Tags
"serious events", bias in clinical decision making, Cholesterol, conflicts of interest, Doctoring Data, Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, Efficacy and safety of statin therapy in older people, no mortality reduction, profit margins, secret data, Serious Adverse Events, silencing statin critics, the pharmaceutical industry
Related:
A) [PDF]Why Most Published Research Findings Are False – John P. A. Ioannidis (Hat tip to Sam C. Eggertsen, MD)
B) Video: Questioning the Cholesterol Treatment Guidelines — Sam C. Eggertsen, MD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=48&v=WLjEVrdqF2g
3rd February 2019
A number of people have asked for my views on the Lancet Paper ‘Efficacy and safety of statin therapy in older people: a meta-analysis of individual participant data from 28 randomized controlled trials.’
It was reported in various major newspapers.
The Times reported the study thus: “Everyone over the age of 75 should be considered for cholesterol-lowering statins, experts have urged, after an analysis found up to 8,000 lives a year could be saved.”1
The Telegraph had this to say. “Researchers said up to 8,000 deaths a year could be prevented if GPs simply prescribed drugs costing pennies a day.”
This comes hot on the heels of a concerted effort to silence statin critics around the world by a coalition of ‘experts. I suspect the coordinated timing is more than a coincidence.
‘The editors of more than two dozen cardiology-related scientific journals around the…
View original post 2,790 more words
