NHS Health Checks

[ManinBlack]

I was prescribed statin tablets to reduce my border line cholesterol. After about 6 weeks I could hardly walk because of cramps in my legs . I was taken off them immediately , but I'm sure its caused some muscle damage , i still don't feel right after 18 months off them .

Statins are evil and the medical "experts", who take notice of research done by the Statin manufacturers, want everyone over the age of 40 to be on them. Their own research, properly interpreted, proves that Statins don't prevent heart attacks and that, although they slightly ​prevent a recuurance, the patients, as a group, don't live, on average, any longer.

 

[ManinBlack]

You can find books saying the earth is flat

I would normally agree with you but this doctor takes the Statin manufacturers' research, on huge populations, and demonstrates that (a) Statins don't prevent the first heart attack at all and (b) although the incidence of recurrance on Statins is marginally lower, the mortality rate is the same i.e. people are dying from non coronary causes, possibly long term Statin use.

He publishes all the figures in his book and challenges anyone to tell him where he's gone wrong.

My mate's on Statins since a mild heart attack and he's had a lot of cramp type & muscular problems since then which I am sure are related to the Statins.

 

[Ethan]

Statins are evil and the medical "experts", who take notice of research done by the Statin manufacturers, want everyone over the age of 40 to be on them. Their own research, properly interpreted, proves that Statins don't prevent heart attacks and that, although they slightly ​prevent a recuurance, the patients, as a group, don't live, on average, any longer.

You don't know what you are talking about.

Please state your qualifications that allow you to credibly make statements that might make other people make bad health decisions.

I know the author to whom you are referring and have debated the issues with him.

Have you asked him how much money he made from his book and associated activities?

 

[williamalex1]

I would normally agree with you but this doctor takes the Statin manufacturers' research, on huge populations, and demonstrates that (a) Statins don't prevent the first heart attack at all and (b) although the incidence of recurrance on Statins is marginally lower, the mortality rate is the same i.e. people are dying from non coronary causes, possibly long term Statin use.

He publishes all the figures in his book and challenges anyone to tell him where he's gone wrong.

My mate's on Statins since a mild heart attack and he's had a lot of cramp type & muscular problems since then which I am sure are related to the Statins.

If you look up Statin side effects and reported complaints it's frightening reading from people who have been prescribed them. Not saying there not suitable in some occasions but diet can go a long way in reducing cholesterol. with out drugs in my personal experience.

 

[Ethan]

If you look up Statin side effects and reported complaints it's frightening reading from people who have been prescribed them. Not saying there not suitable in some occasions but diet can go a long way in reducing cholesterol. with out drugs in my personal experience.

You should read the prescribing information for paracetemol sometime.

Also, be aware that just because someone takes a pill then gets a problem, it doesn't necessarily mean the pill caused it.

 

[RGDave]

My GP (practice/surgery) wants me to go in for a health check.

I'm overweight and need to eat less, that's a given. I'm not quite sure what he'll say about e-cig habit (2 years ago he was quite pleased), as judging by the news pretty much everyone is out to get us Vapers, as according to popular media they are more dangerous than smoking and lead to cocaine addiction.

However, not can I only run around the course like a 25 year old, but I only puff on the thing when faced with a par 3 over water or a tight driving hole.

Works for me!

 

[ManinBlack]

You don't know what you are talking about.

Please state your qualifications that allow you to credibly make statements that might make other people make bad health decisions.

I know the author to whom you are referring and have debated the issues with him.

Have you asked him how much money he made from his book and associated activities?

Perhaps you should ask the Statin manufacturers if they've made any money from selling Statins to people who may not need them & whom they may harm. Just because he sells the book doesn't mean he didn't write it for the best of reasons.

 

[Ethan]

Perhaps you should ask the Statin manufacturers if they've made any money from selling Statins to people who may not need them & whom they may harm. Just because he sells the book doesn't mean he didn't write it for the best of reasons.

The statin manufacturers have made plenty of money, but ironically they aren't making it any more because the drugs are now generic and made by companies in China and India at knock down prices.
The data from the pharma companies has also been scrutinised by regulatory authorities in Europe, the US and elsewhere. Books written by ideologues have not.

So you appear to be cynical and naive at the same time. Nice trick.

The ideologues have not been so scrutinised so can say whatever they like and have it lapped up by the witless and paranoid.

As for harm, NICE, the UK rationing body not known for its cosy relationship with pharma, have just issued advice on statins saying the side effect profile is pretty benign. Myalgia is an uncommon side effect and a reason to stop, as is liver dysfunction.


Declaration: Practising medical doctor, qualifications Batchelor of Medicine, Batchelor of Surgery, Batchelor of Obstetrics, Diploma Public Health, Masters Public Health, Fellow Faculty of Public Health Medicine UK, Member Faculty of Public Health Ireland, Diploma in Pharmaceutical Medicine, Fellow Faculty of Pharmaceutical Medicine UK. I design and run clinical trials for a living.

 

[ManinBlack]

The statin manufacturers have made plenty of money, but ironically they aren't making it any more because the drugs are now generic and made by companies in China and India at knock down prices.
The data from the pharma companies has also been scrutinised by regulatory authorities in Europe, the US and elsewhere. Books written by ideologues have not.

So you appear to be cynical and naive at the same time. Nice trick.

The ideologues have not been so scrutinised so can say whatever they like and have it lapped up by the witless and paranoid.

As for harm, NICE, the UK rationing body not known for its cosy relationship with pharma, have just issued advice on statins saying the side effect profile is pretty benign. Myalgia is an uncommon side effect and a reason to stop, as is liver dysfunction.


Declaration: Practising medical doctor, qualifications Batchelor of Medicine, Batchelor of Surgery, Batchelor of Obstetrics, Diploma Public Health, Masters Public Health, Fellow Faculty of Public Health Medicine UK, Member Faculty of Public Health Ireland, Diploma in Pharmaceutical Medicine, Fellow Faculty of Pharmaceutical Medicine UK. I design and run clinical trials for a living.

Dr. Kendrick is not the only one and where expert opinion is divided then surely we have the right to make up our own minds. What I quoted were the two main conclusions of the book. Did he get it completely wrong? It's not as clear cut as you say.

To quote another example, my wife has a classic symptom of hypothyroidism, permanently low body temperature. According to her blood tests one specialist says it's definitely not hypothyroidism. Another specialist is of the opinion that the low temperature is unlikely to be caused by anything else. What do I do? Just accept the original diagnosis because I don't know what I'm talking about. The experts are by no means unanimous, and I won't let an arrogant doctor tell me I can't have an opinion.

Remember, it was your profession that said that pueperal fever was nothing to do with poor hygiene.

 

[One Planer]

Remember, it was your profession that said that pueperal fever was nothing to do with poor hygiene.

Isn't that more down to advancements in medical understanding?

I take it your doctor doesn't use leeches or blood lettings?

 

[ManinBlack]

Isn't that more down to advancements in medical understanding?

I take it your doctor doesn't use leeches or blood lettings?

It's an example of accepted medical understanding turning through 180°. And not the only one by any means.

 

[One Planer]

It's an example of accepted medical understanding turning through 180°. And not the only one by any means.

It's not just true of medicine though is it?

A few hundred years ago the Earth was flat. When it came to engineering people thought if you went over 30mph on trains you would suffer horrendous injury and likely die.

It's through research, study and experimentation that understanding advances. Sometimes, previous stand points, as per yor example, are proved completely wrong, others not so.

If I went to a doctor with a headache and he tried to drill a hole in my head to cure me I would run a mile.

 

[williamalex1]

The pamphlet that comes with the statins tells you possible side effects and to contact your doctor if you experience them. They are not suitable for everyone, my heart consultant said he was happy for to come off them because of the side effects. He prescribed a 75mg AspIrin a day.

 

[Ethan]

Dr. Kendrick is not the only one and where expert opinion is divided then surely we have the right to make up our own minds. What I quoted were the two main conclusions of the book. Did he get it completely wrong? It's not as clear cut as you say.

