flintnational
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
LOL.
One of the things it was compared to was... intensive statin treatment.
Because use of statins in that population is absolutely unvontroversial.
I have not indicated the high risk group should avoid statins. In fact, the data strongly supports their use in this population. I am more concerned about the lack of nuance for other groups and the trend to expand statins into otherwise healthy populations. Regarding stents, I am well aware the study indicates statins/medication provide a better benefit. You were the one that mentioned a stent procedure would be used. I simply pointed out the current data does not support that position for most.
You and I are in agreement that in higher risk populations the study data supports that the benefits of statins outweigh the risks. If you have compelling data for the primary prevention group, I would be interested. I think many of us would like to see the NNT and the net life extension (total mortality) for the primary group . The studies tend to only include soft end points not total mortality. Many of us in the primary group are aware of the side effects but are unclear about any potential benefits and their magnitude. And in the lower risk population, we also wonder about the unknown. For my situation, in the primary group, I am about 40/60 for/against statins. I constantly reevaluate their use.
You and I got off on the wrong foot not because I am against statins, I am not. But, I was opposed to your apparent attempts to not discuss the issue with data and simply shut down debate.
Last edited: