Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Diabetes Discussions
Statins - good or bad - what does the research say?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="seadragon" data-source="post: 1021900" data-attributes="member: 195124"><p>Thanks for the info Oldvatr. Not sure my doctor would understand such a calculation. I was told that without statins 10 out of 100 will have a cardiac event and with statins 6 out of a hundred will have a cardiac event (this for those with the hypothetical 10% risk of an event in the next 10 years). To me the actual difference is a mere 4% at best even if all 100 people take the statins for the next 10years. She claims this is almost a 50% reduction in risk presumably as 4 is nearly half of 10 and completely ignoring the other 90% who would never have an event with or with out a statin and the 6 % who still will have an event even with the statin. </p><p></p><p> I'm willing to bet on being in the 90% who wouldn't have a cardiac event with or without a statin or being in the 6% who will have an event anyway (and who may then be more at risk of fatality due to lowered cholesterol if they've taken a statin). I don't wish to be medicalised with a drug with known and possibly severe side effects on the off chance of being in that 4% who might be helped. 50% sounds much more convincing so presumably why she used that. But for 96% of people, taking a statin for 10 years will have no effect either way on cardiac/stroke events but may well have side effects.</p><p></p><p> So yes maybe actually 40% of those who would have an attack anyway maybe helped but the actual numbers are small since it's 40% of the 10%. Plus there's the complete lack of accountability as to who is actually more at risk or any apparent knowledge of what makes diabetics more susceptible in the first place. So an overweight older male diabetic who does no exercise and eats the carby eat-well plate diet would I imagine be more likely to be in the 10% likely to have an event than a normal weight female who eats low carb and exercises regularly - but since no studies seem to take account of such variables to prove otherwise i'll go on my judgement and not take statins. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="seadragon, post: 1021900, member: 195124"] Thanks for the info Oldvatr. Not sure my doctor would understand such a calculation. I was told that without statins 10 out of 100 will have a cardiac event and with statins 6 out of a hundred will have a cardiac event (this for those with the hypothetical 10% risk of an event in the next 10 years). To me the actual difference is a mere 4% at best even if all 100 people take the statins for the next 10years. She claims this is almost a 50% reduction in risk presumably as 4 is nearly half of 10 and completely ignoring the other 90% who would never have an event with or with out a statin and the 6 % who still will have an event even with the statin. I'm willing to bet on being in the 90% who wouldn't have a cardiac event with or without a statin or being in the 6% who will have an event anyway (and who may then be more at risk of fatality due to lowered cholesterol if they've taken a statin). I don't wish to be medicalised with a drug with known and possibly severe side effects on the off chance of being in that 4% who might be helped. 50% sounds much more convincing so presumably why she used that. But for 96% of people, taking a statin for 10 years will have no effect either way on cardiac/stroke events but may well have side effects. So yes maybe actually 40% of those who would have an attack anyway maybe helped but the actual numbers are small since it's 40% of the 10%. Plus there's the complete lack of accountability as to who is actually more at risk or any apparent knowledge of what makes diabetics more susceptible in the first place. So an overweight older male diabetic who does no exercise and eats the carby eat-well plate diet would I imagine be more likely to be in the 10% likely to have an event than a normal weight female who eats low carb and exercises regularly - but since no studies seem to take account of such variables to prove otherwise i'll go on my judgement and not take statins. :) [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Diabetes Discussions
Statins - good or bad - what does the research say?
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…