The Big Lie About Statin Research
A recent article in the British medical journal, Lancet, is causing a lot of waves on both sides of the pond. Would it surprise you that the study findings concluded that people need more drugs?
In this case, we are talking about a class of pharmaceuticals collectively called "The Statin." The author's conclusion can be summarized as such: The benefits of the cholesterol-reducing drug statins are underestimated and the harms exaggerated.
The BBC network wrote a recent editorial that was clearly in support of the Lancet article. We know who pays the BBC’s bills. A young father is quoted regarding why he takes a statin drug. He has two young kids and wants to live. The father says he feels some dizziness now, but he is happy his heart attack risk is lower (by a fraction at best). I sure hope he is not driving with his dizziness symptom.
More doctors are quoted providing the same rhetoric. Risks are small, they say, and benefits clearly outweigh those risks.
But the authors and the media continue to ignore one simple fact: Heart attacks are not from cholesterol and not from the lack of statin drugs. Heart disease stems from poor nutrition and environmental pollutants.
Taking drugs lowers numbers but has a poor impact on outcomes. The ASCOT trial did not find a mortality benefit and neither did PROSPER or AFCAPS. WESCOPS did find that those with LDL levels above 190 mg/dl did have a life or death benefit. It was on the order of 110 people taking drugs for five years to save a life.
I think I will choose door number 2.
So would most of my patients...
You see, reducing the chance of a heart attack from 8% down to 7% doesn’t cut it for me. I want a 0% chance of a heart attack. We know for sure that the Big Pharma studies do not provide that benefit. I think we can, because we address causation. In the meantime, the risk of everything else from diabetes to dementia to cancer is also lowered. Can the statin drug makers make those claims? Hardly. Statin drugs increase blood sugar and can lead to diabetes!
It is no surprise the Royal College of GP’s and the British Heart Foundation are among the major organizations supporting the study conclusion. They are likely heavily supported by Big Pharma. What do you think they are going to say?
There are some critics of this study in the medical community. Fortunately, I am not the only one to take a stand. The editor of the British Medical Journal is calling for an independent review as is another British cardiologist.
Again, there is a better way. Eat responsible Paleo foods, get sunshine, get sleep, get away from toxins/chemicals, and get adjusted by a chiropractor. We do not need the drugs. The scary thing about this article in the BBC is that the young father has a false sense of security. He thinks he is safe from a heart attack or stroke.
Sadly, millions have heart attacks while on statin drugs. Many cardiologists tell people to eat whatever they want and let the drug do its magic. This common philosophy amongst cardiologists is fraudulent and should be grounds for malpractice.
Not going to happen, though.
In the meantime, I will stay natural and THEY can take the drugs. We will see who wins.
Dr. Jack Wolfson
Senior Editor, Clear Health Now
Dr. Jack Wolfson DO, FACC is a board-certified cardiologist who believes bad nutrition and toxins create heart health problems. He prevents and treats cardiovascular disease with good nutrition, not medicines and treats the whole person, not just the symptoms.