Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

nursegrandma — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 19:34:20 GMT

On Lipitor, my husband has suffered generalized and focal pain in his right upper quadrant, a peculiar itchy rash, neuropathy from the knees down, gout, anger and aggression, and transient global amnesia. He had stents placed twice after taking Vioxx. Also re Lipitor: my brother had a ruptured Achilles tendon, my father had anger/aggression, pain and weakness. They are improving since being off Lipitor. Two friends took Crestor: one literally could not lift herself off the toilet and the other took to her bed for a week. Symptoms subsided when off this terrible drug. Pure greed drives the drug industries, aided and abetted by the FDA (many of whom are on the drug comanies payrolls), and an ill-informed, gullible population of physicians who still operate on the old medical model of "fix it with a pill," rather than pro-active living--diet/exercise/natural supplements. It has long been known that statins interfere with the mevalonate pathway in the mitochondria, causing DNA mutations. Specifically, they inhibit the production of vital coQ10. I have only met one person whose doctor advised her to take co-Q10 while taking statins. Doctors don't listen to their patients, they don't keep up with new findings and seem to lack discernment re drug company hype (accompanied by lots of nice perks) and

solid, scientific findings (untainted by unethical conflict of interest). Thank you, Dr Mercola, for being a beacon of hope and a truth-teller. Another truth teller is Dr. Duane Graveline, retired NASA astronaut/physician, who tells the truth about statins on spacedoc.net.

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

Ricardo de Leon — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:01:02 GMT

Curious7, Cows have UDDERS not utters. Utter means to say something.

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

L.E.A.N. — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 00:48:10 GMT

Any time I see large percentages quoted in research, I always check to see if they're using "relative risk." This can sometimes be a hint that they're making the numbers seem bigger than they really are.

As for funding, this will always be a problem. Of course any company who designs and manufactures a product will fund research in hopes of supporting their product. This may be where we need system reform. If we had more consumer advocacy groups, we may be able to produce more unbiased research.

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

gary kaposta — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:34:06 GMT

Insulin directs all the processes associated with arterial wall occlusion. The overproduction of insulin(Hyperinsulinemia), must be addressed in order to rectify CHD. The corrupted food /drink supply and the billions spent advertising/influencing consumption habits are far more dangerous culprits than any foreign Islamic extremist group.We lost 368,000 Americans to obesity related illnesses last year alone.The overconsumption of junk-food/drink carbohydrate(sugar) is constantly triggering the pancreas to release insulin in an effort to shuttle toxic levels of blood sugar into the fat cells in order to prevent coma or blindness. The average American consumes 43,000 cans of soda in a lifetime. As a nation, we consume 178 million cans per/day! No organ in the body responds more favorably/quickly to proper nutrition than the heart. The body is dying to heal itself if we will just give it a fighting chance. Porper nutrition, moderate exercise and deep, restorative sleep. So basic yet so sound. Eat right...get tight !

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

Philup — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 03:23:29 GMT

One more question. If cholesterol does not cause heart disease (and the Vytorin study proved this), what causes problems with this genetic condition?

Thanks again.

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

emkim — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 03:01:49 GMT

About 9 years ago my mother at age 80 was put on Lipitor by a new doctor she had started to see. He also started her on a pill for diabetes, low blood pressure, and thyroid. I don't know which order she put on these drugs, but it seemed like every appointment she was put on something new. Until then, she was on NO medication except drops for glaucoma. She began complaining about muscles aches, weakness, she began to lose weight and then started to become forgetful, which she had no problems before. She feared she was headed for a wheelchair because of the weakness in her legs. After research, I decided to ask her doctor to take her off the lipitor, and he responded with anger and insisted she needed to be on it. I changed doctors and the second doctor said she did not need the sugar pill and that after age 60 it is not recommended to put a person on statins unless they had had heart problems. He put her on fish oil. I also found out that her cholersterol was only slightly elevated and she did NOT have diabetes. I am still upset over this because my mother's memory has not returned and at 89 she is having problems gaining the weight back. She went from 125 to below 100 and I attribute it all to the lipitor. But she does not complain of any more muscle aches, which the doctor told her was neuropathy from her sugar (which she didn't even have) My mother's sister was put on Lipitor by the same doctor and last year had a heart attack, but she won't change doctors and won't believe the doctor would prescribe something she doesn't need.

I warn everyone I can about the dangers of statins and my mother's experience.

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

campeau.serge — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 22:38:08 GMT

The only positive thing of this story is that people will now ear about C-Reactive proteins. It has been known for years already that elevated C-Reactive proteins is a much better indicator of cardiac problem risk than cholesterol level. Since C-Reactive proteins is an indicator of inflammation, eventually the "community" will finally realise the basic truth about cardiovascular problem and the cholesterol myth will fall.

Actually, I read somewhere that the small benefits of statins may be due to an action completely independant to the cholesterol lowering effect. Giving statins only to people with high C-Reactive proteins and not to people with high cholesterol may be an overall better solution. Of course, we all know here that there are better options to control inflammation, but some people are too stubborn or lazy to change their lifestyle.

Serge

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

Dr Rik — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:25:09 GMT

Notice that the research I have cited below is from EUROPE! This is OLD NEWS. It has been IGNORED to date and will be ignored again. The latest US medical editorials lavish royale on the remarkable safeness and effectiveness of statins without a word to Lifestyle or Non-Medical Alternatives (ie genuine Conservative HealthCare).

Omega-3 Fatty Acids, but Not Statin Therapy, Cuts Mortality and Hospitalizations in Heart Failure

September 3, 2008 — Omega-3 fatty-acid supplementation improves morbidity and mortality in symptomatic heart-failure patients, while statins failed to have any beneficial effect in the same group of patients, two new studies have shown [1,2]. The long-term administration of omega-3 fatty acids reduced all-cause mortality and admission to the hospital for cardiovascular (CV) reasons, while there was no effect on these end points with 10-mg rosuvastatin (Crestor, AstraZeneca).

The Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto Miocardico Heart Failure (GISSI-HF) trial — which includes two nested studies designed to test the two hypotheses — was presented here at the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2008 Congress and published online in The Lancet.

Wasn't it the Romans who said "Let the Sucker Beware" (Cavaet Emptor)

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

notox — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 19:20:58 GMT

By reducing the level of coenzyme Q10 (aka CoQ10 or ubiquinone), statins disrupt mitochondrial function, in turn leading to excitotoxicity at points throughout the body. Many problems cascade from there.

It's worth mentioning that Crestor (rosuvastatin) and other statins contain fluorine in their molecular formulas. Yet another problem vector when these drugs are metabolized.

www.sailhome.org/.../Fluoride.html

By the way, these chemicals *are* in our water in 'trace' amounts along with thousands of other chemicals that pass into our waterways and eventually return to us through water suppliers that are incapable of filtering out the contaminants.

www.sailhome.org/.../Synergistic.html

www.sailhome.org/.../Sources3NotObvious.html

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

QueenV — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:03:05 GMT

I am a vegetarian, and have been for many years. I exercise, regularly, at the gym, and do gardening, out in the sun. I am a spiritual person, and relax with my bible study, and prayer. I take Krill Oil supplements, as well as Dr Mercola's vitamins, and other natural supplements. High cholesterol is genetic, in my family, and my younger brother has had two heart attacks, due to this. My nephew, in his forties, has had two heart attacks due to high cholesterol. My blood tests show I have very high cholesterol, even though I don't eat animal products. What is the solution to genetically high cholesterol?

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

Philup — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 15:41:09 GMT

NEED ADVICE ON MY CHOLESTEROL PLEASE.

About a year ago it was 360. I exercise, take fish oil and eat a pretty healthy diet - no trans fats, french fries etc. I just decided to try eliminating the grains and sugars (tough!) and have my numbers rechecked. It's only been a little over two weeks but I since I might have a bit of dessert at Thanksgiving I went ahead and had my cholesterol checked. It was 430! (Triglycerides are 79 and glucose is 80)

Questions:

1. How long do I need to stay on this diet to see results?

2. If my insulin levels are below three does this confirm a genetic problem or is there a way to determine if I have it?

3. If it is genetic, what then? Pick the least bad statin and take ubiquinol?

4. I have been extremely stressed lately, how much could this drive it up?

Dr. Mercola? anybody?

Thanks!

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

WellAware — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:56:48 GMT

Where does nattokinase fit into all this, if at all? I notice Dr. Mercola mentions this not at all and also got some sort of warning letter about claims re. nattokinase in 2006, which MUST mean it's effective. Please clarify, someone else, if Dr. M. can't mention it anymore.

How utterly ridiculous that we must use warning letters from FDA as a measure of success. One could also use the criminal activities against right use of nutrients/supplements as yet another measure of ultimate positive effectiveness, even without any studies!

Talk about doublespeak!!!

comments above immensely edifying and thanks for all who have contributed the educational ones...

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

craig_br — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:31:44 GMT

Let me explain this better. These "brilliant" Harvard graduates took the difference between percentages of change, while referring to the "groups." Sorry, Mercola, but when you said this isn't really lying? Well, yes it really IS LYING because here's what was claimed:

"The results showed a nearly 50 percent reduction in the risk of heart attack, stroke, and heart-related death among the statin group." (So says Harvard)

When you claim it this way, you say that the placebo GROUP had 50% more heart-related malfunctions than the statin GROUP. So when you use the word "GROUP," you refer to the total numbers in each GROUP! When you say that, then change horses to the percent of the percentage changes, you lie!

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

Heather Marsh — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 13:44:55 GMT

Thank you for the article.

It does give me more ammunition in my fight to remain statin-free.

re: Statin Drugs: Another Industry-Sponsored Study, Another Deceptive Result

Oigen — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 13:06:56 GMT

Ever wonder why and how the current cholesterol levels were established. They were quite simply adjusted downwards by edict in response to complaints by the white coats conducting trials for statin efficacy some thirty years ago because they couldn''t find enough people over the age of 50 with levels over 240 mg/dl (6.2 mmol/l), the then norm for that age bracket, to sufficiently power their trial studies. So the medical cartel to the glee of Big Pharma arbitrarily, by fiat, declared that 200 (5.2 mmol/l) should be the norm for everybody. See.........http://tinyurl.com/2nylpn... Of course this resulted in providing participants galore for cholesterol studies and statin therapy for practically the whole of the nation. And we have been stuck with these artificial levels ever since with the alarming result that our drinking water is now laced with it. Whatever ones cholesterol level is within 2 standard deviations of the then 6.2 mmol/l is what is normal for one and shouldn't be tampered with. The cholesterol hypothesis is the mother of all scams for cholesterol at any level is not a cause of heart disease. See...http://tinyurl.com/36tz6j...

CRP? Because statins are useless at preventing one's premature demise the statin mongers are now shifting the gobbling of same to some ostensible benefit as an anti inflamatory.