People 75-years and older without cardiovascular disease who took the statin, pravastatin (Pravachol, 40 mg/day), to lower cholesterol were 34% more likely to have died during the 8 year study than people of the same age not taking a statin although the difference did not quite reach statistical significance.

(There was a 7% chance that the difference between the two groups was due to random chance, but this is close enough for me.)

There were 92 deaths in the pravastatin group versus 65 deaths in the non-statin group.

At the very least this means that pravastatin (Pravachol) provides no benefit to people of this age, and at worst, it means that pravastatin (Pravachol) increases the risk of death considerably.

People 65- to 74-years-old without heart disease who took the statin, pravastatin (Pravachol, 40 mg/day), to lower cholesterol were 8% more likely to have died during the 8 year study than people of the same age not taking a statin although the difference was not statistically significant.

There were 141 deaths in the pravastatin group versus 130 deaths in the non-statin group.

At the very least this means that pravastatin (Pravachol) provides no benefit to people of this age, and at worst, it means that pravastatin (Pravachol) increases the risk of death.

People taking both a statin and a nonstatin to lower cholesterol levels had a 95% increased risk of Parkinson’s compared to people taking neither according to new study.

Nonstatin cholesterol-lowering drugs included fenofibrate (Trilipix, Tricor, Triglide, Antara, Lipofen, Fibricor, Lofibra, and Fenoglide), ezetimibe (Zetia), and niacin.

This study found that the most popular statins increase the risk of Parkinson’s Disease by 58%.

These are the lipophilic statins, meaning that they dissolve in fats, which include atorvastatin (Lipitor), fluvastatin (Lescol), lovastatin (Mevacor), pitavastatin (Livalo), simvastatin (Zocor).

The most popular statins increase the risk of Parkinson’s Disease by 58% according to new study.

These are the lipophilic statins, meaning that they dissolve in fats, which include atorvastatin (Lipitor), fluvastatin (Lescol), lovastatin (Mevacor), pitavastatin (Livalo), simvastatin (Zocor).

People taking both a statin and a nonstatin to lower cholesterol levels had a 95% increased risk of Parkinson’s compared to people taking neither according to new study.

Nonstatin cholesterol-lowering drugs included fenofibrate (Trilipix, Tricor, Triglide, Antara, Lipofen, Fibricor, Lofibra, and Fenoglide), ezetimibe (Zetia), and niacin.

This study found that the most popular statins increase the risk of Parkinson’s Disease by 58%.

These are the lipophilic statins, meaning that they dissolve in fats, which include atorvastatin (Lipitor), fluvastatin (Lescol), lovastatin (Mevacor), pitavastatin (Livalo), simvastatin (Zocor).

“Among the [twelve (12)] Western European countries studied, the large increase in statin utilisation between 2000 and 2012 was not associated with [coronary heart disease] mortality, nor with its rate of change over the years,” notes a recent study.

Statin use is associated with a 13% increased risk of cataracts according to a new paper.

Statin use is associated with a 10-13% increased risk of cataracts according to a new paper.

“Statin treatment increased the risk of type 2 diabetes by 46%, attributable to decreases in insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion,” concludes a 2015 study that followed 8,749 non-diabetic participants, 45– to 73-years-old, for 5.9 years.

The one-third of people with the highest cholesterol levels were 57% less likely to get Parkinson’s during a 20-year follow-up compared to the one-third of people with the lowest cholesterol levels according to a recent study.

The one-third of people with the middle cholesterol levels were 44% less likely to get Parkinson’s compared to the one-third of people with the lowest cholesterol levels.

The say this the other way, the one-third of people with the lowest cholesterol levels were 2.3 times more likely to get Parkinson’s than the one-third of people with the highest cholesterol levels, and they were 1.8 times more likely to get Parkinson’s compared to the one-third of people with the middle cholesterol levels.

“Our study suggests that lowering cholesterol unnecessarily actually may harm the brain,”  Xuemei Huang, MD, PhD lead author of the study was quoted as saying.

Statin use is associated with a 61% greater risk of Parkinson’s disease according to an analysis of data on 30,343,035 people aged 40 to 65 years between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012.

This was after adjusting for age, sex, and other comorbidities, such as hyperlipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, and coronary artery disease.

“We identified 20,000 Parkinson’s disease patients and looked at whether using statins was associated with a higher or lower risk, and we found people using statins have a higher risk of the disease, so this is the opposite of what has been hypothesized,” senior author Xuemei Huang, MD, PhD, vice chair for research at Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania, told Medscape Medical News.

“Our study suggests that lowering cholesterol unnecessarily actually may harm the brain,”  Xuemei Huang, MD, PhD lead author of the study was quoted as saying.

