The Great Cholesterol Deception

solve_et_coagula · 20-11-2010, 12:46 PM

The Great Cholesterol Deception

November 17, 2010

By Dr. Peter Dingle

Millions of Australians are prescribed cholesterol-lowering drugs – statins like Pravachol®, Zocor® and Lipitor® – each year at a cost of more than $1 billion dollars with very little, if any, benefit. In the US, some 40 million people currently take statins at a cost of more than $3.00 per pill, more than $1,000 per year, totalling more than $40 billion a year.
While there are many exaggerated claims and a lot of hype about the benefits of statins, there are also many studies showing no benefits at all. The pro-statin hype is based on the misuse and abuse of statistics.

Various independent studies in prestigious, peer-reviewed journals have shown that statin use in primary prevention – that is, to save lives – has minimal or no value in reducing mortality and certainly nothing that is considered anywhere near clinically significant to warrant their widespread use. It does not matter how one manipulates the statistics, the results just aren’t there.

In data gathered in 2009 from six trials, a review of the efficacy in lowering the risk of death with statins found virtually no difference between the treatment group and the control group.1 There are many more of these studies.

In an independent meta-analysis (when a number of studies are put together to achieve more statistical power) of randomised controlled trials in patients without CVD, statin therapy decreased the incidence of major coronary and cerebrovascular events and revascularisations but not coronary heart disease or overall mortality.2

Taking statins for a number of years will not reduce mortality: “Primary prevention with statins provides only small and clinically hardly relevant improvement of cardiovascular morbidity/mortality.”3 “Hardly relevant” means there is virtually no clinical benefit; as the authors of these particular studies are independent, they gain nothing by stating this.

Another review found that “current clinical evidence does not demonstrate that titrating lipid therapy (trying to lower cholesterol with statins) to achieve proposed low LDL cholesterol levels is beneficial or safe.”4 In other words, lowering lipids has no real benefit and has the potential for adverse effects.

Following up on this, in a major independent review of studies funded by the Ministry of Health of British Columbia (Canada) on statins and primary prevention, researchers reported that “statins have not been shown to provide an overall health benefit in primary prevention trials.”5 This is a government report carried out by an independent university yet its findings are still ignored.

The problem really comes down to vested interests and the abuse of statistics. To overcome the limitations of small studies, vested parties combine many studies into a meta-analysis. The researchers themselves select the studies used in the meta-analysis. A fundamental problem is that researchers with direct links to drug companies have the authority to select the most positive studies and ignore the rest – including independent studies not funded by pharmaceutical companies. Despite this, they have still not been able to show any clinically significant findings.

As readers of the scientific journals, we should not be confused between statistical significance and clinical significance. For an outcome to be “statistically significant” means that the outcome was likely a result of the treatment – whether the result was 100% effective or less than 0.1% effective. That is, if you treat 1,000 people to save one life (0.1%) it may be statistically significant but it is not clinically significant. “Clinical significance” means 20% to 30% or more. The drug companies’ most positive studies on statins for prevention of CVD report statistical significance, mostly 1% or less, and none have found any clinical significance.

Busy medical professionals don’t have time to review the statistics; few of them may be aware of the different ways the statistics are manipulated. So if the experienced professionals don’t understand the results of these studies, how do we expect the media or public to understand?

Continue to read:
http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/artic...erol-deception

beldazar · 20-11-2010, 12:52 PM

Thanks, I will save this for my mum to read, not sure but I think she is on cholesterol lowering drugs, I know they talked her to going on skimmed milk

for 79 years old, she is doing ok....

friendsinthesky · 20-11-2010, 01:04 PM

Most people who pop these silly pills usually have bad habits. Kind of like a religious person who often goes against the practise of their religion and prays their god will not punish them. fighting a useless cause

beldazar · 20-11-2010, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by friendsinthesky

Most people who pop these silly pills usually have bad habits. Kind of like a religious person who often goes against the practise of their religion and prays their god will not punish them. fighting a useless cause

No it's because the doctor has recommended them and they take it in trust they are a good idea.

Isn't the brain cholesterol?

friendsinthesky · 20-11-2010, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beldazar

No it's because the doctor has recommended them and they take it in trust they are a good idea.

Isn't the brain cholesterol?

I don't know! is it?

If you wanna lower the 'cholesterol level' .. then eat properly (i.e. fresh foods)

yhwhschild · 20-11-2010, 01:25 PM

There is always this interesting site to read on the matter as well.

http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm

My Dr is trying to get me to reduce my cholesterol as well seams like there is a myth on linking high cholesterol and heart disease as well as I have found out after doing my own research on this topic.

beldazar · 20-11-2010, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by friendsinthesky

I don't know! is it?

If you wanna lower the 'cholesterol level' .. then eat properly (i.e. fresh foods)

My mums cholesterol is just fine and what if it is some mass deception simply to GET people prescribed these drugs hey?

beldazar · 20-11-2010, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yhwhschild

There is always this interesting site to read on the matter as well.

http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm

My Dr is trying to get me to reduce my cholesterol as well seams like there is a myth on linking high cholesterol and heart disease as well as I have found out after doing my own research on this topic.

posted while I was typing.

kiwimaj · 20-11-2010, 01:51 PM

You don't need drugs to lower cholesterol, you can do it by natural means, altering what you take into your body, also by your emotional state. I am pretty sure meditation would lower it also.

friendsinthesky · 20-11-2010, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beldazar

My mums cholesterol is just fine and what if it is some mass deception simply to GET people prescribed these drugs hey?

Yeah well, stupid (naive) people do stupid things. The 'legal drug dealers' are so damn good at what they do - they know we're all a bunch of dumb fucks.

beldazar · 20-11-2010, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by friendsinthesky

Yeah well, stupid (naive) people do stupid things. The 'legal drug dealers' are so damn good at what they do - they know we're all a bunch of dumb fucks.

I don't consider it dumb personally, just far too trusting. It's dumb when you have presented them with alternative info and they still believe the doctor

coldinsomnia · 20-11-2010, 02:10 PM

I've read that cholesterol is normally a result of acidic (poor) diets, which make the blood more acidic and results in a weakening of vessel walls.

Cholesterol is the blood's "band-aid", it is there to reinforce struggling vessel walls against the acidic conditions of most modern people's blood.

Whilst it is true that too much cholesterol is dangerous because it can and does block blood flow, trying to remove the cholesterol is NOT the answer! Doing so without actually fixing the problem of why the cholesterol appeared in the first place is DANGEROUS. By taking cholesterol-reducing medicines / food and continuing a poor acidic diet I believe you're putting yourself at even MORE risk than if you'd let the cholesterol stay to continue it's "work".

As the blood becomes healthier and vessels repair themselves cholesterol will remove itself as it's no longer needed.

beldazar · 20-11-2010, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coldinsomnia

I've read that cholesterol is normally a result of acidic (poor) diets, which make the blood more acidic and results in a weakening of vessel walls.

Cholesterol is the blood's "band-aid", it is there to reinforce struggling vessel walls against the acidic conditions of most modern people's blood.

Whilst it is true that too much cholesterol is dangerous because it can and does block blood flow, trying to remove the cholesterol is NOT the answer! Doing so without actually fixing the problem of why the cholesterol appeared in the first place is DANGEROUS. By taking cholesterol-reducing medicines / food and continuing a poor acidic diet I believe you're putting yourself at even MORE risk than if you'd let the cholesterol stay to continue it's "work".

As the blood becomes healthier and vessels repair themselves cholesterol will remove itself as it's no longer needed.

Thanks, good info and makes sense.

zsymon · 20-11-2010, 02:41 PM

High cholesterol offers significant protection against cancer.

And no I'm not talking about the "good" cholesterol.

curtaincat · 20-11-2010, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by friendsinthesky

Yeah well, stupid (naive) people do stupid things. The 'legal drug dealers' are so damn good at what they do - they know we're all a bunch of dumb fucks.

I really wish that if they knew to change their diet, etc, and peace out once in a while.. then all that STRESS would go away. But being worried about money really fks up your whole body / mind / stuff.

I reallly dont want anyone to go to big pharma drugs.... but sometimes i cant stop them.

friendsinthesky · 20-11-2010, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by curtaincat

I really wish that if they knew to change their diet, etc, and peace out once in a while.. then all that STRESS would go away. But being worried about money really fks up your whole body / mind / stuff.

I reallly dont want anyone to go to big pharma drugs.... but sometimes i cant stop them.

Spot on!

We have naive OLD people watching morning news/variety TV cause they're too weak/old/decrepitude to go for a walk. Instead, they are bomb blasted with, THIS WILL MAKE YOU BETTER propaganda.

-------------------

Hey curtaincat, we all have the freedom to choose, unfortunately, some choose incorrectly.

lesleypumpshaft · 20-11-2010, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beldazar

No it's because the doctor has recommended them and they take it in trust they are a good idea.

Isn't the brain cholesterol?

It does play a really important part in your brains functioning I know that much. If you want to prove it to yourself go on an extremely low fat diet cutting out all cholesterol for 3 weeks and then see how you feel

On second thoughts don't, it will make you forgetful and irritable!

Quote:

Originally Posted by curtaincat

I really wish that if they knew to change their diet, etc, and peace out once in a while.. then all that STRESS would go away. But being worried about money really fks up your whole body / mind / stuff.

I think that is spot on my dear

I reallly dont want anyone to go to big pharma drugs.... but sometimes i cant stop them.

zenith82 · 20-11-2010, 04:23 PM

My mum has, quite possibly, the most ridiculously healthy diet I have ever known anyone to have, and during routine checks was told she had high cholesterol and should take meds for it. The doctor has been trying to get her to take them for years, she refuses to buy into this and has been talking about the whole notion being a complete farce.

Foods that are reported to lower cholesterol are extortionate. Just another money making gimic.

friendsinthesky · 20-11-2010, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zenith82

My mum has, quite possibly, the most ridiculously healthy diet I have ever known anyone to have, and during routine checks was told she had high cholesterol and should take meds for it. The doctor has been trying to get her to take them for years, she refuses to buy into this and has been talking about the whole notion being a complete farce.

Foods that are reported to lower cholesterol are extortionate. Just another money making gimic.

Oh I agree with the bottom half of your post. But if your mum is healthy, then tell her to stay the fuck away from doctors! Simple really

beldazar · 20-11-2010, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lesleypumpshaft

It does play a really important part in your brains functioning I know that much. If you want to prove it to yourself go on an extremely low fat diet cutting out all cholesterol for 3 weeks and then see how you feel

On second thoughts don't, it will make you forgetful and irritable!

Thanks

Which is why they seem to be insanely pushing these drugs, mess with the brain the same as flouride, vaccines and aspartame

20-11-2010, 12:46 PM	#1
solve_et_coagula Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Zurich, Switzerland Posts: 1,535	The Great Cholesterol Deception The Great Cholesterol Deception November 17, 2010 By Dr. Peter Dingle Millions of Australians are prescribed cholesterol-lowering drugs – statins like Pravachol®, Zocor® and Lipitor® – each year at a cost of more than $1 billion dollars with very little, if any, benefit. In the US, some 40 million people currently take statins at a cost of more than $3.00 per pill, more than $1,000 per year, totalling more than $40 billion a year. While there are many exaggerated claims and a lot of hype about the benefits of statins, there are also many studies showing no benefits at all. The pro-statin hype is based on the misuse and abuse of statistics. Various independent studies in prestigious, peer-reviewed journals have shown that statin use in primary prevention – that is, to save lives – has minimal or no value in reducing mortality and certainly nothing that is considered anywhere near clinically significant to warrant their widespread use. It does not matter how one manipulates the statistics, the results just aren’t there. In data gathered in 2009 from six trials, a review of the efficacy in lowering the risk of death with statins found virtually no difference between the treatment group and the control group.1 There are many more of these studies. In an independent meta-analysis (when a number of studies are put together to achieve more statistical power) of randomised controlled trials in patients without CVD, statin therapy decreased the incidence of major coronary and cerebrovascular events and revascularisations but not coronary heart disease or overall mortality.2 Taking statins for a number of years will not reduce mortality: “Primary prevention with statins provides only small and clinically hardly relevant improvement of cardiovascular morbidity/mortality.”3 “Hardly relevant” means there is virtually no clinical benefit; as the authors of these particular studies are independent, they gain nothing by stating this. Another review found that “current clinical evidence does not demonstrate that titrating lipid therapy (trying to lower cholesterol with statins) to achieve proposed low LDL cholesterol levels is beneficial or safe.”4 In other words, lowering lipids has no real benefit and has the potential for adverse effects. Following up on this, in a major independent review of studies funded by the Ministry of Health of British Columbia (Canada) on statins and primary prevention, researchers reported that “statins have not been shown to provide an overall health benefit in primary prevention trials.”5 This is a government report carried out by an independent university yet its findings are still ignored. The problem really comes down to vested interests and the abuse of statistics. To overcome the limitations of small studies, vested parties combine many studies into a meta-analysis. The researchers themselves select the studies used in the meta-analysis. A fundamental problem is that researchers with direct links to drug companies have the authority to select the most positive studies and ignore the rest – including independent studies not funded by pharmaceutical companies. Despite this, they have still not been able to show any clinically significant findings. As readers of the scientific journals, we should not be confused between statistical significance and clinical significance. For an outcome to be “statistically significant” means that the outcome was likely a result of the treatment – whether the result was 100% effective or less than 0.1% effective. That is, if you treat 1,000 people to save one life (0.1%) it may be statistically significant but it is not clinically significant. “Clinical significance” means 20% to 30% or more. The drug companies’ most positive studies on statins for prevention of CVD report statistical significance, mostly 1% or less, and none have found any clinical significance. Busy medical professionals don’t have time to review the statistics; few of them may be aware of the different ways the statistics are manipulated. So if the experienced professionals don’t understand the results of these studies, how do we expect the media or public to understand? Continue to read: http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/artic...erol-deception

20-11-2010, 12:52 PM	#2
beldazar Premier Subscribers Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Cornwall UK Posts: 19,312	Thanks, I will save this for my mum to read, not sure but I think she is on cholesterol lowering drugs, I know they talked her to going on skimmed milk for 79 years old, she is doing ok.... __________________ The most beautiful piece of music I have ever heard. George Carlin and Bill Hicks at their very finest! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sipD...layer_embedded

20-11-2010, 01:51 PM	#9
kiwimaj Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: London, England Posts: 3,254	You don't need drugs to lower cholesterol, you can do it by natural means, altering what you take into your body, also by your emotional state. I am pretty sure meditation would lower it also. __________________ It's time to wake up and step outside of the square thing... When you wake up, you can finally see the puppet master and who wants to be a puppet??

20-11-2010, 02:10 PM	#12
coldinsomnia Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 754	I've read that cholesterol is normally a result of acidic (poor) diets, which make the blood more acidic and results in a weakening of vessel walls. Cholesterol is the blood's "band-aid", it is there to reinforce struggling vessel walls against the acidic conditions of most modern people's blood. Whilst it is true that too much cholesterol is dangerous because it can and does block blood flow, trying to remove the cholesterol is NOT the answer! Doing so without actually fixing the problem of why the cholesterol appeared in the first place is DANGEROUS. By taking cholesterol-reducing medicines / food and continuing a poor acidic diet I believe you're putting yourself at even MORE risk than if you'd let the cholesterol stay to continue it's "work". As the blood becomes healthier and vessels repair themselves cholesterol will remove itself as it's no longer needed. __________________ The Savile Connection JimmyVids - Click Me!

20-11-2010, 04:23 PM	#18
zenith82 Premier Subscribers Join Date: May 2009 Location: Where the clouds gather Posts: 1,416	My mum has, quite possibly, the most ridiculously healthy diet I have ever known anyone to have, and during routine checks was told she had high cholesterol and should take meds for it. The doctor has been trying to get her to take them for years, she refuses to buy into this and has been talking about the whole notion being a complete farce. Foods that are reported to lower cholesterol are extortionate. Just another money making gimic. __________________ "I will point out now I know next to bugger all about anything, especially this" Originally Posted by tk421

20-11-2010, 01:04 PM	#3
friendsinthesky Banned Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: -my world- Posts: 2,209	Most people who pop these silly pills usually have bad habits. Kind of like a religious person who often goes against the practise of their religion and prays their god will not punish them. fighting a useless cause

20-11-2010, 01:25 PM	#6
yhwhschild Inactive Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 403	There is always this interesting site to read on the matter as well. http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm My Dr is trying to get me to reduce my cholesterol as well seams like there is a myth on linking high cholesterol and heart disease as well as I have found out after doing my own research on this topic.

20-11-2010, 02:41 PM	#14
zsymon Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 5,196	High cholesterol offers significant protection against cancer. And no I'm not talking about the "good" cholesterol.