Dosage is a completely separate argument. If a user chooses to take ten paracetamol he/she know the likely outcome. Can you honestly say the same thing about statins? Do you know what the outcome of an overdose of atorvastatin is?
What defence? You are relying on inherently flawed data and, I might add, incomplete non biased research.
You are missing a key point in your argument about paracetamol. The benefits are known, the risks are known. You cannot say that for statins when the long term use IRL are unknown. It is the very foundation of cholesterol knowledge that is as yet not fully understood and yet you advocate mass medication? Honestly....
Did you miss yesterday's post by another member. This guy is a GP I will listen to. He doesn't have much time for your 'benefits outweighing the risk' line,or '20 yrs of evidence-based research'.
When I say tolerate I mean if they have no ill effects. How many people are on Statins? and how many have suffered from taking them? How many have not suffered from taking them? Like I said before. Most drugs come with warnings, yet many far outweigh the dangers. Would I have had another Heart Attack without them? I will never know,but so far so good
I mentioned up thread (or possibly another thread) that it has been said that fewer than 5% of GPs report side effects to the relevant body. So it is left to anecdotal/observational data to determine what exactly are the numbers re side effects. The same can be said for benefits because unless or until the full role/s of cholesterol are fully understood how can we make informed choices? How can HCPs make informed choices? n=1 data is important only to the particular person involved.
Maureen, a lot of people on here feel their cholesterol, at any rate triglycerides and HDL, which are now said to be the important ones, have improved since they adopted a lower carb way of eating. Personally, my GP wanted to put me on statins because of slightly high LDL, but instead I have lowered my carb intake in the hopes of also lowering my blood glucose. My last full blood test was in July and my next is scheduled for January, so I can't yet tell you what effect if any my diet may be having on my cholesterol. It is certainly lowering my bg considerably, according to the testing I am doing at home, so I am living in hopes.
post: 1608971 said:
He is not good at interviews. I have listened to radio programs where he said he had not tested statins for adverse side effects, another where he said that that he did hold pre trial tests and weeded out some people and each time I got the impression that the world would have been a better place if he mentioned all that earlier.
