If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...


The Great Cholesterol Con

Statins are the so-called wonder drugs widely prescribed to lower blood
cholesterol levels and claim to offer unparalleled protection against heart
disease.

Believed to be completely safe and capable of preventing a whole series of
other conditions, they are the most profitable drug in the history of
medicine.

In this groundbreaking book, GP Malcolm Kendrick exposes the truth behind
the hype, revealing: high cholesterol levels don't cause heart disease; a
high-fat diet - saturated or otherwise - does not affect blood cholesterol
levels; and, the protection provided by statins is so small as to be not
worth bothering about for most men and all women.

Statins have many more side affects than has been admitted and their
advocates should be treated with scepticism due to their links with the
drugs' manufacturers. Kendrick lambastes a powerful pharmaceutical industry
and unquestioning medical profession, who, he claims, perpetuate the madcap
concepts of 'good' and 'bad' cholesterol and cholesterol levels to convince
millions of people to spend billions of pounds on statins, thus creating an
atmosphere of stress and anxiety - the real cause of fatal heart disease.

With clarity and wit, "The Great Cholesterol Con" debunks our assumptions on
what constitutes a healthy lifestyle and diet. It is the invaluable guide
for anyone who thought there was a miracle cure for heart disease, an appeal
to common sense and a controversial and fascinating breakthrough that will
set dynamite under the whole area.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

One of my hobbby horses as well.

I shall concentrate on one aspect.

If someone is hypothyroid when they start taking statins, there are
well-documented cases of nasty effects including rhabdomyolysis,
myopathy, myositis, bilateral leg compartment syndrome and myonecrosis,
and even renal failure (when taken with fibrate).

But I am aware of dozens of people who were offered statins whilst
hypothyroid - some known about, others not diagnosed. There does not
appear to be much use of thyroid testing of patients prior to starting
statins. (And yes, some did indeed commence regular statin-taking. So I
am not claiming the side-effects are automatic and universal.) At least
some people have had their thyroid problem diagnosed due to suffering
the side effects of statins!

The irony, however, is that hypothyroidism is a *cause* of cholesterol
problems. Many people, when they get their thyroid hormone levels right,
find their cholesterol levels normalise. In such cases it is quite
possible that cheap old levothyroxine[1] would cure the high cholesterol
*and all the other symptoms of low thyroid hormone levels*.

I wonder what would happen if all hypothyroid-related[2] issues were
fully treated? Would statins ever have been able to make their case?

Some of this is from PubMed and other web sources, some from personal
communications and posts on various places.

(Current diagnosed hypothyroidism in England is just over 2%.)

[1] I am aware that even some people who need it have problems just
taking cheap old levothyroxine for all sorts of reasons - some known,
some not.

[2] There are many people with what appear to have reasonably 'normal'
thyroid hormone levels who are actually hypothyroid or at least
subclinically hypothyroid. This is at least partly due to very
questionable setting of the reference ranges the main diagnostic test -
TSH. (Until recently the top of the range in the UK was often 10; it has
been reduced to around 4.95 in this area. It works opposite way round -
high TSH = hypo; low TSH = hyper.) But there are many other reasons -
not all of which are understood.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
. ..
.....
In this groundbreaking book, GP Malcolm Kendrick exposes the truth behind
the hype, revealing: high cholesterol levels don't cause heart disease;

Apart from some of the media, I don't think anyone has claimed they do. The
main concern until very recently has been atherosclerosis. High levels of
LDL cholesterol can be shown to increase the risk of atherosclerosis and
atherosclerosis can lead to heart disease, angina and strokes. Therefore,
high cholesterol levels do increase the risk of heart attacks, but cannot be
said to cause them.

A report published last month also shows that statins halve the risk of
heart attacks in people with high levels of a protien called CRP,
irrespective of their cholesterol levels. Stains also help to keep the
artery walls smooth, reducing the risk of atherosclerosis, and to make blood
platelets less sticky, reducing the risk of harmful blood clots if it does
occur.

High cholesterol levels also may be linked to the development of Alzheimer's
disease, although it is too early in the research to decide whether lowwer
cholesterol reduces the risk.

... and, the protection provided by statins is so small as to be not worth
bothering about for most men and all women.

Again, this is quiet a complex subject. The evidence is thaat the amount of
reduction in cholesterol levels may be more important than the final level.
However, with a drop from 4.5 to 2.9, on a fairly moderate dose, I am very
happy with the result of taking them myself.

Statins have many more side affects than has been admitted ...

All drugs have side effects, most being very rare, but few include reducing
autoimmune disease, reducing transplant rejection, improving bone strength,
or reducing the risk of developing diabetes.

Colin Bignell

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
. ..
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...


The Great Cholesterol Con

Statins are the so-called wonder drugs widely prescribed to lower blood
cholesterol levels and claim to offer unparalleled protection against
heart disease.

Believed to be completely safe and capable of preventing a whole series of
other conditions, they are the most profitable drug in the history of
medicine.

In this groundbreaking book, GP Malcolm Kendrick exposes the truth behind
the hype, revealing: high cholesterol levels don't cause heart disease; a
high-fat diet - saturated or otherwise - does not affect blood cholesterol
levels; and, the protection provided by statins is so small as to be not
worth bothering about for most men and all women.

Sounds like he is just following guide lines then, you give statins to
people who are at higher risk not everyone.
Like if you have T2 diabetes or high blood pressure with high cholesterol.

The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...


The Great Cholesterol Con

Statins are the so-called wonder drugs widely prescribed to lower blood
cholesterol levels and claim to offer unparalleled protection against heart
disease.

Believed to be completely safe and capable of preventing a whole series of
other conditions, they are the most profitable drug in the history of
medicine.

In this groundbreaking book, GP Malcolm Kendrick exposes the truth behind
the hype, revealing: high cholesterol levels don't cause heart disease; a
high-fat diet - saturated or otherwise - does not affect blood cholesterol
levels; and, the protection provided by statins is so small as to be not
worth bothering about for most men and all women.

Statins have many more side affects than has been admitted and their
advocates should be treated with scepticism due to their links with the
drugs' manufacturers. Kendrick lambastes a powerful pharmaceutical industry
and unquestioning medical profession, who, he claims, perpetuate the madcap
concepts of 'good' and 'bad' cholesterol and cholesterol levels to convince
millions of people to spend billions of pounds on statins, thus creating an
atmosphere of stress and anxiety - the real cause of fatal heart disease.

With clarity and wit, "The Great Cholesterol Con" debunks our assumptions on
what constitutes a healthy lifestyle and diet. It is the invaluable guide
for anyone who thought there was a miracle cure for heart disease, an appeal
to common sense and a controversial and fascinating breakthrough that will
set dynamite under the whole area.


No doubt he will be submitting a research paper for proper peer review
at reputable medical journal, say, The Lancet?

What's wrong with drugs being profitable? Drug development costs
astronomical sums of money. This needs to be paid for from profits made
by selling the drugs.

Why are you prepared to believe someone who is profiteering from a scare
story about cholesterol / statins by writing a book about it.

I would suggest that you treat him with the same amount of distrust as
the pharmaceutical industry.

Don't believe the hype

Rod wrote:

If someone is hypothyroid when they start taking statins, there are
well-documented cases of nasty effects including rhabdomyolysis,
myopathy, myositis, bilateral leg compartment syndrome and myonecrosis,
and even renal failure (when taken with fibrate).

I realise from your .sig that you're trying to "do the right thing" and
most (but not all) people will know that thyroid=gland-in-neck and
renal=kidney, but if they have to go running to a medical dictionary or
wikipedia for all the other terms you might be loosing some audience at
the first hurdle.

Andy Burns wrote:
Rod wrote:

If someone is hypothyroid when they start taking statins, there are
well-documented cases of nasty effects including rhabdomyolysis,
myopathy, myositis, bilateral leg compartment syndrome and
myonecrosis, and even renal failure (when taken with fibrate).

I realise from your .sig that you're trying to "do the right thing" and
most (but not all) people will know that thyroid=gland-in-neck and
renal=kidney, but if they have to go running to a medical dictionary or
wikipedia for all the other terms you might be loosing some audience at
the first hurdle.

Agreed - but I thought the post was getting rather long already -
without expanding it!!

So - the effect of statins can be *severe* muscle problems. And in the
extreme, kidney failure.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:28:46 +0000, Rob Horton wrote:

The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...
....
Don't believe the hype

Better still read Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" book: a marvellous antidote
and eye-opener to the fads and scams perpetrated by the quacks, big pharma
and the media.

--
John Stumbles

Time flies like an arrow
Fruit flies like a banana
Tits like coconuts

John Stumbles wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:28:46 +0000, Rob Horton wrote:

The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...
...
Don't believe the hype

Better still read Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" book: a marvellous antidote
and eye-opener to the fads and scams perpetrated by the quacks, big pharma
and the media.


My cholesterol is embarrassingly low despite 60 odd years of moderate
self abuse and abstinence from all healthy food, so I know lifestyle has
sod all to do with it in my case. I eat what I damned well feel like
eating, just not too much of it.

[email protected] wrote:

you give statins to
people who are at higher risk not everyone.
Like if you have T2 diabetes or high blood pressure with high cholesterol.

I saw that the Chief Scientist (I may have the title wrong) in the UK
suggested some time (a year or so) ago that there was a strong argument
for putting everybody over 50 on statins.

It struck me at the time as surprising advice, because of the cost involved
if his advice was actually followed.

Timothy Murphy wrote:
[email protected] wrote:

you give statins to
people who are at higher risk not everyone.
Like if you have T2 diabetes or high blood pressure with high cholesterol.

I saw that the Chief Scientist (I may have the title wrong) in the UK
suggested some time (a year or so) ago that there was a strong argument
for putting everybody over 50 on statins.

It struck me at the time as surprising advice, because of the cost involved
if his advice was actually followed.


1 Yes - I heard that too (but not sure of precise title).

2 Much cheaper if added to the water supply. Which I have also heard
suggested. :-)

3 First time I heard an 'investigative' approach (which would almost
certainly have been Radio 4 a few years ago), there was a doctor
categorically arguing in favour of statins for at least almost everyone
over 50. But asked if he would be taking them, said that he would not.
To be fair, he did appreciate the hyporcrisy and intellectual
questionability of his position(s)!

4 Since when did cost really enter the health equation? I know of
people who have had dozens of consultant appointments, investigations,
x-rays, MRIs, etc. But as soon as it is established that there is no
'life to be saved', merely 'enhanced quality of life', no-one seems to
care enough to even ensure they get proper treatement.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

On Dec 4, 10:23*am, John Stumbles wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:28:46 +0000, Rob Horton wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said....
...
Don't believe the hype

Better still read Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" book: a marvellous antidote
and eye-opener to the fads and scams perpetrated by the quacks, big pharma
and the media.

And read his weekly column in the on-line Grauniad.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/Pages/NewsIndex.aspx is also good

John Brignell's NumberWatch http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/number%20watch.htm
and his books.
MBQ

On Dec 4, 1:45 pm, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
On Dec 4, 10:23 am, John Stumbles wrote:

On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:28:46 +0000, Rob Horton wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...
...
Don't believe the hype

Better still read Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" book: a marvellous antidote
and eye-opener to the fads and scams perpetrated by the quacks, big pharma
and the media.

And read his weekly column in the on-line Grauniad.

and also be aware that this source, like all others, has its
limitations:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11..._a_mouthpiece/

J^n

On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 13:45:33 UTC, "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Dec 4, 10:23Â*am, John Stumbles wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:28:46 +0000, Rob Horton wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...
...
Don't believe the hype

Better still read Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" book: a marvellous antidote
and eye-opener to the fads and scams perpetrated by the quacks, big pharma
and the media.

And read his weekly column in the on-line Grauniad.

Or just:

http://www.badscience.net/
--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

John Stumbles wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 09:28:46 +0000, Rob Horton wrote:

The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon
said...
...
Don't believe the hype

Better still read Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" book: a marvellous
antidote and eye-opener to the fads and scams perpetrated by the
quacks, big pharma and the media.

Just ordered via Amazon. Cheers


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...


The Great Cholesterol Con


God, next you'll be telling us that passive smoking doesn't cause lung
cancer...

[ducks]

David

"Lobster" wrote in message
...
The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon said...


The Great Cholesterol Con


God, next you'll be telling us that passive smoking doesn't cause lung
cancer...

[ducks]

David

Passive smoking doesn't cause lung cancer. There, you've been told. Now
please. Stop calling me by my first name, in front of everyone. :-) LOL

Lobster wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
If you have read 'Panic Nation' you might like this - as Amazon
said... The Great Cholesterol Con


God, next you'll be telling us that passive smoking doesn't cause lung
cancer...

[ducks]

Any more of that & I'll blow smoke at you...


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk