the article.

    As I said, that's how I interpreted your comment.
    Otherwise why raise the issue of his diagnosis in the
    first place?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> I ask because it makes it look as though Dr.
    >> Golomb's study found 15% suffering from adverse
    >> effect. As I posted here several weeks ago, the
    >> study that cited earlier for that figure actually
    >> says that she estimates that 15% of *her* patients
    >> (not study patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >I don't know what she is referring to.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    run before results are opened and analyzed.

    Quoted message said:

    I read it too. I don't know what she is referring to.

    Here's what I wrote in this newsgroup on February 10:

    "On January 26, 2004, Parker-Pope wrote of a number of
    "medical breakthroughs" expected in 2004. Regarding the
    NIH study of statins, she cited Beatrice Golomb, director
    of the study thus: "Although the patient data in the NIH
    study is still secret, Dr. Golomb says that among other
    patients she has seen, about 15% have developed some
    cognitive problem related to statin use. Even so, notes
    Dr. Golomb, 'there are still people who are persuaded ...
    that there are no cognitive effects from statins.'

    "Note that the 15% is not from the NIH study but is Dr.
    Golomb's estimate from her own practice. Also note that
    15% could be three patients out of twenty, and that Dr.
    Golomb's clientele may not be typical, since she is
    associated with a university."

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Since she is a University professor of medicine I
    >questioned
    >> at the time how representative her own patients were
    >> of the general population. I also wonder if she has
    >> other than subjective observations to support her
    >> estimate.

    [Re anecdotal reports]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    >> definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to
    >> invalidate the relatively low risk figures often
    >> quoted for the statins, considering the hundreds of
    >> thousands (?) of statin users..

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >If doctors don't know statins do this, dismiss the
    >patient to further unnamed suffering often mitigated
    >upon stopping the statin, and never report the
    >incident to the FDA (or your country's eqivalent) as
    >an adverse effect the number suffering is not likely
    >accurate.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Doctors don't know that treatment (medication,
    manipulation, surgery) "does" anything until clinical
    experience provides credible evidence for good or for
    ill. ISTM that's what we're all waiting for (or should
    be). There is no risk free treatment, just as there is
    no risk free life. The questions are whether there is
    undue risk and whether potential benefits outweigh
    potential risks.

    Quoted message said:

    Yes. That is the question. And in my opinion, the answer
    is there is undue risk and potential risks outweigh
    potential benefits. Not that that is how it has to be, or
    should be though.

    And my opinion is that science proceeds on persuasive
    evidence.

    It is my opinion that we have had marketing masquerading as
    science. In the case of statins (appropos the topic of this
    newsgroup) but also other medications, most notably SSRIs.

    For a case in point, marketing masquerading as science,
    visit www.healthyskepticism and read about Nexiuum. (sp?)

    I have

    Quoted message said:

    no opinion about the risks or effects of statin use,
    because the only evidence I have is my own history of six
    years on high dose statins without adverse effects.

    You once posted as having had some difficulty. And it seems
    to me you have an opinion. Do you put drugs in your mouth
    without some opinion about their efficacy?

    That is no more persuasive than your opinion

    Quoted message said:

    that they are harmful--

    It is not my opinion that they are harmful. There is
    incontrovertible evidence that they are harmful.

    And I question: for any good they may do, would we have been
    just as protected by taking aspirin? We don't know, because
    the 'research' has followed the money. Your being *able* to
    take them is no proof they do what you take them for.

    I'm waiting for peer reviewed evidence before I

    Quoted message said:

    make up my mind.

    I think you have already made up your mind. You take them.
    You open your mouth and put something in there that you have
    no opinion about, haven't made your mind up about, are
    doubtful about? Not science or logic here, but faith.

    Quoted message said:

    One person's logic is another person's sophistry. (Well,
    not really, according to the dictionary.)

    Can you show me where Dr. Golomb said 15 per cent of the
    people she sees with side effects are in her private
    practise? This is what you have said she is saying. Can you
    show me where she says that?

    B'adant

  17. On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 03:12:40 GMT, "Sharon Hope" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:


    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Sharon Hope said:

    Clarification: "Don Kirkman" <[email hidden]> wrote
    in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...
    <snip>
    > >> I ask because it makes it look as though Dr.
    > >> Golomb's study found


    15%

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >> suffering from adverse effect. As I posted here
    > >> several weeks ago,


    the

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >> study that cited earlier for that figure actually
    > >> says that she estimates that 15% of *her* patients
    > >> (not study patients) show such symptoms.
    >
    > >I don't know what she is referring to.
    >
    > I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    > provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    > fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    > run before results are opened and analyzed.
    >
    Quote from the Wall Street Journal Article, January
    26, 2004:

    "There are clinicians out there who really are beginning
    to appreciate


    that

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    these side effects are substantially more common than
    one would divine


    from

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    reading the [medical] literature," says Beatrice Golomb,
    the University


    of

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    California, San Diego, assistant professor leading the
    NIH study. Although the patient data in the NIH study is
    still secret, Dr. Golomb


    says

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    that among other patients she has seen, about 15% have
    developed some cognitive problem related to statin use.
    Even so, notes Dr. Golomb,


    "there

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    are still people who are persuaded ... that there are no
    cognitive


    effects

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    from statins."

    There is nothing in this quote that specifies "from her
    own practice" -


    that

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    is Don's unsubstantiated conclusion.

    "Dr. Golomb says that among *other* patients she
    has seen,"

    In the context of that whole statement wouldn't *other*
    mean those NOT from the study??

    With the study results still secret it would be highly
    unethical for
    Dr. Golomb to discuss results.

    Everyone should wait for the study to be published in its
    entirety before assuming any conclusions.

    L.

    From the quote, obviously "other" means not from the NIH
    study of Statins and their Non-Cardiac Endpoints.

    Thank you for repeating what I just posted - a direct quote
    from WSJ. It is so rare that you agree with my posts.

    Difficult to disagree, because that is what the
    article says.

    However, the article does *not* say "from her practice" -
    Don's supposition or fabrication.

    The scope of "other" is not equal to "Practice + one
    NIH study".

    Not to nit-pick here, but I can see how one could assume
    that when Dr. Golomb is quoted as saying "among other
    patients she has seen.." she *might* be referring to her
    practice, in context with the entire statement.

    I will say I find the statement "..about 15% have developed
    some cognitive problem related to statin use.." similarly as
    vague. "Some" problem..? What does *that* mean? And 15% of
    how many? All quite dodgy stuff.

    L.

  18. It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...
    > It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    > article
    > <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    > >news:<[email hidden]>...
    > >> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    > >> article
    > >> <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >> >tw.us.publicus.comarticle
    > >> >ID=/20040129/NEWS/401290101

    [Cut material relating to newspaper article]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >> I ask because it makes it look as though Dr.
    > >> Golomb's study found 15% suffering from adverse
    > >> effect. As I posted here several weeks ago, the
    > >> study that cited earlier for that figure actually
    > >> says that she estimates that 15% of *her* patients
    > >> (not study patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >I don't know what she is referring to.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    > provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    > fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    > run before results are opened and analyzed.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I read it too. I don't know what she is referring to.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Here's what I wrote in this newsgroup on February 10:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    "On January 26, 2004, Parker-Pope wrote of a number of
    "medical breakthroughs" expected in 2004. Regarding the
    NIH study of statins, she cited Beatrice Golomb, director
    of the study thus: "Although the patient data in the NIH
    study is still secret, Dr. Golomb says that among other
    patients she has seen, about 15% have developed some
    cognitive problem related to statin use. Even so, notes
    Dr. Golomb, 'there are still people who are persuaded ...
    that there are no cognitive effects from statins.'

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    "Note that the 15% is not from the NIH study but is Dr.
    Golomb's estimate from her own practice. Also note that
    15% could be three patients out of twenty, and that Dr.
    Golomb's clientele may not be typical, since she is
    associated with a university."

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >Since she is a University professor of medicine I
    > >questioned
    > >> at the time how representative her own patients
    > >> were of the general population. I also wonder if
    > >> she has other than subjective observations to
    > >> support her estimate.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    [Re anecdotal reports]

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >> These patient stories clearly suggest the need for
    > >> definitive studies, but IMO they don't seem to
    > >> invalidate the relatively low risk figures often
    > >> quoted for the statins, considering the hundreds of
    > >> thousands (?) of statin users..

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > >If doctors don't know statins do this, dismiss the
    > >patient to further unnamed suffering often mitigated
    > >upon stopping the statin, and never report the
    > >incident to the FDA (or your country's eqivalent) as
    > >an adverse effect the number suffering is not likely
    > >accurate.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > Doctors don't know that treatment (medication,
    > manipulation, surgery) "does" anything until clinical
    > experience provides credible evidence for good or for
    > ill. ISTM that's what we're all waiting for (or should
    > be). There is no risk free treatment, just as there is
    > no risk free life. The questions are whether there is
    > undue risk and whether potential benefits outweigh
    > potential risks.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Yes. That is the question. And in my opinion, the answer
    is there is undue risk and potential risks outweigh
    potential benefits. Not that that is how it has to be,
    or should be though.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    And my opinion is that science proceeds on persuasive
    evidence.

    Quoted message said:

    I have

    Quoted message said:

    no opinion about the risks or effects of statin use,
    because the only evidence I have is my own history of six
    years on high dose statins without adverse effects.

    Quoted message said:

    You once posted as having had some difficulty.

    Please cite what you're referring to. Aside perhaps from
    some physical

    time of ingestion were adjusted, the only "difficulty" I can
    recall is that my doctors had to increase my Lipitor to a
    high level to get the desired results. I run 15 to 20 miles
    a week, I walk one round of golf a week, I have the mental
    acuity to do research and engage in discussions like several
    hours a day in a number of newsgroups on a variety of
    topics, I am a beta tester for an internet application, and
    my cardiologist has extended my visits to six month
    intervals because there are no signs of damage to my liver
    or other organs. In short, at age 75 I'm probably far better
    off than many 60-year-olds.

    Quoted message said:

    And it seems to me you have an opinion. Do you put drugs in
    your mouth without some opinion about their efficacy?

    My decision is that for my needs the possible benefits
    sufficiently outweigh the possible harm to justify
    medication.

    Quoted message said:

    It is not my opinion that they are harmful. There is
    incontrovertible evidence that they are harmful.

    To quote you: "Yes. That is the question. And **in my
    opinion** [my emphasis], the answer is there is undue risk
    and potential risks outweigh potential benefits. Not that
    that is how it has to be, or should be though." All the
    reported incontrovertible evidence I've seen presented seems
    to be questioned, which makes it controvertible by
    definition.

    Quoted message said:

    I'm waiting for peer reviewed evidence before I

    Quoted message said:

    make up my mind.

    Quoted message said:

    I think you have already made up your mind. You take them.
    You open your mouth and put something in there that you
    have no opinion about, haven't made your mind up about, are
    doubtful about? Not science or logic here, but faith.

    Percentages. If five in a million get adverse effects I
    figure I'll probably be one of 999,995 patients not
    getting them.

    Quoted message said:

    Can you show me where Dr. Golomb said 15 per cent of the
    people she sees with side effects are in her private
    practise? This is what you have said she is saying. Can you
    show me where she says that?

    Are you suggesting she might be seeing other doctors'
    patients? I don't thing that's a viable conclusion from "Dr.
    Golomb says that among other patients she has seen, about
    15% . . ." quoted much farther up in this thread.
    --
    Don [email hidden]

  19. It seems to me I heard somewhere that Sharon Hope wrote in article
    <K3r7c.55802$_w.890817@attbi_s53>:

    Quoted message said:

    Clarification: "Don Kirkman" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message
    "]news:[email hidden]... <snip>

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > I ask because it makes it look as though Dr. Golomb's
    > study found 15% suffering from adverse effect. As I
    > posted here several weeks ago, the study that cited
    > earlier for that figure actually says that she
    > estimates that 15% of *her* patients (not study
    > patients) show such symptoms.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I don't know what she is referring to.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I do, because I read the earlier cite that Sharon Hope
    provided. :-) She is referring to her own practice--
    fairly obvious, since the study still has some time to
    run before results are opened and analyzed.

    Quoted message said:

    Quote from the Wall Street Journal Article, January
    26, 2004:

    Quoted message said:

    Although the patient data in the NIH study is still secret,
    Dr. Golomb says that among other patients she has seen,
    about 15% have developed some cognitive problem related to
    statin use. Even so, notes Dr. Golomb, "there are still
    people who are persuaded ... that there are no cognitive
    effects from statins."

    Quoted message said:

    There is nothing in this quote that specifies "from her own
    practice" - that is Don's unsubstantiated conclusion.

    Quoted message said:

    My understanding is that Dr. Golomb practices at the
    Veteran's Hospital, and is not just a researcher. Her
    credentials are at:
    medicine.ucsd.edugolomb

    And my understanding is that as a practitioner at a hospital
    she sees patients who constitute her practice. Nowhere did I
    say or hint that she has a private practice; I don't know or
    care if she does or not. The obvious point is that the 15%
    refers to patients that she has seen or sees outside the
    study group. QED.

    My question, which no one has responded to, stands: as a
    hospital practitioner wouldn't she be seeing a different,
    arguably more seriously ill, clientele than would be either
    in a random study or in a typical private practice?
    --
    Don [email hidden]

  20. "Don Kirkman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message


    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    article
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message


    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
    >> article
    >> <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >Don Kirkman <[email hidden]> wrote in message


    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> >> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote
    >> >> in article <e5f4a9c2.0403191152.71e6f022@posting-
    >> >> .google.com>:



    <snip>

    Quoted message said:

    . In short, at age 75 I'm probably far better off than
    many 60-year-olds.

    You are very fortunate. My husband was totally disabled by
    Lipitor (4 years 10mg/day) at age 54. Two years later
    after stopping the drug, he is still disabled. You are
    also in an age group for which there is very little
    evidence of statin efficacy.

    <snip>

    Quoted message said:


    Percentages. If five in a million get adverse effects I
    figure I'll probably be one of 999,995 patients not
    getting them.

    It would be a benefit to become better informed.

    Pfizer admits to 'under 2%' for most of the side-effects
    listed on the physician's insert - at 2% that would be:
    TWENTY THOUSAND PATIENTS in a million. (compare that to your
    estimate of five)

    There are over 106 million patients on statins world wide.
    Even at an even 100 million, at 2% that would mean TWO
    MILLION PATIENTS with side effects.

    Pfizer's estimates are considered to be low by many
    researchers. If Pfizer says 2% and Dr. Golomb sees 15%,
    perhaps the actual number is somewhere between those.

    Say half-way at only 6% - we are now talking about SIXTY
    THOUSAND PATIENTS harmed per million patients.

    SIX MILLION with side effects.

    It is a good thing you are still employed at 75, because
    having an additional six million people on disability
    fifteen to twenty years early will take lots more taxes.

    Not only are these people disabled and retired early,
    drawing social security disability, they are no longer
    working and paying their own taxes, and - since many were
    high achieving business owners who employed many other
    people, they are also no longer providing jobs for others
    who would have been paying taxes if their workers were
    still employed.

    The obvious solution is to:

    1) Identify what the statin-damaged have in common
    2) Screen these patients out to prevent the damage
    3) Identify a treatment for those harmed so they can recover
    to a useful life

    It is a much bigger problem than just some quietly suffering
    individuals out of sight and out of mind.

    Quoted message said:

    --
    Don [email hidden]

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.