Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: listener <listener@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 16 Oct 2006 05:00:50 GMT
Susan <nevermind@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in news:4pdi1rFi08b1U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
x-no-archive: yesso
David Rind wrote:
It's not the only benefit demonstrated to date -- they also decrease
recurrent cardiac events. The reason for focusing on mortality is that
it's generally the most important benefit to people.
I think quality of life is the most important benefit to most people.
As a type 2 DM (tightly controlled by diet with no meds) I don't care
much about how long I live, I care that my vision, kidney function,I do.
nerves and mental faculties (impaired though they are) last as long as
ovarian
There's more to think about here, more things that are linked.
Metabolic syndrome, the epidemic of pediatric "adult onset" DM, rising
rates of kidney disease, pancreatic, colon, prostate, breast and
cancers, heart disease, infertility, etc. There's linkage here, anddiets,
researchers are still content to be play Blind Men and The Elephant.
Statins haven't been tested head to head against every other possible
intervention, but that misses the history of treatments for high
cholesterol in patients with and without known heart disease.
Over the past 40 years, lots of treatments were tried (including
alwaysvitamins, and all sorts of medications developed by the very same drug
companies that make statins) and the results on mortality almost
cameshowed either no effect or harm. All this changed when the statins
*but*along. It's not like the same drug companies didn't have a financial
stake in showing that those other medications worked -- it's just that
they actually didn't work and the trials showed it.
Over the last 40 years, all the pharma and conventional practitioners
have embraced a low fat diet for CVD prevention despite the fact that
there's never been a single well controlled study demonstrating that
fat, saturated or otherwise, promotes CVD. Then, when the recommended
diet promoted CVD (and obesity and an explosion of type 2 DM even in
children) they started shoving drugs at the public, who can't reach the
phony targets without ever increasing doses of them. Then, when folks
get achey, lethargic, mentally fuzzy, their docs say it's anything
the statin. Statins are part of the problem, the "take this pill, it's
new and better" mentality. They're not better, they're just the latest
mistake.
Shortsighted, narrowminded, wrongheaded and pathetic inside the box
thinking gets us crap for our research dollars, which the NIH keeps
shoveling over to profit making pharma corps.
Susan
Do you *ever* listen to what other people have to say?
.
- References:
- Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Susan
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Jim Chinnis
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Susan
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Jim Chinnis
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Susan
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: David Rind
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: James216440
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Susan
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: David Rind
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Susan
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: David Rind
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Susan
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: David Rind
- Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- From: Susan
- Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- Prev by Date: Free Heart Rate Monitor Info
- Next by Date: Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- Previous by thread: Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- Next by thread: Re: Lack of evidence for LDL treatment targets
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|