From: INVALID_SEE_SIG@example.com.invalid   
      
   In the previous article, Adam H. Kerman  wrote:   
   > Hold it. Statins don't "prevent". They "reduce the risk of". It's a   
   > controversial drug as there are some studies suggesting that risk of   
   > heart attack may be reduced but the risk of stroke may be increased   
   > by a small amount.   
   >   
   > That's a seriously problematic tradeoff.   
      
   Despite a long history of high total cholestorol (including when I was   
   25, 180 lbs., bicycling 200 miles per week), I declined statins for   
   more than a decade because I was (casual) friends with a clinician who   
   worked on the final human trials for the first "blockbuster" statin,   
   as well as supervising "lab practices" for the development of a   
   follow-on.  He told me that they simply weren't worth the risk.   
      
   But I'm not mentioning this to agree with you, because all of that was   
   before the semi-definitive 2019 study (which convinced me), and my   
   clinician friend started taking statins the same month I did in   
   response to that evidence.  Furthermore, there is a new study that   
   pretty well annihilates the proposition that "statins do more (or 'as   
   much' or 'nearly as much') harm than good."  (The Lancet, May 2024.)   
   In matters of science, of course, the debate is never "over," not   
   absolutely and definitively, but the advocates of the contrary notion   
   (and they're out there) have a pretty high wall to scale now.   
   --   
     _+_ From the catapult of |If anyone objects to any statement I make, I am   
   _|70|___:)=}- J.D. Baldwin |quite prepared not only to retract it, but also   
   \      /  baldwin@panix.com|to deny under oath that I ever made it.-T. Lehrer   
   ***~~~~----------------------------------------------------------------------   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)