I came across this short video today (below). It mainly concerns some research just out which found that in a huge group of postmenopausal women, statin use was associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes [1]. I saw ‘associated’ because this study was ‘epidemilogical’ in nature, meaning that it’s only good for looking at whether things are associated with each other, and can’t tell us if one is causing another. However, as an accompanying editor’s note points out, this finding is also backed by other data from clinical trials that have implicated statins as a potential cause of diabetes.
The video features two doctors from the same centre. One seems more in-tune with conventional thinking than the other. The first tells us that while close to 500 women would need to be treated for one to develop diabetes, in comparison only about 150 would need to be treated to prevent a heart attack or stenting or some other cardiac event. Just let the second figure sink in for a bit. For each 150 women treated, 149 will not benefit in terms of saving them from a cardiac event. The miracles of modern medicine!
But for me the really interesting part of the video came when the second doctor popped up and suggested that cholesterol may not be the issue, but inflammation is a more likely culprit and perhaps it’s that we should be seeking to control (not cholesterol levels). Give that doctor a medal.
References:
1. Culver AL, et al. Statin Use and Risk of Diabetes Mellitus in Postmenopausal Women in the Women’s Health Initiative. Arch Intern Med. 2012;0(2012):20116252-9.
I love the way the patient thinks (or has been lead to believe) that taking a statin to keep her cardiovascular system healthy outweighs developing diabetes. Um, sorry to burst your bubble love, but diabetes will tend to shag your CV system too.
“the really interesting part of the video came when the second doctor popped up and suggested that cholesterol may not be the issue, but inflammation is a more likely culprit and perhaps it’s that we should be seeking to control (not cholesterol levels). Give that doctor a medal.”
I heartily second that point.
And anyone wanting some more evidence about the bogus war on cholesterol should go no further than http://29billion.com
Keep up the good work,
George Super BootCamps
She doesn’t connect her weight to any issues she may have either. I wonder why the medical profession is still clinging to cholesterol as the main cause of arterial blocking. For a different viewpoint visit the Weston Price Foundation. It opened my eyes and mind to the likelihood that there were other forces at play causing heart malfunction.
Hello Dr Briffa,
I’ve just read “Escape the Diet Trap”, which I enjoyed very much. It basically confirmed my own views, which was nice, since I was reading it to get myself back on the low-carb track after having regained 10 kg (over four years) of the 51 kg I originally lost. So, I am working on that. In the meantime, re cholesterol, CV disease, and statins, I can only recommend that people try to get hold of Dr Uffe Ravnskov’s book “The Cholesterol Myths” (now out of print, sadly), which is what opened my eyes to this problem. Dr Ravnskov does have some other publications still available (http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm).
Thanks again for your terrific book – I will be buying and reading your other work as well.
Jamie makes a good point: having diabetes massively raises your chances of cardiovascular disease (great for the drugs companies who supply the necessary medications!) A fact blithely ignored by the doctor on another related video put out by MedScape this week, where she says that yes, statins do seem to increase the risk of diabetes but that should not stop doctors prescribing them (!!) “because the benefits of statins clearly outweigh the risks”. How is it possible that doctors are still making these blatantly ridiculous claims about the benefits of statins?
hello from malta.good to see a maltese doc thinking out of d box. i had to fight ten docs last time i was in hospital because all they want is to go by d book and save themselves the possibility of backlash or whatever could be a consequence of their thinking with their minds.
Medical health advicethe really interesting part of the video came when the second doctor popped up and suggested that cholesterol may not be the issue