Is the use of statins defensible?

Discussion in 'Health and medical' started by Al. Lohse, Apr 16, 2004.

  1. Al. Lohse

    Al. Lohse Guest

    Maybe only to the uninformed.

    I found this by having googled the author "Jeppesen."

    A summary (not MY summary, someone else's):

    http://home.earthlink.net/~mbabc/statinssh.pdf

    Inform yourselves or let pharma, listener, marcus, drchung,
    madison avenue, and your own doctors do the informing. There
    are some brave souls working on our behalf. Some have put
    their careers on the line.

    Statins may merely be the "tip of the iceberg." There is
    doubtlessly a great deal of deception going on in the
    pharmaceutical industry. The verifiable facts point toward
    prudence w.r.t. statins and, by extension, all drugs which
    do not cure or control a disease. (Like, my personal pet
    peeve, risk a 1 in 100 chance of getting a heart attack by
    taking a drug for a 1 in 850 chance of not getting a stroke.
    Duh. Values?)

    Regards,

    A.L. (Will reply to the impolite at my own discretion.
    P,RBBDBW)
     
    Tags:


  2. Listener

    Listener Guest

    On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:21:33 -0700, "Al. Lohse"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Maybe only to the uninformed.

    >I found this by having googled the author "Jeppesen."
    >
    >A summary (not MY summary, someone else's):
    >
    >http://home.earthlink.net/~mbabc/statinssh.pdf

    Very selective editing to support a very narrow view. Nicely
    done. (Many of the items have been dealt with here in this
    newsgroup and, of course, ignored and/or dismissed out-of-
    hand by you & Zee)

    >Inform yourselves or let pharma, listener, marcus, drchung,
    >madison avenue, and your own doctors do the informing.
    >There are some brave souls working on our behalf. Some have
    >put their careers on the line.

    Hey people, don't listen to you doctors! Advice from
    Lohse: Scary.

    >Statins may merely be the "tip of the iceberg." There is
    >doubtlessly a great deal of deception going on in the
    >pharmaceutical industry. The verifiable facts point toward
    >prudence w.r.t. statins and, by extension, all drugs which
    >do not cure or control a disease. (Like, my personal pet
    >peeve, risk a 1 in 100 chance of getting a heart attack by
    >taking a drug for a 1 in 850 chance of not getting a
    >stroke. Duh. Values?)
    >

    There is doubtlessly a great deal of deception going on
    here, too. Fortunately, it's not a tip of any iceberg. It's
    two people. You and Zee.

    >Regards,
    >
    >A.L. (Will reply to the impolite at my own discretion.
    > P,RBBDBW)

    Will you use more baby talk if you do?

    :)

    L.

    ...."the substantial protective effect of statins,
    particularly on coronary artery disease, is well documented
    and by far outweighs the potential risk of statin-induced
    polyneuropathy."

    Statins and Risk of Polyneuropathy: A Case-control Study, by
    D. Gaist, MD, PhD; U. Jeppesen, MD, PhD; M. Andersen, MD,
    PhD; L. A. Garcia Rodriguez, MD, MSc; J. Hallas, MD, PhD;
    and S. H. Sindrup MD, PhD; Neurology, May 2002.

    "...high blood levels of cholesterol do bear a relation to
    heart disease risk; and statin drugs that lower
    cholesterol reduce the risk of heart disease and stroke,
    which are primary causes of death and disability,
    respectively, in the US:

    Beatrice A. Golomb, MD, PhD on Statin Drugs March 7,
    2002 interview
     
  3. Al. Lohse

    Al. Lohse Guest

    listener wrote:
    >
    > On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:21:33 -0700, "Al. Lohse"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Maybe only to the uninformed.
    >
    > >I found this by having googled the author "Jeppesen."
    > >
    > >A summary (not MY summary, someone else's):
    > >
    > >http://home.earthlink.net/~mbabc/statinssh.pdf
    >
    > Very selective editing to support a very narrow view.
    > Nicely done. (Many of the items have been dealt with here
    > in this newsgroup and, of course, ignored and/or dismissed
    > out-of-hand by you & Zee)
    >
    > >Inform yourselves or let pharma, listener, marcus,
    > >drchung, madison avenue, and your own doctors do the
    > >informing. There are some brave souls working on our
    > >behalf. Some have put their careers on the line.
    >
    > Hey people, don't listen to you doctors! Advice from
    > Lohse: Scary.
    >
    > >Statins may merely be the "tip of the iceberg." There is
    > >doubtlessly a great deal of deception going on in the
    > >pharmaceutical industry. The verifiable facts point
    > >toward prudence w.r.t. statins and, by extension, all
    > >drugs which do not cure or control a disease. (Like, my
    > >personal pet peeve, risk a 1 in 100 chance of getting a
    > >heart attack by taking a drug for a 1 in 850 chance of
    > >not getting a stroke. Duh. Values?)
    > >
    >
    > There is doubtlessly a great deal of deception going on
    > here, too. Fortunately, it's not a tip of any iceberg.
    > It's two people. You and Zee.
    >
    > >Regards,
    > >
    > >A.L. (Will reply to the impolite at my own discretion.
    > > P,RBBDBW)
    >
    > Will you use more baby talk if you do?
    >
    > :)
    >
    > L.

    Here is an excerpt from the link that Listener would rather
    you ignore:

    ========= Start quote ================

    Statins & Polyneuropathy “The authors note that their study
    showed that long-term exposure to statins may substantially
    increase the risk of polyneuropathy. These findings suggest
    that statins may have a toxic effect on peripheral nerves.
    One possible mechanism may be that by interfering with
    cholesterol synthesis, statins may alter nerve membrane
    function.” – A Colorado Health Site review of the study
    “Statins and Risk of Polyneuropathy: A Case-control Study,”
    by D. Gaist, MD, PhD; U. Jeppesen, MD, PhD; M. Andersen, MD,
    PhD; L. A. Garcia Rodriguez, MD, MSc; J. Hallas, MD, PhD;
    and S. H. Sindrup MD, PhD; Neurology, May 2002 –
    http://www.coloradohealthsite.org/ – search on “statins
    polyneuropathy”.

    ========= end quote ================

    Now, do you think this quote is based on the findings of
    their studies?

    Do you think Listener's quote below is based on the findings
    of their study?

    >
    > ...."the substantial protective effect of statins,
    > particularly on coronary artery disease, is well
    > documented and by far outweighs the potential risk of statin-
    > induced polyneuropathy."
    >
    > Statins and Risk of Polyneuropathy: A Case-control Study,
    > by D. Gaist, MD, PhD; U. Jeppesen, MD, PhD; M. Andersen,
    > MD, PhD; L. A. Garcia Rodriguez, MD, MSc; J. Hallas, MD,
    > PhD; and S. H. Sindrup MD, PhD; Neurology, May 2002.

    Prefacing this quote should have been the sentence, "Now for
    a word from our sponsor."

    Following the quote above is a sentence beginning with "We
    therefore believe...." A belief system has nothing to do
    with science. They have given no grounds for their belief.
    The belief is actually a rumour.

    Nomatter what, one can never bring into summations of any
    article, paper, or thesis, items which are not presented or
    discussed within the body of those writings. I found no
    mention in the paper of the "substantial protective effect
    of statins." NO EVIDENCE WAS GIVEN. This, then, should be
    considered to be a rumour, nothing else. Spreading rumours
    can and does sell product. (e.g. in a recent survey it was
    discover that people preferred cola a to cola b by 2 to 1.)
    The lead author's name is a homonym for the English word
    "ghost" in, at least, one other European language. Might
    they be telling us something?

    I do not give advice, but having a look at the colorado
    website might prove to be interesting.

    ********* PART TWO *******

    This is Listener's favourite quote from the person being
    interviewed. Is it an accurate quote? Maybe not. Maybe she
    has been misquoted. Was her quote taken out of context?
    Please notice her quote extracted from the link given.

    >
    > "...high blood levels of cholesterol do bear a relation to
    > heart disease risk; and statin drugs that lower
    > cholesterol reduce the risk of heart disease and stroke,
    > which are primary causes of death and disability,
    > respectively, in the US:
    >

    > Beatrice A. Golomb, MD, PhD on Statin Drugs March 7, 2002
    > interview
    >
    ========= Start quote ================

    There has never been benefit shown for many groups. “However
    benefit to survival with statins or other cholesterol-
    lowering agents has never been demonstrated in women (even
    those at high cardiac risk), in the older elderly, or in men
    at lower cardiac risk . . .” [emphasis added] – “Beatrice A.
    Golomb, MD, PhD on Statin Drugs” –
    http://www.coloradohealthsite.org/
    ========= end quote ================

    Are these quotes compatible? Maybe. The first one
    (Listener's) alludes to the possible widespread use of
    statins while the latter (Colorado's) narrows it AT
    LEAST in half.

    Amazing.

    Is this why Listener bowed out? I take a long weekend and
    Listener bows out....there is more...

    Some believe a game of checkers can be won on the first
    move. Those believers should be required to prove it!

    Regards,

    A.L.
     
  4. listener

    listener Guest

    On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 12:42:22 -0700, "Al. Lohse"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Is this why Listener bowed out? I take a long weekend and
    >Listener bows out....there is more...

    No. It's (partially) because of cretinous assholes like you.

    Have a nice day, loser.

    [flame off]

    L.
     
  5. George

    George Guest

    >No. It's (partially) because of cretinous assholes
    >like you.
    >
    >Have a nice day, loser.
    >
    >[flame off]
    >
    >
    Hey L now you are speaking the way Al needs to be spoken to.
    Don't forget he has thrown down the gauntlet so I'd watch
    your back lol.
     
  6. Al. Lohse

    Al. Lohse Guest

    [email protected] wrote:
    >
    > On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 12:42:22 -0700, "Al. Lohse"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Is this why Listener bowed out? I take a long weekend and
    > >Listener bows out....there is more...
    >
    > No. It's (partially) because of cretinous assholes
    > like you.
    >
    > Have a nice day, loser.
    >
    > [flame off]
    >
    > L.
    Been called worse by better people...

    Sounds like someone caught in self, internal CONTRADICTION.

    Lash out rather than allow ones brain to explode.
    Satisfying?

    When the truth hurts so badly that you have to curse a
    trusted internet friend, it may be time to take stock. Put
    your feet up... contemplate... meditate... "What is wrong
    with me?" "Why am I like this?" "So irritated?" "So
    agitated?" Uhmmmmmmmm HUhmmmmmmm Relax, it is not the end of
    the world.

    Only time will determine a loser. You certainly cannot. You
    lack credibility. If there were no real problem, I would
    have no "ammunition." Then, because I have so much
    "ammunition," there must be a real problem. You resort to
    cursing because you have lost all your defenses. I still
    have three books to fall back upon. What have you got?

    Suggest you grow up.

    After all, you, Listener, are a verified liar, and I am not
    even a regular kind. I have tried lying, a long time ago,
    but find it exceedingly uncomfortable, unnecessary, and
    unprofitable.

    All is not lost; At least the good Dr. will be praying for
    you. I would too, but, oh look, look at the time... sorry...
    gotta run...

    No time even for a closing remark or salutation, at least
    not a very long one, at least not a very clever one,

    A.L.
     
  7. George

    George Guest

    Al you really shouldn't waste your keystrokes trying to
    prove your point. You have proven it to me beyond a doubt.
    You are sick (and pretty stupid) and yet somehow you have a
    tremendous vision of yourself as a fountain of wisdom. Must
    be the result of oxygen depravation that occurred during one
    of your MI's.
     
  8. Al. Lohse

    Al. Lohse Guest

    George wrote:
    >
    > Al you really shouldn't waste your keystrokes trying to
    > prove your point. You have proven it to me beyond a doubt.
    > You are sick (and pretty stupid) and yet somehow you have
    > a tremendous vision of yourself as a fountain of wisdom.
    > Must be the result of oxygen depravation that occurred
    > during one of your MI's.

    George. George. George. Sounds like somebody got out of the
    wrong side of the bed this morning. Since when do you attack
    the messenger when you cannot handle the message? Can you
    think of another messenger who was attacked because of his
    messages, on Good Friday, two millennia ago? By all means,
    have a go at the messages. That is what this medium is for.

    Actually, if you will have had difficulty with my latest
    post, you may want to straighten out the nice folks at
    coloradohealthsite.org for having misled me, and report
    back, telling us what happened. Other than that, if you
    prefer to be in the camp of the foul-mouthed, bone fide
    liar, why not announce that as your choice and tell us why?

    H.AN.D.
    H.A.That is: http://www.coloradohealthsite.org/
     
Loading...