8 ms·

The thing about statins is if you believe the hype, and don't believe the fear mongering they still barely work, according to the pharmaceutical funded studies.

The thing about statins is if you believe the hype, and don't believe the fear mongering they still barely work, according to the pharmaceutical funded studies. Just enough to claim its got a benefit but how big is this benefit?

killjoywashere 8y ago
The evidence on statins is so strong that DeBakey put himself on one when they first came out. He lived to 99 and was sharp to the end. More than a few have opined we should add one to water supply.
- vertexFarm 8y ago
  This isn't evidence, this is marketing and anecdotes.
  - eyeball 8y ago
    Things like this make me ask ... would he have been sharper without them? That’s what I run into with my doc. “You seem sharp to me”. Yeah, I’m a resonably smart guy, but could I be better if I skip these? Slowdown may not be apparent to others, but it is to me.
    - neffy 8y ago
      Not a doctor... observed some interesting side effects with my parents on these, and would personally err on the side of caution with them. If you do come off though, do it gradually - also there are different types, so it may be worth looking into that.
    - jonhendry18 8y ago
      "would he have been sharper without them" Probably not? It'd be pretty unusual for an already sharp person to become sharper at age 80.
      - eyeball 8y ago
        Sharper at 80 with statins or without statins was the question, not sharper at 80 than at 70.
        jonhendry18 8y ago
        Since he kept working for another 19 years, including supervising heart surgery on Boris Yeltsin, he probably didn't suffer much of a decrease in sharpness on statins, if any.
  - killjoywashere 8y ago
    oh for pete's sake, let me google it for you: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/evidence-summary-statins/statin-use-in-adults-preventive-medication1 https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/... Now, as for mental health, the FDA has added no warnings despite decades of use, and the mechanism of action strongly suggests statins would be protective if anything (by directly and significantly reducing vascular dementia). Here's a package insert from the FDA's website: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/021316s028lbl.pdf https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/02... Also, I'm not raging statin advocate, the real answer is diet and exercise. The American lifestyle is a catastrophe.
    - vertexFarm 8y ago
      Believe it or not, relying on other people to google your claims is not a good way to present evidence. I can find confirmations and denials of literally any concept in the universe on google. This is more a general rule when discussing medicine, not so much a denial of this specific drug.
  - fthssht 8y ago
    True, evidence looks more like this: Two well-done meta-analyses of statins for primary prevention showed no mortality benefit. After the exclusion of four trials with serious risks of bias, the relative risk of cardiovascular events associated with statins was 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.90 to 1.08).2,3 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1207079 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1207079

killjoywashere 8y ago

The evidence on statins is so strong that DeBakey put himself on one when they first came out. He lived to 99 and was sharp to the end. More than a few have opined we should add one to water supply.

vertexFarm 8y ago
This isn't evidence, this is marketing and anecdotes.
- eyeball 8y ago
  Things like this make me ask ... would he have been sharper without them? That’s what I run into with my doc. “You seem sharp to me”. Yeah, I’m a resonably smart guy, but could I be better if I skip these? Slowdown may not be apparent to others, but it is to me.
  - neffy 8y ago
    Not a doctor... observed some interesting side effects with my parents on these, and would personally err on the side of caution with them. If you do come off though, do it gradually - also there are different types, so it may be worth looking into that.
  - jonhendry18 8y ago
    "would he have been sharper without them" Probably not? It'd be pretty unusual for an already sharp person to become sharper at age 80.
    - eyeball 8y ago
      Sharper at 80 with statins or without statins was the question, not sharper at 80 than at 70.
      - jonhendry18 8y ago
        Since he kept working for another 19 years, including supervising heart surgery on Boris Yeltsin, he probably didn't suffer much of a decrease in sharpness on statins, if any.
- killjoywashere 8y ago
  oh for pete's sake, let me google it for you: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/evidence-summary-statins/statin-use-in-adults-preventive-medication1 https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/... Now, as for mental health, the FDA has added no warnings despite decades of use, and the mechanism of action strongly suggests statins would be protective if anything (by directly and significantly reducing vascular dementia). Here's a package insert from the FDA's website: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/021316s028lbl.pdf https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/02... Also, I'm not raging statin advocate, the real answer is diet and exercise. The American lifestyle is a catastrophe.
  - vertexFarm 8y ago
    Believe it or not, relying on other people to google your claims is not a good way to present evidence. I can find confirmations and denials of literally any concept in the universe on google. This is more a general rule when discussing medicine, not so much a denial of this specific drug.
- fthssht 8y ago
  True, evidence looks more like this: Two well-done meta-analyses of statins for primary prevention showed no mortality benefit. After the exclusion of four trials with serious risks of bias, the relative risk of cardiovascular events associated with statins was 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.90 to 1.08).2,3 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1207079 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1207079