Maryanne Demasi, PhD, wrote:
"The public health mantra about cholesterol has always been "the lower, the better." Statins have been widely promoted as life-saving drugs, even in people who have normal cholesterol levels. However, our new analysis published today in JAMA Internal Medicine challenges that notion."
She continued:
"The full manuscript is behind a paywall (sorry) but my summary of the analysis is [HERE]
My colleague and lead author on the paper, Dr Paula Byrne, has also published a summary in The Conversation [HERE]
If you would like to contribute to my medical research and investigative journalism, please support my work as I do not accept drug industry funding [HERE]
Thank you and best wishes, Maryanne Demasi, PhD"
Statins are the most widely prescribed cholesterol-lowering drugs in the world. Since their introduction in the late 1980s, statins have been a particularly lucrative class of drugs, primarily for pharmaceutical giants Pfizer, Merck Sharp & Dohme and AstraZeneca. Pfizer’s Lipitor is the most profitable drug in the history of medicine. At its peak in 2006, yearly revenue for Lipitor exceeded $US12 billion.
Gary:
The drugs industry has a bad habit of focusing on "relative risk" while forgetting the most critical measure, "absolute risk". Maryann does an excellent job of explaining this, especially regarding what may have been the most profitable of all patent drugs, statins, before COVID-19 came along, and mRNA drugs entered the market.
I have written many articles explaining the dangers of taking statin drugs, and you can read some of them in this Google Search here. If you are on medications yourself or a loved one is on these drugs, please read this article: https://rxisk.org/nearly-invisible-drug-traffic-accidents/, and this one: https://www.garymoller.com/post/is-this-the-real-cause-of-the-dementia-epidemic.
When one looks at the weight of evidence, the case against statin use is overwhelming, other than, perhaps, in a few rare cases of genetic hyperlipidemia.
I wouldn't say I like saying these things because it conflicts with experts within the medical profession who I consider compromised and who do not understand what natural health is all about. Also, I do not welcome the attention of Big Pharma or its army of apologists, and their propagandist Fact-Checkers, because they manipulate the truth and confuse science and make life difficult for conscientious and aware health professionals. They are opinionists rather than Fact-Checkers; please understand this. One important thing to note is I have never had to retract or apologise for anything I have written on this topic, so I'm confident that the weight of research supports me.
What about quality of life?
Sure, Maryann shows there is barely any reduction of risk of dying, suffering a heart attack or a stroke by taking these drugs, so why take an expensive and side-effect-riddled drug that does not work in most cases? If that's not bad enough, it gets really bad when we think about how these drugs impact a person's quality of life, bearing in mind the downsides are grossly understated in the medical literature. The drugs industry funds most studies about statins, so when you factor in bias, the REAL benefits are probably zero or even negative, similar to what we see with mRNA drugs.
But who cares about dying or not dying? While staying alive is important, life is not worth living unless there is an acceptable degree of quality of life, and we should always set the bar high for this factor.
Regardless of my age, we should all value and strive for feeling full of energy each day, having a gymnast-like brain and being free of aches and pains: in other words, high quality of life. So, do statins sustain or improve quality of life? The answer is an obvious "NO!", especially for the more active person.
Here is a list of statin side effects. Have a careful study of them, and I'll point out that these are very common and far from rare: This is because only about 2% of drug side effects are ever correctly reported if even that. In addition, most symptoms, such as loss of leg strength, are easily confused with "getting old".
Act your age, Gary - well, yes I am!
The good news about statins
Statins are one of the few drugs which a person can stop without suffering the unpleasant and possibly unsafe side-effects of withdrawal. That's the only good news, by the way.
So, do you stop immediately? I can't tell you to do this because each person is unique: many risk factors lead to the development of cardiovascular disease, which it is wrongly claimed statins treat. These false claims are similar to those made in favour of mRNA vaccines that have little or no reduction in absolute risk of catching or surviving COVID.
I recommend you hire a health professional like myself to do a simple but critical "health stocktake", which includes trying to identify the root causes of ill health. Begin your journey under supervision by ordering this test and consultation and taking it from there. It costs less than the WOF, Rego and insurance for your car, and, unlike your car, your health is beyond being precious: do not skimp on it - invest consistently and generously in your health and you will be rewarded with a long, productive and enjoyable life.
In my 68th year, I'm still going strong despite our family history of heart disease and cancer. I'm doing well by adhering to the strategy of anticipating illness at least 20 years ahead of its expression, then taking healthy, drugs-free measures to ensure it never gets a chance to express itself. This strategy works! Come and join me!
As always, you're an inspiration, Gary! God bless you and your family 😍