Statins Don't Save Lives in People Without Heart Disease. To read more about heart disease and cholesterol, check out the. In the second article, I explained it’s not the amount of cholesterol in your blood that drives heart disease risk, but the number of LDL particles. Access the official records of the Smithsonian Institution and learn about its history, key events, people, and research.Deck yourself in the raddest jewelry around! Shop stackable rings, body chains, ear cuffs, arm parties & more at Nasty Gal. In the third article, I discussed the five primary causes of elevated LDL particle number. In this article, I will. Researchers and pharmaceutical companies often use relative risk statistics to report the results of drug studies. For example, they might say “in this trial, statins reduced the risk of a heart attack by 3. But what they may not tell you is that the actual risk of having a heart attack went from 0. In other words, before you took the drug you had a 1 in 2. That’s not nearly as impressive as using the 3. With that in mind, let. In the medical literature, these groups are referred to as . Several large controlled trials including 4.
S, CARE, LIPID, HPS, TNT, MIRACL, PROV- IT and A to Z have shown relative risk reductions between 7% on the low end in MIRACL and 3. S, with an average risk reduction of about 2. However, absolute risk reductions are much more modest. They range from 0. MIRACL on the low end to 9% in 4. S on the high end, with an average of 3%. An analysis by Dr. David Newman in 2. A heart attack or stroke can have a significant negative impact on quality of life, so any intervention that can decrease the risk of such an event should be given serious consideration. But even in the population for which statins are most effective. Most studies have shown that while statins do reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and deaths from CVD in women, they do not reduce the risk of death from all causes (. Statins do reduce the risk of heart attack and other CVD events in men over the age of 8. However, the bulk of the evidence suggests that statins don’t extend life in people over 8. However, this effect is more modest than most people assume. Newman also analyzed the effect of statins given to people with no known heart disease for 5 years (5): 9. These statistics present a more sobering view on the efficacy of statins in people without pre- existing heart disease. They suggest that you. These somewhat unimpressive benefits must also be weighed against the downsides of therapy, such as side effects and cost. During that hypothetical 5 year period, 1 in 6. This is true even when the risk of heart disease is high. In a large meta- analysis of 1. Kausik Ray, MD and colleagues published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, statins were not associated with a significant reduction in the risk of death from all causes. It was important because it was the first review that only included participants without known heart disease. Previous studies suggesting that statins are effective in reducing death in people without pre- existing heart disease included some people that did have heart disease, which would have skewed the results. The lack of significant effect on mortality is even more interesting in light of the fact that LDL cholesterol levels did decrease significantly in the statin group; the average LDL level in those taking placebo was 1. L and the average in the statin- treated patients was 9. L. Yet in spite of this marked reduction in LDL cholesterol in the statin group, there was no difference in lifespan between the two groups. This is yet another line of evidence suggesting that the amount of cholesterol in LDL particles is not the driving factor in heart disease. A meta- analysis of statin trials in people without heart disease by the prestigious Cochrane Collaboration came to a similar conclusion. This is significant because research clearly indicates that industry- sponsored trials are more likely than non- industry- sponsored trials to report favorable results for drugs because of biased reporting, biased interpretation, or both. But statins are not free, nor are they harmless. Statin use has been associated with a wide range of side effects, including myopathy (muscle pain), liver damage, cataracts, kidney failure, cognitive impairment, impotence and diabetes. Unfortunately, studies show that physicians are more likely to deny than affirm the possibility of statin side effects, even for symptoms with strong evidence in the scientific literature. Naveed Sattar and colleagues published in The Lancet in 2. They found that statin use was associated with a 9% increased risk in developing diabetes. Note that this is a relative risk, so the absolute risk of developing diabetes while taking a statin is very low. That said, observational data from the Women. A heart attack or stroke can have a significant, negative impact on quality of life. The decision whether to take them should be based on whether you have pre- existing heart disease, what your overall risk of a heart attack is, how healthy your diet and lifestyle is, what other treatments you’ve already tried, and your own risk tolerance and worldview. It’s clear that statins reduce heart disease as well as the risk of death in those that have already had a heart attack, so if you’re in this group and you’ve already tried diet and lifestyle interventions without much impact on your lipid or inflammatory markers, you are more likely to benefit. In the next and final article of this series, I? Sign up for FREE updates delivered to your inbox. I hate spam too. Your email is safe with me.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |