('’)

Major JAMA Study Shows Statins Do Not Prevent Heart Disease

Big Pharma doesn't even blink. They've already got their shills out there belittling the study—so don't expect your doctor to take you off statins just because they're useless and dangerous.

by Heidi Stevenson

1 July 2010

Statins, the drug that Big Pharma has convinced leading doctors to push on nearly everyone, have finally been subjected to the study that should have been done before being approved for sale. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reports that a large metastudy has shown that statins do not reduce death rates in people without established heart disease. Statins have no benefit for most people subjected to them.

Since 1987, we have been plagued with doctors pushing statin drugs to cure the disease of have-not-had-heart-attack-yet. From the beginning, thinking doctors and alternative practitioners have questioned the concept of treating a nonexistent disease. Basically, we were yelled down.

Bogus studies were trotted out, but the fact is that there was never a single legitimate study demonstrating any benefit from statin drugs in people who hadn't already had heart attacks—precious little benefit for men who had suffered them, and none for women ever.

Of course, that hasn't stopped the pressure to take statins. They supposedly reduce cholesterol, but there's no proof of that, either.

Even more significant is that it's never been shown that reducing cholesterol is beneficial. It's been well-implanted in the modern medical mind—not to mention the general public's—that cholesterol is a great evil, and that we all need to go on low-fat diets and eat statins to cut it.

It's all nothing but a tall tale put out by Big Pharma to sell its poisons.

Big Pharma's Spin—and Why Statins Won't Disappear Anytime Soon

Naturally, Big Pharma isn't going to let this setback slow them down. They've already trotted out Dr. Steven Nissen, who put this spin on the study:

Because mortality is low in primary-prevention patients, it is difficult to show a mortality benefit. This has been established previously. The primary benefit in this setting is reduction in nonfatal MI, which remains a worthwhile goal of therapy.

Nissem works for the Cleveland Clinic, which is steeped in Big Pharma money. They toss it off by saying they're "Placing Patients First" on their "Integrity" page. That section goes on to state:

Industry collaborations with medical schools, hospitals and biomedical research institutions are critical to furthering research efforts and accelerating innovative patient care. Biotechnology companies require physician investigators and patient participants in clinical trials to gain government approval of new products.

Nissem sorta-kinda doesn't take Big Pharma money himself—though he works for a business that's joined at the hip with Big Pharma. So, he has the companies donate his fees to unstated nonprofit organizations. The companies he speaks and consults for include some of the most egregious examples of profiteering:

The Study

The study, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, is a meta-analysis of 11 randomized controlled trials that covered 65,229 subjects. They were able to access previously unpublished data. The authors concluded:

In conclusion, based on aggregate data on 65 229 men and women from 11 studies, yielding approximately 244 000 person-years of follow-up and 2793 deaths, we observed that statin therapy for an average period of 3.7 years had no benefit on all-cause mortality in a high-risk primary prevention population. Current prevention guidelines endorse statin therapy for subjects at high global risk of incident CVD as a means to reduce fatal and nonfatal vascular events. Due consideration is needed in applying statin therapy in lower-risk primary prevention populations.

It's a shame that the authors are closely tied to Big Pharma themselves. According to the paper's financial disclosure, they have received money, including honoraria and grants from the majority of pharmaceutical corporations that sell statins. That most likely explains their conciliatory tone towards statins.

In the introduction, the authors state that statin therapy reduces all-cause mortality in those with established heart disease. That statement, as Gaia Health readers know, is highly questionable. In their conclusion, they couldn't bring themselves to suggest that statin therapy be stopped in everyone except, possibly, men who have suffered heart attacks. Instead, they suggest only that "due consideration is needed in apply statin therapy in lower-risk primary prevention populations."

Kinda softens the impact, doesn't it? If your doctor has you on statins because you're at so-called "high risk" for a heart attack, it's well past time to take your health into your own hands. Obviously, the advice—often an order—is wrong. No one has shown that lowering blood pressure prevents heart disease in people who haven't suffered heart attacks. No one has shown that lowering cholesterol prevents heart attacks.

It's Your Life and Your Decision

No one has shown that anyone benefits from statins other than men who have already suffered heart attacks. Yet, everyone who takes them is at risk from serious adverse effects, which can include arthritis, liver damage, pancreatitis, toxic epidermal necrolysis, rhabdomyolysis (muscle wasting), and nerve damage, among many others.

Remember that the only person who lives inside your skin is you—and you are the only one who will experience the results of taking a drug with no demonstrable benefits for heart disease and many severe adverse effects. It's your life.

Share

('’)