Previous research has failed to recognize this or reported the opposite, that statins lower the risk of Parkinson’s, because previous studies have failed to adjust for cholesterol levels.

Statin use is associated with a 1-12% greater risk of Alzheimer’s disease according to an analysis of data on 30,343,035 people aged 40 to 65 years between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2012.

In the first statin study called the the Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study (1991), all-cause mortality was 2.8 times greater in people given lovastatin those given a placebo (0.50% vs 0.18%) during the first year of follow-up as noted in a 1992 paper published in the British Medical Journal titled Should there be a moratorium on the use of cholesterol lowering drugs?

“Medical research is fraught with incompetence, careerism and fraud. Conflict of interest ... is a cancer eating at the core of medical research,” Dr. Kailash Chand, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association, “who is an outspoken critic of what he regards as industry-driven hype surrounding statins” was quoted as saying in a Dec 2015 article published on the Daily Mail Online.

“The more embedded the financial and other interests in the outcome of a study, the more likely the findings are going to be false.”

“We need doctors to concentrate on research that matters to patients, not their careers or the advance of drug companies.”

Dr. Kailash Chand, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association, believes that statin benefits have been “grossly exaggerated” and that there is a lack of transparency over the statins’ side effects,’ as he was quoted as saying in a Dec 2015 article published on the Daily Mail Online as saying.

Regarding a paper claiming that news stories about statin side effects caused people to die from heart attacks because they had stopped their statins [which I think is complete nonsense], Dr. Kailash Chand, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association, who is an outspoken critic of what he regards as industry-driven hype surrounding statins, “argued that in his view the conclusions of the study were ‘very misleading’ and detracted from the real issues surrounding statins - lack of transparency over the drugs’ side effects and the fact that their benefits have been ‘grossly exaggerated’” according to an article from Dec 2015 article published on the Daily Mail Online.

A recent vaccine study found that statins have an immunosuppressive effect.

Older people on statins given flu vaccines for various strains of flu had a 38-67% lower response to the vaccine than people not on statins.

“This apparent immunosuppressive effect of statins on the vaccine immune response was most dramatic in individuals receiving synthetic statins,” the paper notes.

LDL cholesterol inactivates bacteria and viruses; in other words, adequate amounts of LDL are a good thing, not a bad thing

Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD has noted that LDL cholesterol inactivates bacteria and viruses, however, he has also noted that this fact is not widely known.

Therefore, my guess would be that this is the reason that statins have an immunosuppressive effect, that is, statins lower LDL cholesterol which is involved in the immune response.

Sir David Nicholson, the former chief executive of NHS England (National Health Service England), stopped taking his statin because of “debilitating” side effects according to an article in the UK newspaper The Sunday Times.

Nicholson was quoted as saying, “I was getting muscle and joint pain. It was getting worse and worse. It was mild to begin with and I kind of thought it was because I was getting old. I stopped taking them for a week and I got better.”

“The muscle pain probably started in May or June 2013. It got really bad towards the last two or three months. I was struggling with sleep.”

Sir Richard Thompson, the former president of the Royal College of Physicians and the Queen of England’s doctor for 21 years, was quoted in The Daily Express as saying,
    “The statin data needs to be urgently scrutinised.
    “We are very worried about it and particularly side-effect data which seems to have been swept under the carpet.
    “We have to be very wary of the doubts about statins produced by this new research and if we are wrong about widespread prescribing of this drug we have to stand up and say sorry.”

His quote was in response to the review paper by Michel de Lorgeril, MD, a cardiologist at the University of Grenoble in France, and Mikael Rabaeus, MD, a Swiss cardiologist, of statin studies done since 2005-2006, when rules changed making the results more credible.

Findings from their review paper are posted here.

Their report concluded “statins are not effective for cardiovascular prevention”.

Dr. De Lorgeril, was quoted as saying, “We cannot trust these trials. I would warn people not to take statins.”

There is strong evidence which suggests that statins do not lower the risk of cancer as has been claimed, but instead they increase the risk of cancer as described in an article titled ”Statins do not protect against cancer: quite the opposite” written by Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD, an independent researcher from Denmark; Paul Rosch, MD from New York Medical College and the American Institute of Stress; and Kilmer McCully, MD from Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Among women in the 1998 CARE trial in which people were given pravastatin to reduce cholesterol levels, there were 12 cases of breast cancer in women given the statin versus only one women who was given a placebo.

Total number of cancer cases was nearly twice as great in women given a statin as women given a placebo (23 cases versus 12 cases).

Lots of experimental evidence shows that lower cholesterol levels are associated with a higher risk of cancer, and higher cholesterol levels are associated with a lower risk of cancer.

“We have collected a wealth of information on cholesterol and statins from many published papers and find overwhelming evidence that these drugs accelerate hardening of the arteries and can cause, or worsen, heart failure.
    “I cannot find any evidence to support people taking statins and patients who are on them should stop,” Prof. Harumi Okuyama from Nagoya City University in Nagoya, Japan, lead author of a recent review of more than 20 studies done with statins, was quoted as saying in the UK newspaper The Daily Express.

“Statins are being used so aggressively and in such large numbers of people that the adverse effects are now becoming obvious.
    “These drugs should never have been approved for use.
    “The long-term effects are devastating,” Peter Langsjoen, MD, a cardiologist from Texas and coauthor of a recent review paper of more than 20 studies done with statins, was quoted as saying in the UK newspaper The Daily Express.

Their review of more than 20 statin studies found evidence that statins can “cause, or worsen, heart failure”, and that there is overwhelming evidence that these drugs accelerate hardening of the arteries.

“With more than one million heart failure hospitalizations every year in the USA, the rapidly increasing prevalence of congestive heart failure is now described as an epidemic and it is likely that statin drug therapy is a major contributing factor,” according to a 2015 review paper by Prof. Harumi Okuyama from Nagoya City University in Nagoya, Japan, Peter H. Langsjoen MD, a cardiologist from Texas, and others who reviewed more than 20 statin drug studies done after 2004.

Statins can cause congestive heart failure by depleting coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) and ‘heme A’ which reduces production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) according to a 2015 review paper by Prof. Harumi Okuyama from Nagoya City University in Nagoya, Japan, Peter H. Langsjoen MD, a cardiologist from Texas, and others who reviewed more than 20 statin drug studies done after 2004.

“In summary, statins are not only ineffective in preventing CHD [coronary heart disease] events but instead are capable of increasing [coronary heart disease] and heart failure,”  according to a 2015 review paper by Prof. Harumi Okuyama from Nagoya City University in Nagoya, Japan, Peter H. Langsjoen MD, a cardiologist from Texas, and others who reviewed more than 20 statin drug studies done after 2004.

“Statin-induced impairment in heart muscle function appears to be permanent, and even though patients may clinically benefit from discontinuation of the statin along with supplemental CoQ10, we believe that many years of statin drug therapy result in the gradual accumulation of mitochondrial DNA damage,” according to a 2015 review paper by Prof. Harumi Okuyama from Nagoya City University in Nagoya, Japan, Peter H. Langsjoen MD, a cardiologist from Texas, and others who reviewed more than 20 statin drug studies done after 2004.

“A prolonged decrease in mitochondrial CoQ10 would diminish the ability to protect mitochondrial DNA from free radical damage.”

“After 2004–2005 [when new penalties were put in place regarding clinical trials in the EU], all clinical trials, performed by scientists relatively free of conflict of interest with pharmaceutical industries, reported… no significant beneficial effects were observed [with the use of statins] for the prevention of CHD [coronary heart disease],” according to a 2015 review paper by Prof. Harumi Okuyama from Nagoya City University in Nagoya, Japan, Peter H. Langsjoen MD, a cardiologist from Texas, and others who reviewed more than 20 statin drug studies done after 2004.

“Currently, the majority of scientists continue to claim that statins are effective in preventing CHD [coronary heart disease], but these claims are based on meta-analyses of reports, including those published before the EU regulation (mostly in 1990s) [which are unreliable].”

Statins can cause coronary artery calcification by inhibiting synthesis of vitamin K2 according to a 2015 review paper by Prof. Harumi Okuyama from Nagoya City University in Nagoya, Japan, Peter H. Langsjoen MD, a cardiologist from Texas, and others who reviewed more than 20 statin drug studies done after 2004.

“Pharmacological evidence and clinical trial results support the interpretation that statins stimulate atherogenesis by suppressing vitamin K2 synthesis and thereby enhancing artery calcification,” the paper notes.

“[S]tatins are mitochondrial toxins making all cells ATP depleted. Because most mammalian cells depend on mitochondria for their energy metabolism, statins are general cell toxins,” notes a 2015 review paper by Prof. Harumi Okuyama from Nagoya City University in Nagoya, Japan, Peter H. Langsjoen MD, a cardiologist from Texas, and others who reviewed more than 20 statin drug studies done after 2004.

Prof. Beatrice A. Golomb, MD, PhD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego who headed The UCSD Statin Study group, writes in Scientific American that:

• Statins can cause peripheral neuropathy.


• Some patients given statins report poor sleep.


• Some patients given statins report greater irritability and aggression.


