From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   J.D. Baldwin  wrote:   
   >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.)   
      
   Do you remember what it says about the slight increase in stroke risk,   
   or is that completely discounted?   
      
   >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.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)