Hi
@Sophia78 and other respondents.
I would like to place
this concern and discussion about medications, and statins in particular, into in
some perspective and would ask moderators and others to be critical and discerning about of what I say so that the matter can be kept as objective as and accurate as possible. Any reference to people who have posted about this question is for reference only, not as any criticsm.
1) in the
history of diabetes, peripheral neuropathy was a well described and known complication in diabetics before statins were ever first prescribed
2) The
study mentioned by @tim2000s, compared 2 groups of people but only 39 people in each group and it was
not clear to me whether the people in each group had had thorough testing to ensure there were no other health conditions which might explain why nerve problems might show up. For instances, why were the group on statins prescribed them ? All for the same reason? and were any of them diabetic? perhaps there is more information elsewhere about this study. but on face value the comparison has too many variables and too few people in it to make definitive conclusions.
3) The
study mentioned by @sophie78, had difficulty
being able to piece all the evidence together. but the problem then is how long would it take to do a study to answer the question more conclusively ? 5 years ? ,longer.
4) So, in regard two both reports,
I personally would NOT be rushing out and take statins, but that I need more evidence to be forthcoming because statins from what I have read have been found to be useful for certain people ( but not maybe in the numbers and reasons for use that big Pharma was promoting).
5) before a medication such as
a statin is released on the market it has had to undergo certain trials to make sure about its side-effects vs its beneficial effects. And no doubt many of us I have read about how some trials have been 'fudged' to minimise adverse results, or performed on only men or women, and not on a variety of persons from different parts of the world.
So we have become cynical of Big Pharma and its reassurances about the safety of their drugs.
6) but there are
medicines which have also undergone extensive trials and use in the world with studies done independent of the manufacturer. They still have side-effects but as drugs for certain use are more acceptable than others. So there may have been a time when
administration of an antibiotic has made a big difference to someone's health. I do not doubt that
some diabetics are prescribed a medication/drug which has been shown to reduce the risk of. or at least prolong the time before, kidney complications might show up.
7) sometimes
despite all the testing and research a serious side-effect of a drug may take years to show up. This is not about trying to make apologies about drugs and their testing, and there will be occasions where big Pharma pushes so hard that a regulation authority releases a drug too soon.
8) So
we have medications/drugs without which some of us cannot live, others that help us stay well or minimise the effect of some diabetes-related conditions, and devices that improve blood sugar control and monitoring etc.
9) We also have
HCPs who are trained to follow certain protocols for treatment which may be
applied without sufficient discernment for the person involved, yet thoughtfully prescribed for just the right reason and purpose to another individual.
10)
What we do not want
is to treated by health authorities, health care practitioners, Big Pharma and device companies as mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed on BS) !!
