Re: "Statins caused my kidney failure"

From: George Conklin (nilknoc_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 07/10/04 

Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 18:54:52 GMT

"Robert" <Robert@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10f0acclvlr9ne4@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "George Conklin" <nilknoc@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:wDQHc.14328$yy1.9412@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Chris Malcolm" <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > news:ccob90$1ns$1@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
> > > "George Conklin" <nilknoc@earthlink.net> writes:
> > >
> > > >We even have physicians now
> > > >suggesting that everyone should be on statins, regardless of health.
> > >
> > > There are two kinds of drugs I'm recommended to take. The first kind
> > > I'm recommended to take because I get diagnosed with some problem and
> > > get prescribed a drug. I start feeling better, but I develop some
> > > symptoms I think may be side effects. I try stopping the drug. I start
> > > feeling worse, but the side effects go. I take it again. I start
> > > feeling better, and the side effects come back. I discuss these side
> > > effects with my doc, look them up on the web, etc., and decide that
> > > the side effects are less dangerous than the problem I face without
> > > the drug. I become reasonably convinced it's doing me some good.
> > >
> > > The second kind of drug I'm recommended to take is when the doctor
> > > does a test and finds out that I'm at risk of something, such as a 3%
> > > risk of heart attack in the next ten years. He prescribes me a drug
> > > which he tells me will reduce my risk to 2%.
> > >
> > > I didn't feel ill in the first place. I don't feel any better when I
> > > take the drug. In fact I suspect it may be causing some unpleasant
> > > side effects. I stop it. They go away. I start it. They come back. I
> > > discuss this with my doctor. He tells me I need to balance these minor
> > > side effects against an extra 1% risk of dying.
> > >
> > > But these percentages are averages. How do I know if, in this case,
> > > I'm average? How do I know I'm not one of those whose risk is not
> > > improved? How do I know I'm not one of the .01% who suffer damage from
> > > this drug?
> > >
> > > In this case my doctor is not treating me as an individual. He's
> > > treating a population to improve the population statistics. I might be
> > > a winner, and I might be a loser. I have no way of finding out. What
> > > is more, my doctor is not a statistical specialist, nor are many of
> > > the medical researchers who supply the statistics on which he bases
> > > his prescriptions, and the data collection process on which the
> > > process is based has huge commercial interests defending huge profits
> > > interfering with the data.
> > >
> > The problem with treating populations is that as a member of the
> > population which in theory might be helped you are NOT included in the
> > so-called evaluation. Only a small sample was. And with HRT, for
> example,
> > there was horrible self-selection, so the so-called population was
> atypical.
> > That is the problem with population studies today. They are not random
> > populations. The drug which was supposed to have helped was actually
> > doubling the cancer rates for women. No one noticed.
> >
> >
> What do you mean no one noticed? How do you know about now?

    We know now because 40-50 years after treatment began, the proper
research was done. I am surprised how gloriously ignorant you are.

Quantcast