Night-time muscle cramping



[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On 16 Dec 2003 11:16:03 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:
Corruption at NIH - I'm SHOCKED! Of
> course it's really a sad commentary, if true, but what institution doesn't have some level of
> corruption?

Some level of corruption? Five researchers who were NIH principal investigators were taking hundreds
of thousands of dollars and stock options on the side from pharmas. The LA Times did a year long
covert investigation and published storied dated Dec 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15th. They also wrote an
editorial. Congress is screaming for blood.

The LA Times only profiled five corrupt researchers. One kept a trial going and suppressed from
clinical participants that one of their number had died. Protocol demanded he shut the trial down
but he did not. He covered it up. These are only examples I put here for you. The LA Times said the
corruption was throughout the NIH, and the head people were involved in cover-up.

The researchers were employees of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) where as part of their
contracts they signed away any consort with industry when they took those jobs, working as any civil
servant, for the taxpayer.

American taxpayers pay these people to develop drugs, then the pharma pays them on the side (under
the table) AND gets them to consult and write studies on these very drugs, saying they are
vunderbar. People died in the studies and it was hushed up. The researcher involved then went on
speaking junkets lauding the drug. Hardly non-biased. The pharmas then go on to make billions on
these drugs which you have paid to develop and they are put on the market with the negative and very
serious side effects suppressed. Detail men certainly don't talk about it. They did not on statins.
>
> Hey, I'm not arguing that statins don't have side-effects. ALL medications have side-effects of
> one sort of another, from mild to severe. I'm just not as anti-statin as you seem to be.

All medications have side-effects: but if you don't know, it can hardly be called informed consent
when you take a drug, right? Yes, we know aspirin will set your ears ringing if you take too much,
but did you know that if you took pravachol you stood a good chance of retinal blindness and ocular
myasthenia? Did you know you could experience transient global amnesia (www.spacedoc.net),
mitochondrial myopathy (www.impostertrial.com)? Lay your money down....because I need a new cane and
I'm willing to bet you do not know what pravastatin might cause you. You are playing Russian
roulette. There are other, safer ways to lower cholesterol, if you think that is a reasonable thing
to do. I don't and my cholesterol is 560. Therapeutics Initiative in their study number 48 say there
is no clinical evidence for taking statins for prevention. In their study number 49 they say there
is some evidence for taking them if you have had serious cardiovascular disease. But even then they
qualify it. Read it please. http://www.ti.ubc.ca/pages/letter48.htm. But I wonder, why is it ok for
someone who is already suffering so terribly to risk more suffering from which he or she may never
recover, since it is also known statins CAUSE cardiomyopathy?
http://www.redflagsweekly.com/features/2002_july08.html

You say that you have had little side effect: Will it go away or will you, like me after taking a
drug you expected to help you, remain with a deficit? Did you look at the histopathology page of
www.impostertrial.com? Six months after taking statins, damage remaining. Six YEARS after stopping
statins, damage remaining.

I have truly not heard from people who did not have side effects eventually, and they are lingering,
to a greater or lesser degree. They certainly are in me. You do not respect the studies I have
posted here, and you do not respect my personal experience. What does it take?

I exaggerate nothing I have said here, and I am legion (700,000 at a conservative estimate). I am
very glad you did not have a problem, but please do not pretend that what you posted (the url
please, from Dr. Phillips website) was an impartial article. Here are the connections for the
American 'consultants' who were paid hundreds of thousands to write that pimped article.

Do you seriously believe people who are on pharma payroll would risk their careers to dare speak
against the drug the pharma produces?

***************

"...the Canadian authorities have bought the new American {guidelines}uncritically. Here is a
summary of the way these guidelines were created:

1. A small group of private individuals come together and call themselves the "Expert Panel."
2. These people recieve large sums of money from pharmeceutical companies to give talks, do
research, etc.
3. The Expert Panel rewrites the guidelines and issue them with the apparent endorsement of the
federal government.
4. Thirty million more Americans now need to be on cholesterol-lowering drugs.
5. Insurance companies, Medicare, etc. pay the pharmeceutical companies billions of dollars a year
for those drugs.

Here is the list of commitments for the members of the expert panel: Financial Disclosure: Dr Grundy
has received honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Sankyo, Bayer, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr Hunninghake
has current grants from Merck, Pfizer, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Schering Plough, Wyeth Ayerst, Sankyo,
Bayer, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and G. D. Searle; he has also received consulting
honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and Bayer. Dr McBride has
received grants and/or research support from Pfizer, Merck, Parke-Davis, and AstraZeneca; has served
as a consultant for Kos Pharmaceuticals, Abbott, and Merck; and has received honoraria from Abbott,
Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Merck, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Parke-Davis, Pfizer, and DuPont. Dr
Pasternak has served as a consultant for and received honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, and Kos
Pharmaceuticals, and has received grants from Merck and Pfizer. Dr Stone has served as a consultant
and/or received honoraria for lectures from Abbott, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kos
Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Novartis, Parke-Davis/Pfizer, and Sankyo. Dr Schwartz has served as a
consultant for and/or conducted research funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Merck, Johnson
& Johnson-Merck, and Pfizer.

Read also my comments to the American guidelines on http://www.ravnskov.nu/ncep_guidelines.htm

Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD Spokesman for THINCS, The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics
http://www.thincs.org www.ravnskov.nu/uffe
 
[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

(Unless you believe that ALL positive statin studies are bogus - or some sort of conspiracy!)

$$$$$$$$$$$

Well don't take my word for it. I truly believe there are honest truthful people out there, but they
are going down for the count. Because you need a lab to do a study in, and they are owned by Pharma,
one way or the other.

Have you heard of Dr. Nancy Olivieri? Dr. David Healy? They both lost their contracts when they
spoke out to protect study participants from a drug they believed would harm. The pharma didn't want
they. They wanted the information suppressed and the studies to continue. You'll find hundreds of
urls for them on google.

Once again, Listener, thank you for the opportunity to discuss this. MFG

From www.nofreelunch.org Comments: 1999

The worst problem with drug promotion lies not with the sales reps but with industry-funded
research. I personally witnessed the excesses for 8 years while on the faculty of a major medical
school. This operates at several levels.

First, one must understand that in academics teaching is like catching fly balls and publishing is
like hitting home runs. They didn't pay Hank Aaron for his fielding. It isn't just the publishing
and reflected glory to the institution that drives academicians to do research. The institution
takes a cut of every grant, whether it's industry money or an NIH grant. The percentages vary, but
they are rather large; a $10MM grant yields several million for the hospital, school, or whatever
institution the grantee works for. Those who bring in grant money have *power*. What can they get
with that power? A raise, a bigger office, private secretary, less time actually having to teach
residents or touch a patient (when I was in academics it seemed to be a matter of prestige to *not*
carry a pager). Also, although it is difficult to directly gain monetarily from grant money, one can
usually buy a few new computers or other toys that may find their way home.

Publishing favorable articles leads to invitations to speak at fun places - all expenses paid - and
receive nice honoraria to boot. Yes, the drug companies fly private practitioners to nice places,
but who are they listening to? Impartial lecturers? No - they are listening to the drug whores who
will say nice things about the product. Some of the drug whores I met during my own march in the
******** parade were big names in the field, including departmental chairmen. Some of the biggest
names in my specialty are, in my opinion, on the take. The people who really get wined and dined at
these meetings are the "mouthpieces", not the attendees.

One time I was even mailed a lecture, complete with slides to present, at a sponsored meeting at a
very nice resort. When I balked and insisted on giving my own lecture with my own slides it caused a
major storm. Another time, one of my colleagues asked another colleague to do the statistics for his
drug company data. When the results came back unflattering he asked if perhaps a different
statistical test might be tried.

If a researcher plays the game well, publishing flattering studies and giving lots of positive
lectures, he might get a real plum: a "consultant's contract", or a position on the "advisory
board". This can mean tens ofthousands of dollars of income per year for very little actual work.

Therefore the real danger is in the poisonous influence the private sector has on the generation of
scientifi studies. Bad results and balanced lectures are not rewarded. Sadly, with the drying up of
public funds for research in the past two decades, academic institutions have had to rely more and
more on private funding. When I graduated medical school in 1979 medical journals did not require
financial disclosure. Now you see it everywhere - a sad reflection of the influence of commercial
research funding, and the closest anyone will come to actually admitting we have a serious problem.

When a drug rep buys you lunch you know you are being fed a sales pitch. The truly insidious aspect
of all this is that published peer-reviewed articles funded by drug companies are usually taken at
face value, and the lectures are given by drug whores (after all, they are the ones with funding and
have written all the articles - they are the "authority" by virtue of the sheer volume they have
published). The damage done by this misinformation takes years to undo.

***************
 
[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On 16 Dec 2003 15:11:01 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:
>
> >[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >> On 15 Dec 2003 13:10:41 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:
> >>
> >> > Go to www.impostertrial.com, the site of Dr. S. Phillips of Scripps Mercy Hospital's studies
> >> > on statin myopathy. Read through BOTH patient site and physician site.
> >>
> >> Interesting site. Especially:
> >>
> >> "Cholesterol lowering therapy with HMGCoA reductase inhibitors (statins) convincingly reduces
> >> death and myocardial infarction among patients with coronary heart disease. Application of the
> >> National Cholesterol Education Program?s ATP III guidelines could lead to as many as 36 million
> >> patients receiving this therapy in the United States.
> >
> >
> >Listener I do not find the paragraphs as you have copied them here for us, in your post above. I
> >am not including your whole post in mine, for space reasons, but I am sure readers here will read
> >what you have set it out, above. Please give me the url for the place on Dr. Phillip's site that
> >you found this study as you have copied it. I would like to see it in context.
> >
> >I'm glad you posted it because it lends us some new insight into how drugs are marketed. Dr.
> >Jacques Genest, a Montreal cardiologist, is one of the authors, or writers, of the Canadian
> >heart guidelines, which are based on the American guidelines (to which you have referred in your
> >above post.)
> >
> >Dr. Jacues Genest is the person who made the comment about "statins in the drinking water" which
> > is in your above post. He made this commment in a story to the Calgary Herald, in spring of
> > 2002, while he attended a pharma sponsored cardiology conference at Lake Louise. The
> > conference sponsoring pharma, coincidentally, makes a statin.
> >
> >Now then, we have whoever wrote the study you have posted, presumably a member of the American
> >guideline writers, quoting one of the Canadian guideline writers, one of his own, so to speak, as
> >evidence of why we should all be on statins.
> >
> >This is what I find I Dr. Phillip's website. I'm sure you will correct me, and show me where on
> >his site, are the paragraphs as you have set them out.
> >
> >Dr. Phillips on statin-induced myopathy: "The recent withdrawal of cerivastatin from the market
> > has highlighted both our ignorance and the need for post-marketing surveillance of these
> > therapies."
>
>
> I find it a bit odd that you apparently snipped my entire response...oh, well.
>
> Anyway....here's the url for the website YOU orginally posted:
>
> http://www.impostertrial.com/virtues.htm
>
> This article and comments by Dr. Phillips aside, I still stand by what I said.

The article I was reading was on the physician's site. The article you quoted from was on the
patient's site. I have been told researchers are threatened by pharma if they do not air the pharma
doctrine. The article you quoted is written by bought and paid-for pharma whores. Read the article I
posted that gives all their pharma affiliation. Do you buy a car only reading the glossies the
dealership gives you? Why do you suspend good judgement for drugs?

I snipped your article because no-one wants to scroll through 30 inches of repeated banter each time
they read for the comment at the end of the thread. What you posted is there, in its entirely, on
your first response.

MFG
 
On 16 Dec 2003 19:47:34 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:

>[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>> On 16 Dec 2003 11:16:03 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:
> Corruption at NIH - I'm SHOCKED! Of
>> course it's really a sad commentary, if true, but what institution doesn't have some level of
>> corruption?
>
>Some level of corruption? Five researchers who were NIH principal investigators were taking
>hundreds of thousands of dollars and stock options on the side from pharmas. The LA Times did a
>year long covert investigation and published storied dated Dec 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15th. They also
>wrote an editorial. Congress is screaming for blood.
>
>The LA Times only profiled five corrupt researchers. One kept a trial going and suppressed from
>clinical participants that one of their number had died. Protocol demanded he shut the trial down
>but he did not. He covered it up. These are only examples I put here for you. The LA Times said the
>corruption was throughout the NIH, and the head people were involved in cover-up.
>
>The researchers were employees of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) where as part of their
>contracts they signed away any consort with industry when they took those jobs, working as any
>civil servant, for the taxpayer.
>
>American taxpayers pay these people to develop drugs, then the pharma pays them on the side
>(under the table) AND gets them to consult and write studies on these very drugs, saying they
>are vunderbar. People died in the studies and it was hushed up. The researcher involved then
>went on speaking junkets lauding the drug. Hardly non-biased. The pharmas then go on to make
>billions on these drugs which you have paid to develop and they are put on the market with the
>negative and very serious side effects suppressed. Detail men certainly don't talk about it.
>They did not on statins.
>>
>> Hey, I'm not arguing that statins don't have side-effects. ALL medications have side-effects of
>> one sort of another, from mild to severe. I'm just not as anti-statin as you seem to be.
>
>All medications have side-effects: but if you don't know, it can hardly be called informed consent
>when you take a drug, right? Yes, we know aspirin will set your ears ringing if you take too much,
>but did you know that if you took pravachol you stood a good chance of retinal blindness and ocular
>myasthenia? Did you know you could experience transient global amnesia (www.spacedoc.net),
>mitochondrial myopathy (www.impostertrial.com)? Lay your money down....because I need a new cane
>and I'm willing to bet you do not know what pravastatin might cause you. You are playing Russian
>roulette. There are other, safer ways to lower cholesterol, if you think that is a reasonable thing
>to do. I don't and my cholesterol is 560. Therapeutics Initiative in their study number 48 say
>there is no clinical evidence for taking statins for prevention. In their study number 49 they say
>there is some evidence for taking them if you have had serious cardiovascular disease. But even
>then they qualify it. Read it please. http://www.ti.ubc.ca/pages/letter48.htm. But I wonder, why is
>it ok for someone who is already suffering so terribly to risk more suffering from which he or she
>may never recover, since it is also known statins CAUSE cardiomyopathy?
>http://www.redflagsweekly.com/features/2002_july08.html
>
>You say that you have had little side effect: Will it go away or will you, like me after taking a
>drug you expected to help you, remain with a deficit? Did you look at the histopathology page of
>www.impostertrial.com? Six months after taking statins, damage remaining. Six YEARS after stopping
>statins, damage remaining.
>
>I have truly not heard from people who did not have side effects eventually, and they are
>lingering, to a greater or lesser degree. They certainly are in me. You do not respect the studies
>I have posted here, and you do not respect my personal experience. What does it take?
>
>I exaggerate nothing I have said here, and I am legion (700,000 at a conservative estimate). I am
>very glad you did not have a problem, but please do not pretend that what you posted (the url
>please, from Dr. Phillips website) was an impartial article. Here are the connections for the
>American 'consultants' who were paid hundreds of thousands to write that pimped article.
>
>Do you seriously believe people who are on pharma payroll would risk their careers to dare speak
>against the drug the pharma produces?
>
>***************
>
>"...the Canadian authorities have bought the new American {guidelines}uncritically. Here is a
>summary of the way these guidelines were created:
>
>1. A small group of private individuals come together and call themselves the "Expert Panel."
>2. These people recieve large sums of money from pharmeceutical companies to give talks, do
> research, etc.
>3. The Expert Panel rewrites the guidelines and issue them with the apparent endorsement of the
> federal government.
>4. Thirty million more Americans now need to be on cholesterol-lowering drugs.
>5. Insurance companies, Medicare, etc. pay the pharmeceutical companies billions of dollars a year
> for those drugs.
>
>Here is the list of commitments for the members of the expert panel: Financial Disclosure: Dr
>Grundy has received honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Sankyo, Bayer, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr
>Hunninghake has current grants from Merck, Pfizer, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Schering Plough, Wyeth
>Ayerst, Sankyo, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and G. D. Searle; he has also received
>consulting honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and Bayer. Dr
>McBride has received grants and/or research support from Pfizer, Merck, Parke-Davis, and
>AstraZeneca; has served as a consultant for Kos Pharmaceuticals, Abbott, and Merck; and has
>received honoraria from Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Merck, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Parke-
>Davis, Pfizer, and DuPont. Dr Pasternak has served as a consultant for and received honoraria from
>Merck, Pfizer, and Kos Pharmaceuticals, and has received grants from Merck and Pfizer. Dr Stone has
>served as a consultant and/or received honoraria for lectures from Abbott, Bayer, Bristol-Myers
>Squibb, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Novartis, Parke-Davis/Pfizer, and Sankyo. Dr Schwartz has
>served as a consultant for and/or conducted research funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca,
>Merck, Johnson & Johnson-Merck, and Pfizer.
>
>Read also my comments to the American guidelines on http://www.ravnskov.nu/ncep_guidelines.htm
>
>Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD Spokesman for THINCS, The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics
>http://www.thincs.org www.ravnskov.nu/uffe

Is this reply from Uffe Ravnskov?? Know I'm really confused (and it ain't from statins!)

