Re: One more safe alternative to statins

Susan wrote:
<SNIP bunch of abstracts>

Thank-you for your post, it is interesting.
I have numbered the studies in your post in case I
misscounted in my summary.

Here's my synopsis of the studies you posted:
# PMID subjects duration controlled LDL HDL inc reactions
1 2359503 24 16 wk no - no none
"pantethine is known to be well tolerated" no bias here!!!!
2 6232801 37 90 day no - yes no comment
3 6365107 29 8 wk yes -13.5% yes no comment
"a natural compound free of overt side effects" stated as a
conclusion
4 3098691 72 3-6 mo no - yes perfect
tolerability
5 6442152 rabbit study irrelevant to human tolerability, efficacy
6 3094958 24 1 year no - yes none
7 2970754 18 20 day no - yes none
intramuscular
8 3590676 182 3 wk no ? no pantothenic acid
9 3516477 31 9 mo no - no none
10 2963604 16 9 mo no -tot no no comment
LDL changes not significant
11 1810066 156 3-4 wk no NC no pantothenate
12 2524328 1045 ? no -? no very good
tolerability???
13 6837001 171 2 wk no NC no pantothenic acid
14 3551695 10 28 days crossover - no no comment

#8,11,13 did not use pantethine at all. These are irrelevant.
pantothenic acid and its salts do not impact lipids, the other
part of the molecule does the job we want.
#5 is a rabbit study irrelevant to human tolerability
#7 is a joke, a 20 day test with intramuscular admin???

The only controlled studies #3 and #14 were too short to consider
proving safety. The only ones of significant duration #6,9,10
were all too small to prove anything.

Only one (a suspect "post marketing study") was large enough (#12)
to possibly start to compare to statin data doesn't state duration
(2 weeks?) and its weak comment on "very good tolerability" could
mean that only 6 of 1045 had severe reactions. I'm not sure if
this is better than statins. No financial interest in a
"post marketing study"?

I would not accept your claims for safety and efficacy of a statin
if this were data for any of them. This certainly does not support
your claims for pantethine having been proven safer than statins,
as effective without risk. There is scarce data here to determine
efficacy for pantethine at all. Not one study here compares
pantethine to any statin. The only LDL number here is -13.5% which
I think is pretty lame compared against a statin. Statin data
(PMID: 15901588 another "post marketing study") says 45 to 63%
tested up to 96 weeks!!! Yes, there is a financial motive
here, you made the claim for pantethine studies without such.

None of your claims:
> We know that pantethine is safer than statins, and as effective
> without risk.

> Studies with no financial motive have demonstrated it over and
> over again.
are supported by any of these studies much less "over and over again".


I would like to believe that pantethine is a superior approach.
Your unsupported claims do not help. This doesn't mean that it
isn't safe and effective, it means that we don't have data to
compare them.

I am disappointed how few observed increased HDL which was my interest.

Ed

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: One more safe alternative to statins
    ... >> 5 6442152 rabbit study irrelevant to human tolerability, ... >> to possibly start to compare to statin data doesn't state duration ... >> your claims for pantethine having been proven safer than statins, ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: One more safe alternative to statins
    ... "pantethine is known to be well tolerated" no bias here!!!! ... 6442152 rabbit study irrelevant to human tolerability, ... LDL changes not significant ... to possibly start to compare to statin data doesn't state duration and its weak comment on "very good tolerability" could mean that only 6 of 1045 had severe reactions. ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: One more safe alternative to statins
    ... "pantethine is known to be well tolerated" no bias here!!!! ... 6442152 rabbit study irrelevant to human tolerability, ... LDL changes not significant ... to possibly start to compare to statin data doesn't state duration and its weak comment on "very good tolerability" could mean that only 6 of 1045 had severe reactions. ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: LAB tests reply
    ... >> Somebody in the thread suggested pantethine. ... > I had understood "statin" to be a class of prescription pharmaceutical. ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
  • Re: LAB tests reply
    ... >> Somebody in the thread suggested pantethine. ... > I had understood "statin" to be a class of prescription pharmaceutical. ...
    (alt.support.diabetes)
Quantcast