Sat, Sep-10-16, 03:13
|
 |
|
|
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
|
|
Even bigger firestorm over this review in The Lancet. It is a review of the existing studies, none new, many of those were industry sponsored and after years of requests, the raw data in those industry studies has still not been released. One comment "The Trialists are marking their own homework"
Quote:
|
Media reports the UK during the last 24 hours have suggested that the benefits of statins have been underestimated and the harms have been exaggerated. These reports are based on research done by the clinical trials service unit at Oxford University. The first thing to note is that although this research group is part of Oxford University, it is funded by the pharmaceutical industry. The group is basically a research facility for the drugs companies.
|
Quote:
|
In fact, the CTSU and Prof. Collins have for some time now been making claims about statins that no one else can substantiate because they refuse to let anyone have access to their data. The worrying thing is that the claims that the CTSU and Prof. Collins make do not in any way at all fit with everything else we know about statins. For example, the published article in the Lancet and the press release that accompanied it states that if 10,000 people took a statin for 5 years in primary prevention, 500 major vascular events would be prevented (5% absolute risk reduction). Well, that is quite different from what the actual clinical trial data tells us. (Continues in Statin Nation article)
|
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-37306736
http://www.statinnation.net/blog/20...rated-yet-again
http://www.christopherjamesclark.co...lts-on-statins/
JAMA and BMJ editors also question the Lancet review: http://cardiobrief.org/2016/09/08/s...-with-evidence/ |