• Statins tend to increase aggression in women, but decrease aggression in men, possibly because of reduced testosterone levels.


• Some men given statins experienced a marked increase in aggression, which was correlated with worsening sleep.


• Statins increase the risk of hemorrhagic stroke.


• Statins may also affect neurodegenerative disorders, such as dementia, Parkinson’s disease or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).


• Some patients taking statins develop ALS or ALS-like conditions with progressive muscle wasting, which sometimes [and sometimes does not] resolve when the patients stop taking the medication.


• Statins can increase or decrease oxidative stress involved in neurodegenerative diseases.

The 2013 cardiovascular risk calculator which was put out by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association overestimates the risk of a heart attack 5-6 fold in most people according to a study done by Kaiser Permanente Northern California.

Comments

Lies, lies and more lies from researchers paid by the drug companies to scare people into taking statins, which I believe are not only worthless, but dangerous. (If you have any doubt about this — that statins are not only worthless, but dangerous — see the articles about statins and cholesterol listed at the end of this article.)

Imagine that.

It makes me want to vomit.

I no longer believe ANYTHING or ANYONE associated with the drug companies!

As I stated in 2014, I no longer believe drug studies or drug researchers paid by drug companies or guidelines or risk calculators or anything else that is associated with the drug companies in any way, shape or form.
    This includes the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology.

Marcia Angell, MD, former editor at the New England Journal of Medicine: It is no longer possible to believe drug studies or key opinion leaders or medical guidelines (or risk calculators)

As Marcia Angell, MD, former editor at the New England Journal of Medicine for 21 years, wrote in 2009,

    “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research [ drug research ] that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines [ or risk calculators ].
    “I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades [ 21 years ] as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
    — Marcia Angell, MD, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption,” New York Review of Books, Jan 15, 2009

Long-term statin use is associated with double the risk of breast cancer according to a 2013 study.

Current users of statins for 10 years or longer had a 1.8-fold increased risk of invasive ductal carcinoma and a 2-fold increased risk of invasive lobular carcinoma compared with never users of statins.

Among women diagnosed with hypercholesterolemia, current users of statins for 10 years or longer had 2-times the risk of invasive ductal carcinoma and 2.4-times the risk of invasive lobular carcinoma compared with never users.

“In this contemporary population-based case-control study, long-term use of statins was associated with increased risks of both [invasive ductal carcinoma] and [invasive lobular carcinoma],” the authors of the study concluded.

“In conclusion, this review strongly suggests that statins are not effective for cardiovascular prevention,” notes a recent review paper by French cardiologist, Michel de Lorgeril, MD and Swiss cardiologist, Mikael Rabaeus, MD.

“The [statin] studies published before 2005/2006 were probably flawed, and this concerned in particular the safety issue,” notes a recent review paper by French cardiologist, Michel de Lorgeril, MD and Swiss cardiologist, Mikael Rabaeus, MD.

“A complete reassessment [of all statin trials] is mandatory.

“Until then, physicians should be aware that the present claims about the efficacy and safety of statins are not evidence based.”

“Our systematic review [of four (4) randomized controlled trials published since 2005/2006] ... unambiguously showed that rosuvastatin [Crestor] is not effective in secondary prevention, while the results are highly debatable in primary prevention,” notes a recent review paper by French cardiologist, Michel de Lorgeril, MD and Swiss cardiologist, Mikael Rabaeus, MD.

In other words, statins don’t work even in people who have had a heart attack!

Secondary prevention is when they give a drug—a statin in this case—to people who have had a heart attack or have cardiovascular disease and they are trying to prevent another heart attack or death.

Primary Prevention is when they give a drug—a statin in this case—to people who do not have cardiovascular disease or have not had a heart attack and are trying to prevent a heart attack or death in the first place.

“We then examined the most recent [randomized controlled trials] comparing statins to each other: all showed that no statin is more effective than any other, including rosuvastatin [Crestor],” notes a recent review paper by French cardiologist, Michel de Lorgeril, MD and Swiss cardiologist, Mikael Rabaeus, MD.

In other words, all statins are equally ineffective at preventing heart attack and death!

“Furthermore, recent [randomized controlled trials] clearly indicate that intense cholesterol-lowering (including those with statins) does not protect high-risk patients any better than less-intense statin regimens,” notes a recent review paper by French cardiologist, Michel de Lorgeril, MD and Swiss cardiologist, Mikael Rabaeus, MD.

”[S]tatins appear ineffective in chronic heart failure and chronic kidney failure patients,” notes a recent review paper by French cardiologist, Michel de Lorgeril, MD and Swiss cardiologist, Mikael Rabaeus, MD.