Anyway, I still stand by what I said. A word of advice: be careful when you post a link to a web
site that you think totally bolsters your side. Now you accuse the article I posted from that very
site as not being impartial. (http://www.impostertrial.com/virtues.htm for those of you who may have
missed it).

I think the article speaks for itself. Well, good luck in your quest - I'm not sure what that is, to
be honest.
 
[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On 16 Dec 2003 19:47:34 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:
>
> >[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >> On 16 Dec 2003 11:16:03 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:
> Corruption at NIH - I'm SHOCKED! Of
> >> course it's really a sad commentary, if true, but what institution doesn't have some level of
> >> corruption?
> >
> >Some level of corruption? Five researchers who were NIH principal investigators were taking
> >hundreds of thousands of dollars and stock options on the side from pharmas. The LA Times did a
> >year long covert investigation and published storied dated Dec 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15th. They also
> >wrote an editorial. Congress is screaming for blood.
> >
> >The LA Times only profiled five corrupt researchers. One kept a trial going and suppressed from
> >clinical participants that one of their number had died. Protocol demanded he shut the trial down
> >but he did not. He covered it up. These are only examples I put here for you. The LA Times said
> >the corruption was throughout the NIH, and the head people were involved in cover-up.
> >
> >The researchers were employees of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) where as part of their
> >contracts they signed away any consort with industry when they took those jobs, working as any
> >civil servant, for the taxpayer.
> >
> >American taxpayers pay these people to develop drugs, then the pharma pays them on the side
> >(under the table) AND gets them to consult and write studies on these very drugs, saying they are
> >vunderbar. People died in the studies and it was hushed up. The researcher involved then went on
> >speaking junkets lauding the drug. Hardly non-biased. The pharmas then go on to make billions on
> >these drugs which you have paid to develop and they are put on the market with the negative and
> >very serious side effects suppressed. Detail men certainly don't talk about it. They did not on
> >statins.
> >>
> >> Hey, I'm not arguing that statins don't have side-effects. ALL medications have side-effects of
> >> one sort of another, from mild to severe. I'm just not as anti-statin as you seem to be.
> >
> >All medications have side-effects: but if you don't know, it can hardly be called informed
> >consent when you take a drug, right? Yes, we know aspirin will set your ears ringing if you take
> >too much, but did you know that if you took pravachol you stood a good chance of retinal
> >blindness and ocular myasthenia? Did you know you could experience transient global amnesia
> >(www.spacedoc.net), mitochondrial myopathy (www.impostertrial.com)? Lay your money
> >down....because I need a new cane and I'm willing to bet you do not know what pravastatin might
> >cause you. You are playing Russian roulette. There are other, safer ways to lower cholesterol, if
> >you think that is a reasonable thing to do. I don't and my cholesterol is 560. Therapeutics
> >Initiative in their study number 48 say there is no clinical evidence for taking statins for
> >prevention. In their study number 49 they say there is some evidence for taking them if you have
> >had serious cardiovascular disease. But even then they qualify it. Read it please.
> >http://www.ti.ubc.ca/pages/letter48.htm. But I wonder, why is it ok for someone who is already
> >suffering so terribly to risk more suffering from which he or she may never recover, since it is
> >also known statins CAUSE cardiomyopathy? http://www.redflagsweekly.com/features/2002_july08.html
> >
> >You say that you have had little side effect: Will it go away or will you, like me after taking a
> >drug you expected to help you, remain with a deficit? Did you look at the histopathology page of
> >www.impostertrial.com? Six months after taking statins, damage remaining. Six YEARS after
> >stopping statins, damage remaining.
> >
> >I have truly not heard from people who did not have side effects eventually, and they are
> >lingering, to a greater or lesser degree. They certainly are in me. You do not respect the
> >studies I have posted here, and you do not respect my personal experience. What does it take?
> >
> >I exaggerate nothing I have said here, and I am legion (700,000 at a conservative estimate). I am
> >very glad you did not have a problem, but please do not pretend that what you posted (the url
> >please, from Dr. Phillips website) was an impartial article. Here are the connections for the
> >American 'consultants' who were paid hundreds of thousands to write that pimped article.
> >
> >Do you seriously believe people who are on pharma payroll would risk their careers to dare speak
> >against the drug the pharma produces?
> >
> >***************
> >
> >"...the Canadian authorities have bought the new American {guidelines}uncritically. Here is a
> >summary of the way these guidelines were created:
> >
> >1. A small group of private individuals come together and call themselves the "Expert Panel."
> >2. These people recieve large sums of money from pharmeceutical companies to give talks, do
> > research, etc.
> >3. The Expert Panel rewrites the guidelines and issue them with the apparent endorsement of the
> > federal government.
> >4. Thirty million more Americans now need to be on cholesterol-lowering drugs.
> >5. Insurance companies, Medicare, etc. pay the pharmeceutical companies billions of dollars a
> > year for those drugs.
> >
> >Here is the list of commitments for the members of the expert panel: Financial Disclosure: Dr
> >Grundy has received honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Sankyo, Bayer, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr
> >Hunninghake has current grants from Merck, Pfizer, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Schering Plough, Wyeth
> >Ayerst, Sankyo, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and G. D. Searle; he has also received
> >consulting honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and Bayer. Dr
> >McBride has received grants and/or research support from Pfizer, Merck, Parke-Davis, and
> >AstraZeneca; has served as a consultant for Kos Pharmaceuticals, Abbott, and Merck; and has
> >received honoraria from Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Merck, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Parke-
> >Davis, Pfizer, and DuPont. Dr Pasternak has served as a consultant for and received honoraria
> >from Merck, Pfizer, and Kos Pharmaceuticals, and has received grants from Merck and Pfizer. Dr
> >Stone has served as a consultant and/or received honoraria for lectures from Abbott, Bayer, Bristol-
> >Myers Squibb, Kos Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Novartis, Parke-Davis/Pfizer, and Sankyo. Dr Schwartz
> >has served as a consultant for and/or conducted research funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb,
> >AstraZeneca, Merck, Johnson & Johnson-Merck, and Pfizer.
> >
> >Read also my comments to the American guidelines on http://www.ravnskov.nu/ncep_guidelines.htm
> >
> >Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD Spokesman for THINCS, The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics
> >http://www.thincs.org www.ravnskov.nu/uffe
>
>
> Is this reply from Uffe Ravnskov?? Know I'm really confused (and it ain't from statins!)
>
> Anyway, I still stand by what I said. A word of advice: be careful when you post a link to a web
> site that you think totally bolsters your side. Now you accuse the article I posted from that very
> site as not being impartial. (http://www.impostertrial.com/virtues.htm for those of you who may
> have missed it).
>
> I think the article speaks for itself. Well, good luck in your quest - I'm not sure what that is,
> to be honest.

Listener

I think I have a different understanding about posting here than you do. I'm not here to WIN or to
defeat someone, but to put forth a viewpoint I think has been neglected. From my readings here I
have seen arguing about what a study means, but I have not seen postings from someone affected by
statins. I present both, study urls, and my experience. You may consider me, or dismiss me. It is
your choice. But I hope others will read what I have written.

The article you have sited is a pimped article, written by drug whores in the pay of Pharma. I am
aware there are other examples of 'the other side' on Dr. Phillips' site. I was aware of this when I
gave the url. Dr. Phillips and any honourable researcher must put forth both sides. He has done so.

Yes, the letter I have copied is by Uffe Ravnskov. He has given the Pharma ties for all the
consultants who wrote the new heart guidelines you posted here. The last comment in that article,
about statins in the drinking water, was made by one of their own (another writer of the guidelines)
at a pharma sponsored cardiolgoy conference in Lake Louise. Dr. Jacques Genest, the cardiologist who
made that comment is a consultant for the statin producing pharma which sponsored the cardiology
conference.

How is anyone reading that article to know they are quoting themselves when they say how wonderful
statins are? The implication is it comes from somewhere else. It is fraudulent, and one wonders what
else they lie about. Or, at least I do.

Please read the complete side effects list for pravastatin before you go back on: www.rxlist.com.
Please read Matti Narkia on nutritional ways of dealing with high cholesterol. Please also read
www.thincs.org to see others, such as Dr. Ravnskov, who do not view high cholesterol as the sole
problem and think lowering it is dangerous. But there are those who belong to that group who also
disagree with each other. It is only propagandist who will not put forth all sides.

I posted another of Ravnskov's articles on sci.med.cardiology, sent to me by Dr. Ravnskov. He is
very approachable if you wish to discuss your views with someone far more educated on this issue
than I. It is all about learning Listener. You will come to your own conclusion, but how can you do
that without all the facts?

MFG
 
On 17 Dec 2003 09:52:19 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:

>The article I was reading was on the physician's site. The article you quoted from was on the
>patient's site. I have been told researchers are threatened by pharma if they do not air the pharma
>doctrine. The article you quoted is written by bought and paid-for pharma whores. Read the article
>I posted that gives all their pharma affiliation.

OK. When you direct people to this site you should mention that the "patient" side is written by
whores and is to be ignored.(!)

>Do you buy a car only reading the glossies the dealership gives you?

No. As a matter of fact, I just bought a new car after many months of research.

>Why do you suspend good judgement for drugs?

I don't. I just don't have an irrational fear of them.
 
[email protected] (Listener) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On 17 Dec 2003 09:52:19 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:
>
> >The article I was reading was on the physician's site. The article you quoted from was on the
> >patient's site. I have been told researchers are threatened by pharma if they do not air the
> >pharma doctrine. The article you quoted is written by bought and paid-for pharma whores. Read the
> >article I posted that gives all their pharma affiliation.
>
> OK. When you direct people to this site you should mention that the "patient" side is written by
> whores and is to be ignored.(!)
>
>
> >Do you buy a car only reading the glossies the dealership gives you?
>
> No. As a matter of fact, I just bought a new car after many months of research.
>
> >Why do you suspend good judgement for drugs?
>
> I don't. I just don't have an irrational fear of them.

The first thing I learned in debating club oh so many years ago was you know you've hit home when
they make personal comments about you. I'm sorry you felt it was necessary to do so.

MFG
 
On 17 Dec 2003 18:07:13 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:

>[email protected] (Listener) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>> On 17 Dec 2003 09:52:19 -0800, [email protected] (mfg) wrote:
>>
>> >The article I was reading was on the physician's site. The article you quoted from was on the
>> >patient's site. I have been told researchers are threatened by pharma if they do not air the
>> >pharma doctrine. The article you quoted is written by bought and paid-for pharma whores. Read
>> >the article I posted that gives all their pharma affiliation.
>>
>> OK. When you direct people to this site you should mention that the "patient" side is written by
>> whores and is to be ignored.(!)
>>
>>
>> >Do you buy a car only reading the glossies the dealership gives you?
>>
>> No. As a matter of fact, I just bought a new car after many months of research.
>>
>> >Why do you suspend good judgement for drugs?
>>
>> I don't. I just don't have an irrational fear of them.
>
>
>
>The first thing I learned in debating club oh so many years ago was you know you've hit home when
>they make personal comments about you.

I just responded to your question. I don't know what you mean by "hit home"? Seems such an odd
thing to say in this discussion. You hit home? Are you saying, perhaps, that you feel that
you've "debated" the issue with such force that I was relegated to personal attack (which it
really wasn't)?

Was it the use of the word "irrational" that "hit home"?
 
Thanks for the many replies concerning the muscle cramping. As a follow-up to your responses, I
would like to add one more thing. It now seems very likely that the muscle cramping may have been
caused by my being on a low carb diet for the last several months. Along with the cramping, I have
also been experiencing rectal bleeding. The bleeding occurs only when I walk long distances. I have
increased my potassium and magnesium intake, and am seeing some improvement.

"mfg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "JMDO" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > Two years after double bypass, and am now having severe leg muscle
cramping
> > at night. Could this be a symptom of vascular disease progression? I am presently taking aspirin
> > and Zocor to prevent any future blockages.
>
> John please read through this, and print out and take to your doctor. I do not say this is the
> source of your problem, but it is something to consider. I experienced this myself, and was not
> taken off statins until terrible damage had happened. I continue to struggle with statin side
> effects which have not gone away, have rendered me incapable of working more than little, and
> depleted my savings and pension funds to live on while disabled. I too am considered someone who
> MUST take statins, but I now refuse to take any cholesteol lowering medication. The new meds out
> have not been on the market long enough for me to know what they might and might not do to us. It
> is truly a catch 22, and I sympathize with you. But, read the following from a summer issue of
> Annals of Internal Medicine. MFG
>
> Statin-Associated Myopathy with Normal Creatine Kinase Levels TO THE EDITOR: The article by
> Phillips and colleagues (1) and the accompanying editorial by Grundy (2) highlight a clinical
> experience many of us have had. Are the authors aware of any data, or in their clinical experience
> have they found any other noninvasive testing, such as serum aldolase level, that might identify
> patients who are experiencing creatine kinase-negative statin myopathy? Mark H. Hyman, MD
> University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90025 References
> 1. Phillips PS, Haas RH, Bannykh S, Hathaway S, Gray NL, Kimura BJ, et al. Statinassociated
> myopathy with normal creatine kinase levels. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137: 581-5. [PMID: 12353945]
> 2. Grundy SM. Can statins cause chronic low-grade myopathy? [Editorial] Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:617-
> 8. [PMID: 12353951] TO THE EDITOR: We read with interest the article by Phillips and
> colleagues (1) and the accompanying editorial (2). One of us (Dr. Torgovnick) developed low-
> grade myopathy while receiving statin therapy. Atorvastatin, 5 mg (0.5 tablet), was started in
> September 1999. Nonspecific aches and pains were noticed, but no clear weakness was evident
> and Dr. Torgovnick continued regular exercise. On several occasions, a burning sensation
> beyond what was anticipated developed in the muscles after exercise. Low-grade myopathy was
> considered in June 2000, and creatine kinase level was checked. The result, 3.14 _kat/L, was
> normal (reference range, 0 to 3.34 _kat/L), and atorvastatin therapy was continued. In early
> May 2002, 24 hours after exercise, creatine kinase level was checked and was found to be 4.8
> _kat/L. Atorvastatin was withdrawn, and the aches, pains, and burning sensation gradually
> resolved. After vigorous exercise, several weeks after atorvastatin was discontinued, the
> creatine kinase level was 3.19 _kat/L. On a repeated test, serum cholesterol level was
> significantly elevated and pravastatin was introduced. Symptoms recurred but were tolerated.
> While Dr. Torgovnick was taking pravastatin, the creatine kinase level was 4.98 _kat/L shortly
> after exercise. Phillips and colleagues' patients ranged in age from 62 to 76 years, and no
> information was given on their level of activity or their muscle mass, both of which can
> affect creatine kinase levels. In the current author's case, it was clear that something was
> wrong, but the creatine kinase level rose only with exercise provocation. The message of the
> article by Phillips and colleagues is clear and important. As more patients with this syndrome
> are identified, perhaps less invasive evaluation might include the use of exercise provocation
> to watch for an increase in creatine kinase level. Alternatively, simple serial measurement of
> creatine kinase levels to establish a baseline and subsequent reevaluation after a specified
> period (or withdrawal of the agent and a demonstrated decrease in creatine kinase level,
> particularly if associated with resolution of symptoms) would be useful. Josh Torgovnick, MD
> St. Vincent's Hospital and Medical Center New York, NY 10011 Edward Arsura, MD Salem Veterans
> Affairs Medical Center Salem, VA 24153 References
> 1. Phillips PS, Haas RH, Bannykh S, Hathaway S, Gray NL, Kimura BJ, et al. Statinassociated
> myopathy with normal creatine kinase levels. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137: 581-5. [PMID: 12353945]
> 2. Grundy SM. Can statins cause chronic low-grade myopathy? [Editorial] Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:617-
> 8. [PMID: 12353951] TO THE EDITOR: Phillips and colleagues (1) nicely documented biopsy-
> confirmed myopathy in patients with normal creatine kinase levels in association with statin
> therapy. As they mentioned in their discussion, similar features are reported for coenzyme Q10
> deficiency. It is known that 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMGCoA) reductase
> inhibition by statins influences not only the cholesterol synthesis but also that of proteins
> such as farnesylated and geranylgeranylated proteins and ubiquinones such as coenzyme Q10.
> Similar to cholesterol synthesis, the primary regulation of coenzyme Q10 biosynthesis is the
> HMG-CoA reductase reaction, providing its www.annals.org 17 June 2003 Annals of Internal
> Medicine Volume 138 . Number 12 1007 isoprenyl side chain deriving from mevalonate. Decreased
> plasma levels of coenzyme Q10 have been reported in statin-treated patients (2, 3), and in one
> of them this decrease was dose related (3). Furthermore, in one study (4), statin-induced
> coenzyme Q10 reduction was prevented by exogenous coenzyme Q10 supplementation. On the other
> hand, similar histopathologic findings of myopathy are well documented in patients with
> carnitine deficiency. A 16-week trial of treatment with lovastatin significantly altered
> carnitine status in rabbits with decreased tissue levels of carnitine and increased serum
> levels of acylcarnitine (5). Use of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors leads to increased levels of
> acyl-CoA and, therefore, to higher requirements of carnitine for the buffering of acyl-CoA
> moieties. Assessing the acylcarnitine-free carnitine ratio before and during therapy with
> statins might identify the patients who are most vulnerable to this possible myopathic
> complication. Although the incidence of statin-associated myopathy (with abnormal or normal
> creatine kinase levels) is low, studies on pathogenic roles of coenzyme Q10 and carnitine are
> imperative. Finally, well-done clinical trials addressing the preventive or therapeutic
> effects of coenzyme Q10 and L-carnitine are worthy, since millions of people are receiving
> statins. Emil Toma, MD, DSc, FRCP(C) Maude Loignon, BSc Ho^tel-Dieu Hospital Montreal, Quebec
> H2W 1T8, Canada References
> 1. Phillips PS, Haas RH, Bannykh S, Hathaway S, Gray NL, Kimura BJ, et al. Statinassociated
> myopathy with normal creatine kinase levels. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137: 581-5. [PMID: 12353945]
> 2. Watts GF, Castelluccio C, Rice-Evans C, Taub NA, Baum H, Quinn PJ. Plasma coenzyme Q
> (ubiquinone) concentrations in patients treated with simvastatin. J Clin Pathol. 1993;46:1055-
> 7. [PMID: 8254097]
> 3. Mortensen SA, Leth A, Agner E, Rohde M. Dose-related decrease of serum coenzyme Q10 during
> treatment with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. Mol Aspects Med. 1997;18 Suppl:S137-44. [PMID:
> 9266515]
> 4. Bargossi AM, Grossi G, Fiorella PL, Gaddi A, Di Giulio R, Battino
> M. Exogenous CoQ10 supplementation prevents plasma ubiquinone reduction induced by HMGCoA
> reductase inhibitors. Mol Aspects Med. 1994;15 Suppl:s187-93. [PMID:
> 7752830]
> 5. Bhuiyan J, Seccombe DW. The effects of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibition on
> tissue levels of carnitine and carnitine acyltransferase activity in the rabbit. Lipids. 1996;31:867-
> 70. [PMID: 8869889] TO THE EDITOR: Phillips and colleagues (1) posited that myopathy with
> normal creatine kinase levels may occur in patients receiving statin therapy. Patients with
> muscular pain or weakness but without elevated enzyme levels pose an important clinical
> problem, although the exact incidence of this disorder is not known. Phillips and colleagues
> did not discuss a potential mechanism or mechanisms. However, they reported 3-methylglutaconic
> aciduria consistent with respiratory chain dysfunction and pathologic findings similar to
> those found in coenzyme Q10 deficiency (2). The American College of Cardiology/American Heart
> Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute clinical advisory states that ubiquinone
> (coenzyme
> Q10) deficiency could be a possible mechanism, although no conclusive data support this hypothesis
> (3). The synthesis of coenzyme Q10 in cells involves pathways that are blocked by the
> statins. A recent review of statin myopathy (4) discusses this and other topics. Members of
> the complementary and alternative medicine community have been advocating the concomitant use
> of coenzyme Q10 with statins, although this practice has not been accepted by most mainstream
> physicians. Data on whether statins lower coenzyme Q10 levels are contradictory. However,
> certain persons with a genetic, biochemical, or other cause of decreased levels of coenzyme
> Q10 levels in tissue, such as increasing age (5), may experience statininduced decreases in
> muscle coenzyme Q10 levels as a cause of the myopathy. Of note, the patients in Phillips and
> colleagues' study were 62 to 76 years of age. Do the authors have any information on serum or
> muscle coenzyme Q10 levels or coenzyme Q10 use in these patients? I believe the clinical and
> pathologic data in Phillips and colleagues' study, coupled with other reports in the peer-
> reviewed literature, suggest an etiologic role of coenzyme Q10 deficiency in some patients
> with statin-induced myopathy. Although isolated case reports have supported this hypothesis,
> we need large randomized, controlled studies studying the concomitant administration of
> coenzyme Q10 and statins to prevent or treat muscle symptoms, with or without muscle enzyme
> elevations. Only then will we be able to address this important controversy. Louis Evan
> Teichholz, MD Hackensack University Medical Center Hackensack, NJ 07601 References
> 1. Phillips PS, Haas RH, Bannykh S, Hathaway S, Gray NL, Kimura BJ, et al. Statinassociated
> myopathy with normal creatine kinase levels. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137: 581-5. [PMID: 12353945]
> 2. Ogasahara S, Engel AG, Frens D, Mack D. Muscle coenzyme Q deficiency in familial mitochondrial
> encephalomyopathy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989;86:2379-
> 82. [PMID: 2928337]
> 3. Pasternak RC, Smith SC Jr, Bairey-Merz CN, Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Lenfant C, et al.
> ACC/AHA/NHLBI clinical advisory on the use and safety of statins. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:567-
> 72. [PMID: 12142128]
> 4. Baker SK, Tarnopolsky MA. Statin myopathies: pathophysiologic and clinical perspectives. Clin
> Invest Med. 2001;24:258-72. [PMID: 11603510]
> 5. Rosenfeldt FL, Pepe S, Ou R, Mariani JA, Rowland MA, Nagley P, et al. Coenzyme Q10 improves
> the tolerance of the senescent myocardium to aerobic and ischemic stress: studies in rats and
> in human atrial tissue. Biofactors. 1999;9:291-9. [PMID:
> 10416043]IN RESPONSE: Dr. Hyman asks whether other biochemical markers might identify patients
> with statin-induced myopathy. Levels of aldolase and myoglobin, which would be released
> by disrupted myocyte membranes, have been normal whenever we have tested them in our
> patients. We are currently testing other indicators of the metabolic defect associated
> with this muscle toxicity (1). Drs. Torgovnick and Arsura inquire about the relation of
> this toxicity to exercise. Postexercise creatine kinase level is more sensitive than
> resting creatine kinase level in assessing muscle toxicity. The latter is related to
> membrane disruption but has not met with much success in assessing statin toxicity (2,
> 3). We required that all study patients maintain a consistent exercise and dietary
