http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18403720

I’m strongly of the opinion (and I can back this up) that statins prescribed for primary prevention are not warranted and their efficacy for secondary prevention is incidental with lifestyle changes / supplements being better advised.

The new bogeyman will soon be homocysteine but the best “therapy” is vitamin B / B12 so no profit for big pharma there then!

John, We all have to make decisions on our own. It’s really a crap game. I wouldn’t urge you to take a statin if you don’t want to. I just printed out a study in PLOS claiming that statins reduce incidence of dementia in patients with type 2 diabetes. As I haven’t read it, I can’t comment on its validity.

My point was simply that the drug that benefits the most people may harm some, and vice versa.

Christophe, That was one study. The big ezetemide study hasn’t been concluded yet.

No, because ezetimibe is not a statin drug. It’s a cholesterol-lowering drug, but chemically not one of the statin family. So “non-statin” is correct here.

Gretchen, did you miss the part about this drug lowering cholesterol but not improving health outcomes?

Yossi, I understood that statins don’t work for men over 65. Crazy to prescribe these drugs to a fit and healthy gentleman like you.

Yes I assumed the same, otherwise the ‘conclusion’ makes zero sense.

That’s precisely where my total cholesterol level is: over 400mg/dl = >10mmol/L.
Triglycerides <=1, all ratios very healthy.

Do I feel the need to take any drugs to lower the total level?
Absolutely not.

I also follow LCHF.

So I’m watching, and the first segment to come up was an interview with a physician that specializes in cancer care. He had just written a new book. The interview was to discuss his writing and work as an oncologist. In introducing the author, the TV host really played up how the new book was entirely evidence based, everything had been carefully researched from top to bottom. Honestly, at the time I recall thinking I had not heard such an introduction before! Then the doctor is introduced and he begins mentioning that when it comes to cancer prevention he believes highly in 3 things. I forget the 3rd mention he made, but the first two beliefs where that taking statins were great at preventing cancer. Additionally taking aspirin was a big help too! Then he begins talking about a Greek physician from 2000 years ago and how he had found aspirin to be the mother of all health cures. Made me chuckle and roll my eyes. I wanted to yell out, next time you’re looking for story ideas don’t chose this guy! I did notice that the TV host made no challenges to the doctors evidence based science claims.

Good point Gretchen. The argument of having more options available is always an important one, as in some cases a specific medication may provide benefit to just the right patient. I think the problem is that the data of increased use here suggests it’s not being used in this targeted fashion, but rather based on the previous assumption that added reduction of cholesterol is beneficial in general.

This happens with many drugs in which we find evidence that they are less effective than originally thought, as there is a lag time between reducing clinical use and evidence. Oddly, when the reverse occurs, and a drug is found the be beneficial in large studies, I don’t (subjectively) notice this same lag time.

I felt it was because I was on a LC diet, eating fat and cholesterol, so I was getting plenty of cholesterol from my diet so my body didn’t need to synthesize it, and a drug that reduces its synthesis would have no effect. When ezetemide came out, we tried that, and it brought total cholesterol down to about 250. Then the statins worked to bring it down further.

Made perfect sense to me.

Whether or not high cholesterol is a risk factor for CVD is controversial. And there’s no evidence that statins help women. But “no evidence” doesn’t mean something is true. Before the DCTT people with diabetes were told there was no evidence that high blood glucose was harmful.

I think most people agree that *very high cholesterol* is not good. So if they remove ezetimide from the market, people like me will be in a difficult position.