To quote another example, my wife has a classic symptom of hypothyroidism, permanently low body temperature. According to her blood tests one specialist says it's definitely not hypothyroidism. Another specialist is of the opinion that the low temperature is unlikely to be caused by anything else. What do I do? Just accept the original diagnosis because I don't know what I'm talking about. The experts are by no means unanimous, and I won't let an arrogant doctor tell me I can't have an opinion.

Remember, it was your profession that said that pueperal fever was nothing to do with poor hygiene.

I didn't tell you you couldn't have an opinion. I told you your opinion was uninformed and wrong.

You are perfectly entitled to your opinion, and I am sure you have many other interesting opinions about all sorts of subjects, some of which you may actually know something about.

Malcolm is not the only one, but he and those who think like him are still a rather small group compared to those who accept the evidence. Unanimity is not needed but the consensus is clear. The debate over who far we should go with statins in primary prevention is a legitimate debate and personally I am not a fan of over medicating normal low risk people. But that is a different debate. Malcolm is a statin nihilist.

As for your wife, low body temperature can be a feature of hypothyroidism, but it is only a feature and not the only diagnostic feature. Hypothyroidism has many causes, mostly auto-immune, but the definitive test is to measure thyroid hormones not body temperature. The results of these tests can sometimes be contrary and contradictory. The human body is like that sometimes. I am sure they will sort it out, and if stuck, a short trial of thyroid replacement should sort the diagnosis out.

And puerpural fever. Well, so the medical profession was wrong in 1847. My bad. So what happened then was the medical profession did a study, found something out and implemented the lesson. We now call this learning. It is a valuable tool used in science. Learning has told us a lot about statins, mostly that they work. But not for everybody and they also have side effects.

 

[ManinBlack]

I told you your opinion was uninformed and wrong.

So some of the informed people are wrong as well then. Not wrong in your opinion, mind you, just plain wrong. This it the typical attitude of many medical practitioners "I'm the one with all the expertise, you know nothing, just accept what I say".

Opinion is changing. There are many, many other examples where accepted medical opinion has changed radically over time and those who dared to express an opposite opinion have been ridiculed and sometimes had their careers ruined by the closed minds of the herd. The Statin question may be one of these, time will tell. I may be relatively uninformed but I haven't read anything that refutes Dr. Kendrick's view. If you can point me in the right direction I shall be happy to look at it to become better informed. Uninformed is relative, you may know more than I do, there will be someone, believe it or knot, who knows more than you. Does that mean that if he has the opposite view you are wrong?

 

[SocketRocket]

So some of the informed people are wrong as well then. Not wrong in your opinion, mind you, just plain wrong. This it the typical attitude of many medical practitioners "I'm the one with all the expertise, you know nothing, just accept what I say".

Opinion is changing. There are many, many other examples where accepted medical opinion has changed radically over time and those who dared to express an opposite opinion have been ridiculed and sometimes had their careers ruined by the closed minds of the herd. The Statin question may be one of these, time will tell. I may be relatively uninformed but I haven't read anything that refutes Dr. Kendrick's view. If you can point me in the right direction I shall be happy to look at it to become better informed. Uninformed is relative, you may know more than I do, there will be someone, believe it or knot, who knows more than you. Does that mean that if he has the opposite view you are wrong?

You are absolutely entitled to an opinion and whether it is wrong or not is a matter of opinion. I have read and have been impressed by what Dr John Briffa has to say on such subjects. Here is a link where he is expressing his expert opinion on the use of Statins:

http://www.drbriffa.com/2013/06/20/...uestions-about-the-widespread-use-of-statins/

 

[ManinBlack]

You are absolutely entitled to an opinion and whether it is wrong or not is a matter of opinion. I have read and have been impressed by what Dr John Briffa has to say on such subjects. Here is a link where he is expressing his expert opinion on the use of Statins:

http://www.drbriffa.com/2013/06/20/...uestions-about-the-widespread-use-of-statins/

That's interesting, the tide is slowly turning. The fact is that nobody knows what a "normal" level of cholesterol is. Nobody knows what cholesterol actually does or why it's high in some people & lower in others. To deliberately lower it under these circumstances is not, in my uninformed opinion, a good idea.

 

[Ethan]

So some of the informed people are wrong as well then. Not wrong in your opinion, mind you, just plain wrong. This it the typical attitude of many medical practitioners "I'm the one with all the expertise, you know nothing, just accept what I say".

Opinion is changing. There are many, many other examples where accepted medical opinion has changed radically over time and those who dared to express an opposite opinion have been ridiculed and sometimes had their careers ruined by the closed minds of the herd. The Statin question may be one of these, time will tell. I may be relatively uninformed but I haven't read anything that refutes Dr. Kendrick's view. If you can point me in the right direction I shall be happy to look at it to become better informed. Uninformed is relative, you may know more than I do, there will be someone, believe it or knot, who knows more than you. Does that mean that if he has the opposite view you are wrong?

No, uninformed is not relative. No reputable scientific author is going to waste their time arguing against Malcolm's crackpot theories. just as nobody bothers to argue against the flat earthers. Malcolm has conducted precisely 0 clinical trials, but there are dozens of large and lengthy clinical trials available for you to download and read if you want, as well as reviews by government bodies such as NICE and others. Try the 4S study, WOSCOPS and recent NICE advice for starters. Also, the massive epidemiological studies (without any drugs) which prove the role of cholesterol in heart disease. Framingham is the best example of these, and has been published many times. All of these, common sense and science refute Malcolm's ideas.

This is how science works. It gets a vague idea, not necessarily all correct or perfect and looks at it, finds out the bits that are right and takes them forward, reject the bits that are wrong and design more experiments and refines the understanding and in doing so hones in on better answers. It is an iterative self-correcting process. There are always those who don't get it, and the media often presents these as if the scientific community is finely balanced.

Conspiracy theorists and crackpots, on the other hand, adopt a different approach, a non-scientific one. They adopt an idea sand stick to it, ignoring anything which disturbs their position, jumping all over anything, however badly designed or conducted, which supports it, and sticks to that idea with religious fervour. That is what you are doing, so in scientific terms, there is no point in reasoning with you.

The tide is not turning at all. NICE have just announced a plan to extend statin use to patients with moderate risk of heart disease. The objections to this are mostly economic, because there is a lot of NHS cost and time involved in doing this, and the costs are incurred now while the benefits are remote in time.

 

[ManinBlack]

No reputable scientific author is going to waste their time arguing against Malcolm's crackpot theories.

My last word on the subject. I'm a reasonably intelligent person, read the book, and his theories appeared well argued to me, and based on the results of clinical trials. In the book he challenges anyone to point out where he is misinterpreting the results. If anyone has done this I'll be happy to read about it and try to understand it, but if "No reputable scientific author is going to waste their time" then I won't be able to do this.

Let's see where we are in 20 years' time.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

For a number of reasons I had intended to withdraw from the Forum but whilst still visiting I discovered this thread and felt moved to comment.

To preface my remarks I should say that I am sufficiently sceptical to question all medical advice I receive to ensure I am satisfied I have the information I need.

In April 2001 I had a major heart attack,on the golf-course, followed by another once I had arrived at hospital. By-pass surgery and stents were not considered since it was the heart itself that was damaged rather than arteries or veins. I have, therefore, been dependant upon medication ever since including Ramipril, Bisoprolol and aspirin.

I have also been taking a Statin for 13 years, firstly Atorvastatin and then Simvastatin. Like many others I read some of this comment about muscular cramps etc; and other side effects and discussed them more than once with my GP. Suffice to say that, as a trial, I tried a period without them to assess whether I would be any less fatigued and it did not make a "ha'porth" of difference yet my cholesterol levels started to rise.

As a long term user of statins I feel reasonably qualified to say that, in my experience, they do a good job.

As a member of the public I would only say to the author of this book that when our sons were young there was another apparently reputable medical man who came up with a report on the MMR vaccine and its link to autism leading to many parents, not us, choosing, sometimes with serious consequences, to not have their children vaccinated.

What a surprise! His research data was flawed and his report, fortunately, discredited.

Why do believers in conspiracy theories have such faith in the odd-ball, and yet dismiss the controlled tests and research undertaken by the pharmaceutical industry?

Certainly the drug companies are profit driven but those profit together with their share price and reputation would disappear overnight if it was proved that they were somehow conning the public.