> regimen during the 5-month evaluation. Although all of the creatine kinase evaluations
> were performed after exercise, they were not performed late enough (6 to 12 hours later)
> to make this a sensitive test. We believe that the preoccupation with muscle membrane
> abnormalities and Letters 1008 17 June 2003 Annals of Internal Medicine Volume 138 .
> Number 12 www.annals.org elevation of creatine kinase levels as indicators of toxicity
> has delayed the detection of the metabolic toxicity we described. Other afflictions with
> similar pathologic characteristics-mitochondrial myopathies, for example-cause
> significant abnormalities in muscle function without disrupting membranes sufficiently to
> elevate creatine kinase levels. We suspect that further evaluation of metabolic defects
> in patients with statin myotoxicity will prove more fruitful than repeated attempts to
> evaluate this abnormality from the perspective of muscle membrane toxicities or
> rhabdomyolysis. The comments of Dr. Toma and Ms. Loignon and Dr. Teichholz regarding the
> possible relationships of carnitine and coenzyme Q10 to statin myotoxicity are correct.
> While we found no depression in either serum or muscle carnitine levels in our patients,
> measurement of coenzyme Q10 may be more productive. Muscle coenzyme Q10 levels correlated
> with toxicity in one of the three patients in our study who underwent muscle biopsy, both
> while myopathic and again when toxicity had resolved. We have a report in preparation
> that discusses measurement of coenzyme Q10 level in a series of 50 muscle biopsy
> specimens from patients under evaluation for statin myotoxicity. The results of that
> study should provide further impetus for future trials assessing coenzyme Q10 and
> carnitine. Statins are the best therapy available to reduce cardiovascular end points in
> patients with atherosclerotic risks. The optimal use of these agents requires a thorough
> understanding of their toxicities as well as of their efficacy. We agree that we know too
> little about the mechanism and pathophysiology of statin myotoxicity and that further
> clinical evaluations and biochemical description are essential. Paul S. Phillips, MD
> Scripps Mercy Hospital San Diego, CA 92103 Richard H. Haas, MD University of California,
> San Diego La Jolla, CA 92093-0935 References
> 1. Phillips P, Haas R, Barshop B, Bannykh S, Amjadi D. Utility of abnormal 3-methylglutaconic
> aciduria (3MGA) in diagnosing statin associated myopathy. Atheroscler Thromb Vasc Biol Online
> Journal. 2002;22:878. Accessed at http://aha.agora.com/ abstractviewer/av_view.asp.
> 2. Reust CS, Curry SC, Guidry JR. Lovastatin use and muscle damage in healthy volunteers
> undergoing eccentric muscle exercise. West J Med. 1991;154:198-200. [PMID: 2006566]
> 3. Smit JW, Bar PR, Geerdink RA, Erkelens DW. Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia is
> associated with pathological exercise-induced leakage of muscle proteins, which is not
> aggravated by simvastatin therapy. Eur J Clin Invest. 1995;25:79-84. [PMID: 7737266]
>
> And in the same issue of Annals of Internal Medicine:
>
> Simvastatin TO THE EDITOR: Simvastatin is an antilipemic agent that decreases low-density
> lipoprotein cholesterol levels by inhibiting hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase. Statins
> have an excellent safety profile (1). However, reports have described a lupus-like
> hypersensitivity reaction with late, insidious onset (2- 4). Symptoms include polymyalgia,
> elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), positivity for antinuclear antibodies, and
> potentially life-threatening pneumonitis. To highlight the diversity of this drug-induced
> hypersensitivity, we report a case in which the patient presented with dysphasia. A 74-year-old
> man with coronary artery disease and hypertension presented with sudden onset of dysphasia. He was
> initially thought to have a viral illness, but symptoms progressed over weeks to the point where
> he was able to swallow only liquids. His hematocrit decreased from an initial value of 0.44 to
> 0.28 with no reticulocyte response or evidence of hemolysis. Eosinophilia (eosinophils, 38%), ESR
> of 100 mm/h, and lactate dehydrogenase level of 320
> U/L were noted. Results of endoscopy and esophageal peristalsis studies were normal. Computed
> tomography showed borderline splenomegaly with mediastinal and retroperitoneal adenopathy. Bone
> marrow biopsy revealed only increased eosinophils. The rheumatoid factor level was normal, and
> the patient was strongly positive for antinuclear antibodies. Medications included simvastatin,
> fosinopril, aspirin, colchicine, ranitidine, gemfibrozil, digoxin, and atenolol. The patient had
> the only drug discontinued, and afterward, the patient's dysphasia resolved in a few days.
> Lactase dehydrogenase level and ESR normalized, and hematocrit subsequently improved. Statins
> are commonly used, well-tolerated drugs. A few cases of lupus-like hypersensitivity to statins
> have been described. Although these reactions are rare, they are difficult to diagnose because
> they can occur after several years of treatment. This report highlights the diverse symptoms of
> this reaction. For prescribing clinicians, it is very important to bear these unusual,
> potentially life-threatening adverse effects in mind. Katarina LeBlanc, MD, PhD Mary T. Brophy,
> MD, MPH Boston Veterans Affairs Healthcare System Boston, MA 02130 References
> 1. Grundy SM. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors for treatment of hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med.
> 1988;319:24-33. [PMID: 3288867]
> 2. Hill C, Zeitz C, Kirkham B. Dermatomyositis with lung involvement in a patient treated with
> simvastatin [Letter]. Aust N Z J Med. 1995;25:745-6. [PMID: 8770347]
> 3. De Groot RE, Willems LN, Dijkman JH. Interstitial lung disease with pleural effusion caused by
> simvastin. J Intern Med. 1996;239:361-3. [PMID:
> 8774391]
> 4. Liebhaber MI, Wright RS, Gelberg HJ, Dyer Z, Kupperman JL. Polymyalgia, hypersensitivity
> pneumonitis and other reactions in patients receiving HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors: a report
> of ten cases. Chest. 1999;115:886-9. [PMID:
> 10084510]