Statin Drugs. Conventional medicine still think they are so safe they can be sold without a prescription, regardless of the patient harm they are known to cause

Many people continue to believe that if a pharmaceutical drug can be bought at any pharmacy, over-the-counter, without a doctor's prescription, it must be safe. It would appear that this misapprehension is to be further enhanced in Britain - the NHS is planning to allow pharmacists to dispense high-dose statins without the need for a prescription.

I wrote about the dangers of over-the-counter drugs is in my blog "Pharmaceutical drugs on sale at the pharmacy are no safer" in January 2017. In this I discussed the dangers of drugs such as Alka Sultzer, Anadin, Beechams Powders, Benylin, Calpol, Dulcolax, Feminax, Gavascon, Lemsip, Nurofen, Rennies, Robitussin, Solpadeine, Strepsils, Voltarol, and Zantac.

Now, allowing Statin drugs to be sold over-the-counter, takes this another stage further. When first introduced patients were told that Stains were extremely effective, and entirely safe. THEY HAVE PROVEN TO BE NEITHER.

Indeed, I have written about the dangers of Statins many times over the years (go to the search bar above and type 'statins' to see these blogs). But in summary, the side effects now associated with these drugs are numerous and serious. They include:

• cataracts
• heart failure
• pneumonia
• nerve damage
• muscle pain, muscle tissue breaking down
• diabetes
• prostate cancer
• liver damage
• kidney disease
• memory loss (dementia?)

So are they dangerous enough to ensure that doctors monitor patients who take them? Apparently not, at least not as far as the NHS, and the conventional medical establishment, is concerned.

I can think of only two reasons for opening up the availability of these seriously harmful drugs

• pharmaceutical profits.
• doctors wanting to avoid the responsibility and blame of prescribing them.

Conventional medicine is not over-concerned with safety. The principle of 'first do no harm' has long been jettisoned by doctors. No amount of evidence of patient harm appears to have any impact on the sale and promotion of pharmaceutical drugs, regardless of the harm they are known to cause.

Statins drugs going out of favour?

BBC News is today promoting yet another vaccine. It is part of its role as the 'echo chamber' for the pharmaceutical industry, an unofficial, unpaid position that our 'public service broadcaster' has accepted for many years now.

Michelle Roberts, the Health Editor, has produced this article on the BBC website, "Cholesterol-lowering jab to help prevent heart disease". The article informs us that human trials of a "cholesterol-lowering vaccine" is being produced to help prevent heart disease. As usual, it sounds like another amazing medical breakthrough, but before popping off to see you doctor for the jab, hold on! There have been "successful studies in mice" to date, according to researchers at the Medical University of Vienna, and they are testing the safety of the vaccine on 72 volunteers!

               "It will take years more of testing to know if the treatment will be safe and effective enough for human use.... Even if it does become available, in six years' time, it should not be seen as an excuse for people to avoid exercise and eat lots of high-fat food".

So we have another 6 years to wait before this wonder-vaccine will begin to have an impact on the epidemic levels of heart disease we are currently experiencing, allegedly caused by 'fatty deposits clogging up our arteries!'

The BBC does this all the time, giving us the 'good news' about pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, which is always about the good news that will  happen in the years to come! Years which never seem to arrive!

At the same time as hearing BBC News promoting the pharmaceutical industry this morning (20th June 2017) I received an email of WDDTY (What Doctor's Don't Tell You). They reported two items. The first was Aspirin is a bigger killer among the over 75's than everyone thought! I wrote about this in my recent blog, "Aspirin causes gastrointestinal bleeding, so the solution is to take PPI drugs which cause .... and so it goes on!" Did the BBC pick up this important piece of news? Of course not!

The other WDDTY article was about the deaths caused by pharmaceutical drugs in the USA, estimated to be nearly 500,000 annually. Did the BBC pick up this important (and regular) piece of news? Of course not!

The BBC tells us about the 'good' news, that may (or may not) happen in 6 years time. But it refuses to cover the news about what is happening to patients right now (and for decades past)!

Yet there is another, more interesting news story here. I ought to mention it as the BBC is unlikely to do so! For decades patients have been told that Statin drugs prevented 'fatty deposits clogging up our arteries'. Moreover, these drugs were entirely safe, so safe in fact that everyone should be taking them. The BBC have been part of this media hype about the benefits and safety of Statin drugs for a long time. It was the 'good news' story of yester-year! The question is, why is there a need to develop a vaccine to do what Statins have been doing, apparently so successfully and safely, for decades? The BBC has the answer, probably straight from the news release of the pharmaceutical industry!

               "It would offer patients an alternative to taking daily pills to cut their risk of stroke, angina and heart attacks."

Or, alternatively, is it more to do with the fact (unmentioned by the BBC of course) that Statin drugs are now implicated in having serious side effects, including liver dysfunction, kidney failure, muscle weakness, cataracts, and more recently, memory loss, confusion and dementia?

So maybe this is the first indication that conventional doctors are now beginning to realise that the drugs they have been giving to patients for years are causing more harm to patients then they realised, or were told. They are certainly doing more harm than the BBC has ever informed us about!

And this is, of course, what happens regularly in the world of the pharmaceutical drugs. Dangerous drugs and vaccines are marketed, they cause harm to patients, and when the harm becomes to great to hide (and profitability is reduced because patents run out) they are quietly withdrawn. And this process seems to happen more quickly when Big Pharma has a replacement!

The new vaccine would also appear to be a profitable venture too. As the BBC article suggests, booster jabs will be required, "the researchers envisage that patients could have a yearly booster shot to top up their immunity."

And conventional medicine presents this as medical progress!

Can anyone trust the BBC and its coverage of health issues? Absolutely not. Or mainstream newspapers (who similarly peddle pharmaceutical propaganda)? Absolutely not. The newspapers wonder why their circulations are declining! The BBC are beginning to understand (in non-health areas anyway) the reason why people are turning to 'alternative' news sources, and are rejecting the 'establishment' view on many social issues, including health. The reason is simple.

It is because the public is beginning to realise that the mainstream media has consistently refused to tell us the truth! 

The Nosebo Effect. The nonsense of medical science?

Pharmaceutical drugs do NOT cause side effects! It's just that patients think they will cause them, so they experience them!

This is the new wisdom from the conventional medical establishment, as reported in the Lancet today (3rd May 2017). Researchers at Imperial College London, undertaking research funded by several pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer, found that "patients on statins are more likely to suffer side effects as a result of the ‘expectation of harm’ rather than the drugs themselves". The study follows up a 2014 review that suggested that "very few" of the side effects reported in statin users are down to the drug itself.

This is called the 'nocebo' effect - the expectation of side effects makes patients more likely to report them. The leader of the study, Professor Peter Sever, from the National Heart and Lung Institute, is quoted as saying that the nosebo effect can be very strong.

               "This is not a case of people making up symptoms, or that the symptoms are 'all in their heads'. Patients can experience very real pain as a result of the nocebo effect and the expectation that drugs will cause harm. What our study shows is that it’s precisely the expectation of harm that is likely causing the increase in muscle pain and weakness, rather than the drugs themselves causing them."

As the GP magazine, Pulse, says, this comes after one recent study found that stroke survivors were quitting their statins due to intolerable side effects. THEY ARE, OF COURSE, WRONG! They experienced 'intolerable side effects' only because they expected to experience them! Nothing to do with the drug! More to do with the Patient Information Leaflet that comes with the drug. One doctor has already asked the obvious question:

               "Should patient information inserts be removed for causing increased side effects??"

Indeed, the researchers have said that many people will have died because they stopped taking them. Statin drugs prevent strokes and heart disease by lowering cholesterol, but no mentioned was made of another recent study that has found that when the records of patients dying from strokes and heart disease were examined, it made no difference whether they were on statins or not!

There are several benefits for the conventional medical establishment arising from this research, and the idea of the nosebo effect:

• Doctors will now be able to tell patients that side effects are not caused by the drug, but by their expectations. It has been estimated that only 10% of drug side effects are reported now! After this study reporting will no doubt fall even lower, resulting in even less evidence that pharmaceutical drugs cause harm to patients.
• There will be a strong case made not to tell patients the possible side effects of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, because this is likely to cause the reporting of side effects! There will be even less information for patients, and 'informed choice' will take a back seat!
• The pharmaceutical companies will be able to sell more drugs, and doctors will be able to prescribe more of them because they will know now that they don't cause side effects, it is all part of patient expectation!

Discovering drug side effects is slow enough now. Drugs are tested, approved to be safe by drug regulators, and given to patients for many years before they are round. It will become slower now!

Yet there is another problem. Statin drugs have been found to cause a wide variety of serious side effects. Many other studies have found that they cause not only muscle pain and weakness, but Parkinsons disease, diabetes, liver dysfunction, kidney failure, and cataracts. Were these diseases also caused by the nosebo effect? So are there patients masquerading around out there with Parkinsons because they expected to contract Parkinsons? Is the diabetes epidemic caused by Statin users who just feel they should have diabetes?

In addition, what has been wrong with the many 'scientific' studies that have previously linked Statins with muscle pain over recent decades? Why have they been accepted for so many years? Did they get it wrong? Why can these studies suddenly be overturned by a single (drug company financed) study? If they can be overturned so easily does this conflicting science (yet again) bring into question the validity of medical science, and in particular of randomised controlled testing?

When difficult questions arise within the conventional medical establishment we always need to follow the money! The pharmaceutical companies are in a bad way. Their credibility is at stake, and many of their most profitable drugs failing. 

• Their painkillers are now known to be too dangerous to prescribe. 
• They are running out of antibiotic drugs that work

Indeed, many other pharmaceutical drugs are now being seriously questioned, either for their effectiveness or safety. And few new blockbusting drugs are coming through to replace them. Statins are one of the most profitable pharmaceutical drugs remaining. They could not allow patients to stop taking them because of the nasty side effects. They could not deny the side effects. So pharmaceutical money has paid for the promotion of the 'nosebo effect. It is a useful concept!

So, homeopathy works because of the 'placebo' effect. Patients think they will get better, so they do. And conventional medicine does not cause side effects, it is just the 'nosebo' effect.

We patients seem to be getting everything wrong! We need to listen more carefully to what 'medical science' is telling us, although only when it is funded by the pharmaceutical companies. They know best. We not only know nothing, what we think we know is wrong! 

Just shut up, all of you, and keep taking the tablets.

Post Script November 2020 

The nocebo nonsense continues! This MIMS article says that "Most Statin side effects down to 'nocebo' effect". This means that pharmaceutical medicine wants us to believe that we can develop diabetes, dementia, liver and kidney disease (and all the other 'side effects' known to be caused by these drugs) because we THINK we might get them IF we take Statin drugs!

 

Post Script January 2022

And this is MIMS telling us that two-thirds of Covid-19 vaccines reactions are caused by the nosebo factor, quoting a USA study.

If we think this, why would we want to take them in the first place?

 

 

Statins. An attempted rehabilitation by Big Pharma?

Most new pharmaceutical drugs are heralded as 'wonder cures' or 'main bullets', none more so than Statin drugs. When drug companies found that statins reduced cholesterol, they invented a connection between cholesterol and the heart. So taking statins reduced cholesterol and our hearts would benefit. Yet finding any real link between cholesterol of heart disease is proving difficult to find, other than its ability to sell the drugs!

However, statins, had arrived, and pharmaceutical companies proceeded to invent yet another lie. They were, they said, entirely safe! Indeed they were so safe we should ALL be taking them! So prescriptions for statins rocketed, and the pharmaceutical cash registers sang their songs of profit. The  drug companies were delighted.

But then, as happens with all pharmaceutical 'wonder' drugs, problems began to emerge. Statin drugs were not 'entirely safe', although the drug companies, the drug regulators, our doctors, and the mainstream media, decided not to tell the general public. The usual mantra was recited. The benefits outweigh the advantages! But as the years passed, and the evidence increased, his was increasingly difficult to justify. Doubts began to multiply about just how bad cholesterol was for our health.

The situation took a serious turn for the worse in 2010 when a Nottingham university study was published in the British Medical Journal. It found that people taking Statin drugs have a higher risk of

• liver dysfunction, 
• kidney failure, 
• muscle weakness,
• cataracts. 

The study was a large one, covering over 2 million people in Britain. Yet the list of adverse reactions was even then not comprehensive. The link between Statin drugs and diabetes (now at epidemic levels and usually blamed on our diet) was now linked to this 'entirely safe' drug.

Worse was to follow. The FDA (the USA drug regulator) reported on its website in January 2015 that statins were also linked with memory loss, confusion and dementia. The FDA stated that "it has been been investigating reports of coagnitive impairment from statin use for several years" and that "the agency has reviewed databases that record reports of bad reactions to drugs and statin clinical trials that included assessments of cognitive function." The report stated that memory loss, forgetfulness and confusion spanned "all statin products and all age groups."

Even some doctors now became concerned, and there was an increasing reluctance to prescribe them. So the pharmaceutical industry began to worry about its profits. It needed to take action. And, as they normally do in such situations they turned to medical science to help them preserve their most successful and profitable drug.

Scientists were recruited, (very carefully as we will see) and they produced a report that was published in the Lancet on 1st September 2016. "to help clinicians, patients, and the public make informed decisions about statin therapy for the prevention of heart attacks and strokes."

Basically, the report said that the benefits of Statin drugs were being under-appreciated, and the side effects were being exaggerated. Indeed, they found that the RCT evidence of the benefits were strong, and that the adverse events attributed to statins were not actually caused by them!

These findings were reported without too much critical examination by the mainstream media, and no doubt many people were re-assured. After all, medical science had spoken!

Yet this is a typical response of the pharmaceutical industry when profitable drugs begin to decline, when patients become more resistant, when even doctors are no longer willing to take the reassurances of the drug companies at face value, and are increasingly reluctant to prescribe them.

               It has happened in exactly the same way with HRT, and I wrote about it recently (August 2016) in this blog.

               And it happened in exactly the same way with MMR, when the vaccine was linked with Autism in the early 2000's. I wrote about this in September 2015.

• Find money for some more medical research on the drug. 
• Select the 'scientists' who are prepared to produce a report that refutes the doubts, and supports the efficacy of the drug. 
• Make sure that the academic foundations doing the work is well funded. 
• And make sure that their media allies publicise the new research!

So how was this Lancet report funded? Within the report, tucked away, there is a rather long 'declaration of interests' statement. This confirms that the 'Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit' (CTSU) at the University of Oxford received grants from some of the largest pharmaceutical companies, including Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Schering, and Solvay. There followed a long list of 'declarations of interests' by each of the reports authors, all "governed by University of Oxford contracts that protect its independence", of course

Most media accounts of this report, if they bother to mention these conflicts of interest at all, do so only in passing. For instance, the BBC Article, reports almost exclusively on the 'good news' of the report, leaving just a few short sentences at the end to indicate that there are critics of the report. Fiona Godlee, editor of the British Medical Journal, is quoted as saying that:

          "This still does not address the calls for a thorough, independent review of the evidence of statins. This is especially important in view of the guidance which recommends that large numbers of healthy people should take a tablet every day."

Then, London cardiologist, Dr Assem Malhotra, is quoted as saying that:

          "There are serious question marks about the reliability of industry-sponsored studies on the side effects of statins, and essentially that's what this review is. And a lot of the scientists involved in the original studies were involved in this review. It is not an independent review."

The Huffington Post published an article in April 2016 by Dr Assem Malhotra, entitled "The Great Statin Con", and this is well worth reading as it contains more on his experience and criticism of Statin drugs. (And certainly the BBC is never likely to publish them)!

So only those people who bothered to read to the bottom, the small print, of the BBC article would have got this message. This is typical of BBC News, and the mainstream media generally. They exist to do the bidding of the conventional medical establishment!

And worse is likely to follow. This report will now be used by the media to stifle any further discussion. Medical science has spoken! No counter arguments will be allowed for several years, until the evidence of Statin harm becomes overwhelming, and impossible to ignore.

Meanwhile, patients who have not been properly informed, will continue to take Statin drugs; they will suffer their side effects,'the pharmaceutical companies will continue to profit from them; diabetes, dementia, and other statin 'side effects' will continue to increase; and the NHS will be moved another step towards bankruptcy!

Well, that's how the conventional medical establishment works!

Cholesterol, Medical Science, RCT's and Statin Drugs

Cholesterol? Now, lets get this right! Medical science, and our doctors of course, have been telling us for decades that cholesterol is bad for us, and that if we have high cholesterol, we need to take pharmaceutical drugs to reduce it. 

Well, this was the original basis for the rise and rise in the prescription of Statin drugs.  That is why millions of patients throughout the world now take them regularly. That is why most patients who go to see their doctor are tested for their cholesterol levels. And if that reading is deemed to be too high we are put on Statins in order to prevent heart attacks and stroke. Statins, of course, are completely safe!

Then, as I recall, the message changed. We were told by medical science that there were two types of cholesterol, one good and other bad. Obviously, we needed the good stuff. But we did not need the bad stuff.

Simple? Well, it's not quite that simple!

It was then discovered that by reducing the 'bad' stuff, we were in danger of suffering dementia, because our brains actually needed it. For more information on this, click here. 

So bad cholesterol isn't bad at all, it is actually good! It keeps our minds active and in good order. And by seeking to lower it through Statins drugs is now linked to dementia (which, of course, is running at epidemic levels). Anything to do with Statins? Of course not! The pharmaceutical companies, and our doctors strenuously deny this. The always do, of course, and they will continue to prescribe the drugs ragardless of the dangers.

Yet there is always good cholesterol. Isn't there? Well, no, not really! We have now been told, by another study undertaken by 'medical science', that "high levels of 'good' cholesterol may not be good for us after all. The study, involving 1,764,986 men, suggests that the relationship between HDL cholesterol and death is not so straightforward - that both too little and too much of the 'good' stuff increases our chances of dying!

So let's try to be clear about what medical science is telling us!

• that good cholesterol is bad! 
• that bad cholesterol is good! 

Now, we really should try hard not to be too confused about this! Yet the conventional medical establishment does appear to be somewhat confused, and divided. Recently, NICE (the National Institute for Clinical Excellence) in Britain, wanted our doctors to prescribe Statin drugs to lots more people, with a much lower risk of heart attack or stroke. But doctors did not want to do this, presumably because they knew something about the risks of Statins - even though they have told us, hitherto, that they were entirely safe!

So if conventional medicine is confused, what about patients? Well, thankfully, we patients are not confused at all! After all, no one ever tells us anything about the dangers of pharmaceutical drugs, so if doctors prescribe them, we just take them, believing them to be safe, and accepting any side-effects there might be. Whatever happens to us, however alarming it might be, is nothing to do with the drugs we are taking, it just the result of  'bad luck'! 

More reassuring, of course, is that if the side effect is that we get dementia we will never get to know about it anyway!

Clarity is possible, but only if, when analysing all this important scientific and medical information, we bear in mind the following understandings.

1. Medical science is based on RCT (Randomised Controlled Tests), an important feature of which is that the test results can be anything you want them to be. So if you pay for them (as pharmaceutical companies do) they can get whatever results they want!
2. RCT testing has been the technique that medical science has used to prove that every pharmaceutical drug and vaccine, since Thalidomide, is both effective and safe. Unfortunately not a single drug or vaccine has ultimately been found to be safe, in the real world. Despite this medical scientists still says that RCT's are 'the gold standard'. Perhaps what they mean is that RCT drug testing leads to pots of gold for the pharmaceutical companies, a fact that is hard to deny!
3. The link between heart attacks, strokes and cholesterol has long been known to be false, even by medical science. Conventional medicine does not tell us this though. After all, it is a business, and they want to continue selling pharmaceutical drugs.

So if you have been told that you are at risk of heart attack or stroke, if your cholesterol readings are high, if you are taking Statin drugs, you might want to look at some of the information you are not being told. I have written about the Statin - Cholesterol debacle on many occasions. Here are just some of the links to my previous blogs.

• The dangers of Statin drugs.
• Is Cholesterol harmful? Do we need Statin drugs?
• Cholesterol. Conventional medicine gets it wrong again!
• Statins. Those nice safe drugs we should all be taking!
• Cholesterol. Just how important are Statin drugs to our health?
• Statins. From Wonder drug to Killer drug!
• Statin drugs. Now, doctors, are they still entirely safe?
• FDA warning. Statins now linked to memory loss.
• Dementia and Alzheimers. Are they cause by pharmaceutical drugs?

Nobody should be taking Statins, or any other pharmaceutical drug or vaccine, without being fully informed about the harm they can cause - their 'side effects'. The conventional medical establishment, including our doctors, have consistently failed to do so. Therefore it is difficult, if not impossible for patients to make a fully informed choice about whether to take the drugs prescribed to them, or to refuse them.

The confusion about cholesterol demonstrates something even more alarming. The conventional medical establishment, itself, is in a state of total and utter confusion! Medical science, and the RCT's on which it is based, are at the heart of this confusion. RCT's can prove anything and everything about anything and everything so only confusion will result. And that is what we are dealing with here.

Conventional medicine is totally and utterly confused!

Are patients refusing Statin drugs? Or is the media being silenced?

I have been reporting on the dangers of Statin drugs on this blog for many years. The evidence of the harm they cause is now plentiful, even though doctors continue to tell us they are 'entirely safe', and that 'we should all be taking them'.

• Statins. From wonder drug to killer drug?
• The dangers of Statin drugs.
• Statin drugs. Why are they not banned?
• Statins. Those nice, safe drugs we should all be taking!
• Statin drugs. Now, doctors, are they still entirely safe?
• FDA warning. Satins now cause memory loss.
• Statins. Doctors conflicted about safety?
• Diabetes caused by Statin drugs?
• Is cholesterol harmful? Do we need Statin drugs?

Millions of patients throughout the world are now taking them. They are the most profitable pharmaceutical drug sold today, and arguably the most dangerous to patient health.

But now it has been reported that "hundreds of thousands of patients may have stopped taking statins because of widespread media coverage of controversy over the drugs' risks and benefits." This news was reported in the doctors e-magazine, Pulse, 200,000 patients may have quit statins following negative media coverage, on 29th June 2016.

Note well. Patients have stopped taking statins because of negative media coverage, not because of adverse reactions to the drugs!

According to Pulse, the problem started when NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence), in 2013, put forward plans to extend the use of statins as a preventative measure for 'low-risk' patients, claiming that it would prevent thousands of heart attacks and strokes. It was conventional doctors who resisted this recommendation. And it was this disagreement, within the conventional medical establishment, that attracted press attention. Although the media response was limited, and low key, patients began to ask questions.

So is this good news? Can we expect a more reasoned debate, in which patients are (at long last) given information about the serious side effects caused by statin drugs?

It is certainly good news for the 200,000 patients if they have stopped taking the drug. They will now be avoiding the serious side effects the drug is now known to cause. But could this be part of a counter-attack by the pharmaceutical industry, mirroring what happened when patients began to mistrust, and refuse the MMR vaccine in 2003-2004?

First, the Pulse article serious downplays the risks of statin drug, instead focusing on the media reports. It was these reports that have led patients to worry about the potential side effects of the drugs. The reports had 'dented pubic confidence' and they asked for 'better balanced reporting'.

This position was taken by the original study, published in the BMJ, "Impact of Statin related media coverage on the use of Statins". Its conclusion was as follows:

          "A period of intense public discussion over the risks : benefit balance of statins, covered widely in the media, was followed by a transient rise in the proportion of people who stopped taking statins. This research highlights the potential for widely covered health stories in the lay media to impact on healthcare related behaviour."

So it is not the drugs that are being criticised, it is the reporting of the drug side effects that is the issue! The study found that the 'discontinuation rate' fell after the press reporting, but soon returned to normal. One co-author of the BMJ study was reported in Pulse as saying that the reporting "may have given disproportionate weight to a minority view about possible side effects, denting public confidence in a drug which most scientists and health professionals believe to be a safe and effective option against heart disease for the vast majority of patients."

So it is not the drugs that are a matter of concern, it is the media reporting of the drugs on which attention is being focused on.

This is exactly what happened to the MMR vaccine debate. Evidence of the harm this vaccine caused, particularly its relationship with the epidemic of autism, caused take-up rates to fall dramatically. The response was two-fold. First, buy science to prove to parents that there was no connection. Second, attack the media sufficiently to ensure that they do not report on drug side effects.

The first led to corrupt medical scientists falsifying evidence in order to prove that there was no connection between the vaccine and autism. Then, publicise widely that there is no connection between vaccine and autism.

Second, blackmail the press in order to ensure that they stop publishing any information about anything that might suggest a link between the vaccine and the disease.

In this way, patients continue taking the drugs. And the pharmaceutical companies continue to make their profits.

So can we expect a re-run of the MMR vaccine / Autism cover-up? Do we now have to wait for the pharmaceutical industry to fund research that confirms that statin drugs are, indeed, 'entirely safe'?

And then can we expect the media to climb back into their passive, obsequious acceptance of conventional medical orthodoxy? If so, the first person they will have to silence, is Dr Bill Beeby, deputy chair of the GPC clinical prescribing subcommittee, who Pulse reported as saying that the controversy over the risk and benefit "is far from resolved, with large numbers of clinical trials remaining unpublished concealing much of the negative data surrounding their use", and that "doctors who offer the benefits still lack all of the data to quantify the risks to individual patients".

Such honesty is not required within the conventional medical establishment! The medical career of Dr Andrew Wakefield was ruined because he spoke out about the MMR vaccine / Autism link. And if he is not more careful, Dr Beeby is likely to suffer the same fate!

Information that focuses on the side effects of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines should not be made available to patients, not even to doctors if at all possible. If patients are informed about the dangers of conventional medical treatment they might decline it. And according to the conventional medical establishment it is good for us, regardless of any evidence to the contrary! And they have to support the pharmaceutical companies, who live and die by patients meekly accepting treatment we are given.

Is Cholesterol harmful? Do we need Statin drugs?

Conventional drug-based medicine is supposed to be based on science. The pharmaceutical companies tell us this all the times. My last blog raised the question - how secure is this science? It did so in relation to a single, alcohol dependence drug, Nalmefene.

Now, the same question needs to be asked about the medical science that for decades has been telling us that cholesterol, especially LDL cholesterol, was harmful, and that to counter the dangers of cholesterol we should all take statins.

Now, a new paper has been published by the BMJ (the British Medical Journal). It is called "Lack of an association or an inverse association between low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol and mortality in the elderly: a systematic review." A group of international scientists reviewed 19 studies into the effect of LDL cholesterol on mortality. Contrary to what doctors have been telling us for over 40 years, they found that in most studies there was actually an inverse relationship between LDL cholesterol levels and mortality for those over 60. The authors concluded that "our study provides the rationale for a re-evaluation of guidelines recommending pharmacological reduction of LDL-C in the elderly as a component of cardiovascular disease prevention strategies."

The study has been discussed in the Telegraph, on BBC News, and in the doctors e-magazine, Pulse, and in each the study has been heavily criticised by the conventional medical establishment. Pulse provides us with a statement from the British Heart Foundation, which is typical of the reaction:

          "There is nothing in the current paper to support the author’s suggestions that the studies they reviewed cast doubt on the idea that LDL Cholesterol is a major cause of heart disease or that guidelines on LDL reduction in the elderly need re-valuating."

In contrast, the authors of the paper provide us with a forthright and contrary view.

          "Lowering cholesterol with medications for primary cardiovascular prevention in those aged over 60 is a total waste of time and resources, whereas altering your lifestyle is the single most important way to achieve a good quality of life."

So, one part of the conventional medical establishment is advising patients that to avoid heart disease we are all need to take Statin drugs, because they are very effective. Another part is saying statins are 'a total waste of time and resources'!

So who is right? Who are we to believe? And where is the science behind the assertion that cholesterol causes heart disease? And that statins prevent heart disease?

Two things are certain about this 'debate' going on with the conventional medical establishment , and neither of them are 'scientific'.

• The first is that the response to the new paper is not that it has raised important doubts that require further investigation. It is straight denial, an outright refusal to investigate further. As the British Heart Foundation has said - the study does not cast doubt on previous finding - and there is no need to re-evaluate.

• The second is that nowhere, in any of these discussions, is there any mention of the serious and harmful side effects that statin drugs are now known to cause - including dementia, diabetes, liver and kidney disease, et al (see 'The Dangers of Statin Drugs'). 

Medical science is no guarantee of the safety or the effectiveness of drugs. It is not a reliable informant about the causes of illness.

Medical science has, for too long, been the creature of the pharmaceutical companies, who have used their massive wealth to purchase the science it has wanted to sell its drugs.

• we have a drug that can reduce cholesterol? Well, let's tell patients that cholesterol causes heart disease so that we can sell the drug to huge numbers of patients!
• let's also tell patients that the drug is 'entirely safe', that everyone should be taking it, even after it has proven to cause serious illness and disease to patients who take it regularly.

This is not a 'scientific' disagreement. It is not even a 'scientific' discussion. It is a demonstration that conventional medical science has been bought and paid for by pharmaceutical money for decades. This new study suggest that what I, and many other people having been saying about cholesterol and statins for many years is true. It shows the extent to which the public has been duped into thinking that statin drugs have been beneficial to our health. But this possibility will be studiously ignored!

What it demonstrates is that when 'science' might result in a reduction of drug or vaccine sales it is routinely castigated and ignored. Only the 'science' that supports pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, and can be used in their promotion, is considered to be 'scientific'.

It is not science that underpins conventional medicine, it is drug promotion!

What this situation demonstrates is that no-one should believe anything that the conventional medical establishment tells us about our health!

Diabetes. Is it caused by pharmaceutical drugs?

Diabetes UK, via their website, have warned us that the number of people living with diabetes in Britain has soared by nearly 60% in the past decade. Extracting the statistics from NHS data, they say that more than 3.3 million people now have some form of diabetes compared with 2.1 million in 2005. They remind us that the inability to control blood sugar levels can lead to nerve damage, loss of vision, organ damage, and limbs amputations.

Barbara Young, Chief Executive of Diabetes UK. draws our attention to the cost this epidemic on the NHS budget in Britain.

     “Diabetes already costs the NHS nearly £10 billion a year, and 80 per cent of this is spent on managing avoidable complications. So there is huge potential to save money and reduce pressure on NHS hospitals and services through providing better care to prevent people with diabetes from developing devastating and costly complications?.

The BBC informs us that the NHS are aware of this issue when they quoted Dr Martin McShane, NHS England's Director for Long Term Conditions, saying:

     "These figures are a stark warning and reveal the increasing cost of diabetes. We've said it before and we'll say it again, it's time to get serious about lifestyle change."

There is a similar pattern throughout the world, particularly in Europe, the USA, Canada and Australia. Anywhere, in fact, where Big Food dominates our diet, and Big Pharma dominates our medical care.

Nor is this a new problem for the conventional medical establishment. The Independent newspaper, on 24th February 2009, told us that the problem of diabetes was getting so big, it is "threatening to overwhelm the NHS".  So it would appear that little to nothing has been done to reverse the situation for the last 6.5 years!

Whenever diabetes is discussed, the reason for the epidemic appears to be universally agreed. It is about our diet. As the BBC says, "the explanation for the soaring cases of type 2 are being placed squarely on the nation's ballooning waistline".

And certainly, it is undeniable that the food processing industry causes a large part of the diabetes epidemic, not least as a result of its long-standing love affair with the profits it makes by feeding us with sugar, and sugar substitutes. 

Yet there are other important factors giving rise to the diabetes epidemic, not the least of which are the pharmaceutical drugs used routinely by the conventional medical establishment for the treatment of other medical conditions.

Statin drugs 

Statins are being prescribed to increasing numbers of people to lower cholesterol, as well as to people who have type-2 diabetes. Yet even the USA drug regulator, the Food and Drug Administration, has admitted there is a risk of developing diabetes when taking statin drugs. Indeed, they now place warnings about the risk of diabetes on the labels of all statin drugs distributed in the USA. However, this warning is not required in Britain, and in many other countries, the reason for this lack of caution being rather uncertain, but probably having something to do with being told for decades that these drugs were 'entirely safe'!

The Daily Mail confirmed this in an article dated 5th March 2012 - over 4 years ago.

     "So while popular brands ... (of Statins)... will need to include a new warning on their labels in the US they will not have to on the same products in the UK.

So the conventional medical establishment is dishing out Stating drugs to millions of people, fully aware that they cause diabetes, and then bemoaning the fact that there is an epidemic rise in the numbers suffering from Type-2 diabetes!

• Is this link mentioned by the pharmaceutical industry?
• Is this link mentioned by Diabetes UK?
• Is this link mentioned by NHS spokesmen?
• Is this link mentioned by the BBC, and other media outlets?

Of course it is not. Patients suffer from a conspiracy of silence. We are not supposed to know that the drugs doctors give us cause diabetes. It might upset the profitability of a major industry! So it can all be blamed on the food we eat. Big Food, after all, is less powerful than Big Pharma!

Yet Statin drugs are not the only pharmaceutical culprits linked to the creation of the diabetes epidemic.

Beta Blocker and Diuretic Drugs

In 2006, the Daily mail reported that Beta Blockers drugs have been found to increase the risk of diabetes by 50%. It was quoting a study conducted at Imperial College, London, by Professor Neil Poulter. The study looked at 14,000 patients in the UK, Ireland and Scandinavia. Yet, instead of focusing on the dangers of these drugs, the study sought to compare the risk of the "old style" combination of a beta blocker and a diuretic, and to highlight that 'new' drugs were better! And we are told that "the benefits outweigh the risk", without any real or substantial corroberation about what the benefits are, and just how substantial the risks are!

This focus is typical of medical research. It has the ability to identify a problem, but not to highlight it. So Beta Blocker drugs ar a problem, but they are no longer a problem because there are 'newer' drugs that can be used instead. 

Yet Beta Blocker drugs continue to be prescribed in huge amounts to large numbers of patients.

So despite the risks, little or nothing is done to protect patients. The assumption is made that the drug is safe - until proven otherwise. So Beta Blockers continue to be prescribed to patients. At the same time diabetes continues to rise, exponentially. And we are not told about the link between the two.

Antihypertensive drugs

So what about other hypertensive drugs? WDDTY March 2007 (reporting the Lancet 2007; 369:201-7) said that "it's been suspected for nearly 50 years that antihypertensive drugs provoke diabetes because they lower a patient's glucose tolerance levels". But a 'definitive statement' has been hard to come by because (we are told) many patients with raised blood pressure are simply more likely to develop diabetes in any event. But the article states that researchers from the Rush Medical College in Chicago arrived at these conclusion after re-examining 22 clinical trials involving more than 143,000 patients who did not have diabetes when they started taking an antihypertensive drug to control their blood pressure.

A study entitled 'New-onset diabetes and antihypertensive treatment' in 2010 adds to the picture.

      "Numerous analyses have demonstrated that antihypertensive therapies promote the development of type-2-diabetes mellitus".

Again, the study suggest that using angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor-blockers (ARB) leads to less new-onset diabetes compared to beta-blockers, diuretics and placebo. Note the wording here. It does not say that ACE inhibitors and ARB drugs do not cause diabetes. It says that they cause less diabetes! How much less? We are not told. The conclusion is:

     "Antihypertensive treatment has a significant influence on the incidence of diabetes mellitus, whereas the incidence is higher for patients treated with diuretics or beta-blockers than for patients treated with calcium-channel-blockers, ACE inhibitors and ARB. 

Xyprexa

This antipsychotic drug is used in the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. It is not only known to cause diabetes, it is also known that the drug company sought to hide this from patients. In a story published in the New York Times and Yahoo News (17 December 17 2006) and Consumer Affairs (18 December 2006) evidence had been obtained by an attorney representing patients in a lawsuit suggested that Eli Lilly covered up concerns about the drug. Although the company denied this, the documents suggested that the company withheld important information about the drug's links to obesity and increased blood sugar levels for the 10 years it was being marketed. 

So this is yet another  drug implicated in causing diabetes, and this one shows the lengths that drug companies, and the conventional medical establishment, will go to prevent us knowing about the full enormity of the side effects that they cause.

So one of the results of taking these, and no doubt other pharmaceutical drugs, is that patients, in ever-increasing numbers, are contracting diabetes. Common pharmaceutical drugs are an unmentioned and unacknowledged cause of diabetes. The conventional medical establishments calls this a 'side effect' but of course it is not. Diabetes is a disease. Drugs are causing disease!

And as a result of the diabetes epidemic health resources are required to deal with it. It has been estimated that diabetes medication now accounts for 10% of the entire NHS drugs bill, amounting to nearly £1 billion! These diabetes drugs, in turn, go on to cause of side effects (that is, other diseases) for which other drugs are required. 

Yet although we (as tax payers) are required to continue paying for the drugs, and (as patients) take them, and suffer the consequences, we are not told the real consequences of doing so.

Statins. From 'wonder' drug to 'killer' drug?

Statin drugs have rapidly moved from ‘Wonder Drug’ to ‘Killer Drug’. This is something that happens all too often within the world of Big Pharma, and the drug and vaccine-ridden world of the Conventional Medical Establishment.

Statin drugs were first tested in the 1970‘s, and were found to block substances used by your body to create cholesterol, and also helped the body to re-absorb the cholesterol it created. Lovastatin (brand name Mevacor) was approved for sale in 1987. By the mid-1990‘s Big Pharma produced evidence suggesting that Statin drug’s reduced mortality in people with high cholesterol. Statins had arrived, and soon many new Statin drugs were put on the market - pravastatin, simvastatin, fluvastatin, cerivastatin, atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, with trade names such as Lipitor, Lescol, Pravachol Zocor and Crestor. And no doubt many others!

Statins replaced drugs such as Bile acid resins (Questran, Colestid), which it is now admitted had dreadful side effects, causing gastrointestinal distress, especially constipation; and Niacin, which was not well tolerated because of itching, increased liver toxicity, and increased blood glucose levels. These drugs were also known to be ineffective - so Statins were treated as a welcome new ‘miracle’ drug by the drug companies.

Now, many millions of people take Statins throughout the world. They can cost about £150 per patient per year, and the NHS bill for statins approaches nearly £1 billion annually. What is worse, the UK was the first country to make Simvastin, the most used statin drug, available for sale ‘over the counter’, that is, a Statin drug that can be bought by people without the need for a doctor’s certificate.

Why have we got into this situation? For many years, our doctors have been telling us, unashamedly and unreservedly, that Statins were so safe, and so effective in treating heart disease, that everyone should be taking them! Indeed, we were all told this as recently as 2012. These articles, using almost identical language (no doubt the language of a Big Pharma press release), all appeared on 17th May 2012, each giving us the official message from the conventional medical establishment.

• see this Daily Mail article.
• and this Daily Express article.
• and this Guardian article.
• and this Telegraph article.
• and this BBC article.

“....the NHS should impose a blanket policy of prescribing up to 20 million people statins at a potential cost of £240million a year. Currently, the only people considered at high risk, those with a one-in-five chance of having a heart attack in the next 10 years, are given the cholesterol-lowering drugs. Half of men aged 50 or over and almost a third of women qualify for statin treatment. About five million people are thought to take them. National guidelines should be amended to lower the threshold for treatment to those with a one-in-10 risk over a decade, the experts said”.

Clearly, and quite typically, our mainstream media continues to be willing to pass on to us Big Pharma, and Conventional Medical Establishment propaganda about drugs and vaccines.

• Statins are safe drugs, with only mild and acceptable ‘side-effects’ .

“Side effects of statins can include muscle aches, stomach disturbances, and altered liver function. Patients have also reported sleep and memory problems, depression and headaches.

• Statins prevents heart disease.

“The risk of a heart attack or stroke is cut by a fifth in those who have no sign of heart disease, shows research by scientists at Oxford University”.

• And Statins are so good we should all be taking them, even if are were perfectly healthy.

“The Oxford researchers says the NHS should consider giving statins to healthy people”. 

The Statins website confirms this simple message. Statins benefit everyone, we are told. Statins save thousands of lives (50,000 each year is mentioned). Treating people with Statins leads to huge savings, particularly in hospitalisation costs!

“.... the National Director for Heart Disease and Stroke said that a 'blanket approach' to give everyone above a certain age a daily dose of statins would save lives, NHS funding and doctors' time”.

The NHS appears to agree with this assessment, perhaps not too surprisingly as the NHS has become, over the decades, a monopoly, free-of-charge supplier of conventional medical drugs. This NHS Choices page is entitled “Statins may help even healthy over-50’s”, and it seems quite content to repeat this simple, positive message to its patients. However, it did at least admit that the study on which this message was based “did not include possible adverse effects” but it quickly returned to message, immediately adding that “Statins are safe drugs that have been associated with a small risk of side effects”. So that’s okay then!

This ongoing propaganda campaign about Statins has been going on for over 25 years now. They have achieved ‘super-drug status’, with claims that the drug can treat not only heart disease and stroke, but high blood pressure, diabetes, dementia, osteoporosis, arthritis, and even erectile dysfunction. 

Yet there are two truths emerging rapidly from this long-term, blanket advertising of Statin drugs within the NHS, and the mainstream media.

1. Cholesterol does not cause heart problems, and that lowering cholesterol levels has serious consequences to our health. (See for example these articles, (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), and many more.
2. The ‘side effects of Statins are serious, causing both disease and death for patients.

In my book, the Failure of Conventional Medicine, I have written about the ages of drugs, from ‘wonder drug’ to ‘banned drug’, a journey every conventional medical drug has taken, or is currently undertaking (see also here), (and here).

It is becoming increasingly clear that conventional medical claims for Statin drugs are being overtaken by an increasing awareness of their inherent dangers. These dangers can be found elsewhere (see, for example, my blog "Statin Drugs. Why are they not banned?") where I outline the evidence that these drugs are known to be causing a number of serious disease-inducing-effects. These include:

• cataracts
• heart failure
• pneumonia
• nerve damage
• muscle pain, muscle tissue breaking down
• diabetes
• prostate cancer
• liver damage
• kidney disease
• memory loss (dementia?)

How many people suffer from these ‘side effects’? A Dutch survey of 4,738 Statin users were asked about side effects and found that just over a quarter (27%) said they suffered from them. Around 40% of these sufferers experienced muscle pain and almost a third (31%) had joint pain. It also reported that 16% had digestion problems and 13% had memory loss.

Other research shows patients who had definite or probable side effects from Statin drugs tended to be dismissed by their doctors, who denied any specific Statin-linked causality, and refused to appreciate the effect on their lives. This is not only unacceptable for individual patients, but unacceptable because serious adverse reactions are thereby not reported thus allowing the Conventional Medical Establishment to continue claiming that the drugs are safe!

And according to Malcolm Kendrick, in his book, ‘The Great Cholesterol Con’ (John Blake Publishing), there has been “no large trial of women statin users who already have cardiovascular disease has been shown to increase life expectancy by one day. More importantly, the use of statins in women at lower risk has not increased life expectancy nor prevented heart attacks and stroke”.

As Kendrick says, this raises the question whether women should be prescribed statins at all? His conclusion? They should not!

In addition to these ‘side-effects’, Statin drugs are also known to be dangerous for anyone with liver disease, pregnant and breastfeeding women. Alcohol and Statins also do not mix well!

Drug interactions are also now admitted to be a problem. There are known problems with Nicotinic Acid or Niacin; Bile Acid Sequestrants, Fibrates, Samdimmune or Neoral, Fluvoxamine, Anti-fungal drugs ending with “-azole”, Mycelex (miconazole), or Sporanox (itraconazole), Antibiotics ending in "-mycin", High blood pressure medications, Cordarone (Amiodarone), HIV Protease Inhibitors, Coumadin (warfarin), Prilosec (omeprazole), Tagamet (cimetidine), Zantac, Oral contraceptives, Lanoxin (digoxin), Antacids containing magnesium or aluminum hydroxide. 

Even St. John's Wort is said to decrease the effectiveness of some statins. With all this in mind, perhaps any patient might be better just taking St. John’s Wort!

Another little-known fact about Statin drugs is that at least 3 have had to be withdrawn either before, or after they were marketed. 

• Mevastatin was never marketed because of its adverse effects of tumours, muscle deterioration, and sometimes death in laboratory dogs (Wikipedia). 
• Compactin was also withdrawn from the market because of unwanted side effects. 
• And the muscle damage caused by one Statin drug, Cerivastatin (Baycol) was sufficiently severe and widespread (it killed several hundred people) it had to be withdrawn (quietly) in 2001.

Yet the drugs that remain on the market seem to be no better! But patients are expected to believe that other Statin drugs are sufficiently safe, or well-tolerated, for everyone to take them, without any risk or harm to our health!

Now, some doctors are beginning to take Statin drugs into its ‘old age’, and so closer to death. For instance, Dr Malcolm Kendrick argues that the disadvantages of Statins now outweigh the possible benefits for the majority of people.

“I tell patients with a cholesterol level of between 5 and 7 they’re healthy. If it’s above 7, it’s probably due to a family history of high cholesterol and if any relatives have early heart disease then it’s worth taking a statin. The body needs cholesterol - 25% of it is in the brain and is vital for it to function properly. For patients who have suffered heart attack or stroke or have existing cardiovascular disease (disease of the heart and blood vessels) taking a statin can benefit them. But, the real question is by how much?

“Patients should ask doctors, “How much longer will I live if I take a statin?” The answer is, not very long. If you’re at high risk of heart disease or stroke and you take a statin for 30 years, you’re likely to live an extra nine months.

I suppose that means as long as they don’t die of kidney or liver failure - or prostate cancer - or pneumonia - or suffer from dementia before this!

Undoubtedly, patients who are taking Statin drugs need more honest information. They are unlikely to get it from the Conventional Medical Establishment, including from our own GPs, who appear to be reluctant to tell us. So we need to demand this information of them, preferably before Statins are banned, or we suffer the serious DIEs now known to result from them.

Statin Drugs. Why are they not banned?

This blog is all about 'safer medicine'. One of the most dangerous drugs sold today, and one of the most widely taken, are Statins. I first wrote about the dangers of Statin drugs back in July 2010, with a blog entitled: "Statin drugs: another 'wonder drug' ready to take a fall!"

          "Many doctors have told us that these drugs were so good in preventing heart disease we should all be taking them! They were also supposed to be entirely safe". 

And this has been the propaganda that has persuaded so many people to take them.

Of course, the propaganda was more to do with selling drugs than any benefit to our health. Statins have been one of the most profitable drugs Big Pharma has ever come up with.  And of course, what we were told by the Conventional Medical Establishment, including our GPs, has proved to be entirely wrong.

Let's be forthright about this. Statin drugs are prescribed by doctors to make us better. But Statins are actually making people sick. In October 2011 I wrote this:

          "Even drugs like Statins, which we have been told are 'entirely safe' for decades, are now known to be unsafe. This article outlines the case against Statin drugs, and suggests that heart failure, pneumonia, nerve damage - and many other diseases can be contracted by people, the increasing numbers of people, who take them believing them to be safe.
http://safe-medicine.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/failure-of-conventional-medicine-2.html

Then,  in May 2012 I wrote this:

          "The prodigious rise in the use of Statin drugs over the last few years is another example. Statins have only recently been associated with both diabetes, and prostate cancer - so are Statins one cause of the epidemic of both these diseases? The Media has spent enough time in recent years allowing ConMed spokesmen to tell us how 'safe' these drugs are, and how we should all be taking them : perhaps now they can spare a little time asking why they have been telling us this, when it is palpably untrue, and may be connected with an increase in both these diseases.
http://safe-medicine.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/health-debate-5-epidemic-rise-in.html

You might be thinking that the conventional medical establishment would not be knowingly giving us drugs that were causing disease. But they certainly do know about the dangers. In November 2010, the British Medical Journal announced that Statins cause liver damage, kidney disease, and cataracts. This followed research undertaken at Nottingham University, using data from over 2 million patients taking Statin drugs.

So why are they still on sale?

Yet worse was to come. In October 2012, the FDA (the USA drug regulator) told us that Statins caused memory loss. Yet, despite this evidence, millions of patients are still taking these drugs. As I said at the time:


          "The FDA may have caught up - but have our doctors, the NHS, as they seem intent on continuing to prescribe Statin drugs, regardless of the evidence that they are causing serious DIEs. Indeed, I am not certain that all doctors have stopped telling us that these awful drugs are 'entirely safe'.

Given the epidemic rise in dementia among older people, did this connection with 'memory loss' lead to any action? No, they remain on sale. This is what I said at the time.

          "And what exactly is 'memory loss'. At the extreme end of the spectrum, memory loss equals Dementia. Can the FDA, or Big Pharma, or the NHS, tell us that 'memory loss' ends with a little bit of forgetfulness? Can they be certain Statin drugs are not implicated in the epidemic of dementia that we have been experiencing over recent decades.

And then there are links between Statins and Diabetes, another disease we are experiencing at epidemic levels. And still this there is no action taken. It is estimated that about 7 million people are taking these drug. How many of them go on to develop diabetes. Does anyone know? Does the Conventional Medical Establishment even care?

Then, if we look at the meek acceptance of our mainstream media, it becomes clear that we are not being told about the dangers of Statin drugs. Indeed, despite all this evidence, we are still being told that we should all be taking these drugs, because of their 'benefits'. Perhaps the worst culprit is BBC News. As recently as May 2012 their Today programme on Radio 4 extolled the benefits of Statins, with no mention of the dangers. As I said in this blog, there was:

* No mention of adverse reactions.

* No mention of Disease-Inducing-Effects (DIEs).

* No mention that Statins are now known to cause Diabetes.

* No mention of serious structural muscle damage.

* No mention of serious skin diseases.

* No mention of Prostate Cancer.

* No mention of heart disease.

* No mention of Arthritis.

In other words it is typical media reporting - by media organisations who appear to have more commitment to Big Business, and Big Pharma in particular, than the health and well-being of their viewers, listeners and readers. 

As far as health are concerned, they support the ConMed monopoly that exists within the NHS to the hilt. They will tell us nothing about the dangers of our drug and vaccine-led medical system. Nor will they do anything to inform us about safer, more effective medical therapies.

The vast majority of people who are taking Statin Drugs at this moment will not realise these dangers, they will not have been told either by their GP, the NHS, or the mainstream media.

And so we continue to be asked to continue taking "those nice, safe Statin drugs", and told "we should all be taking them. This, my last blog on the subject of Statins outlines even more information now available about the dangers of these drugs.