Cholesterol lowering is fraud says Cardiologist (on GB news)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDI5FIPI2-M

let hope more of this gets called out.

You know what they should do? Take these guys against it and debate the findings, sentence by sentence, with the company that claims this drug does good. You'd probably get two wildly different interpretations of the raw data. You'll only know for sure if it is a good drug is over time and the effect on the people. People should show this video to their doctors and get their opinion. But if their doctors still prescribe this new drug then people will obey their doctor. Nothing will change unless it is proved in the public eye to be a fraud. These videos are only "he says/they say" videos that just puts forth ideas to make you think. Too bad it stops there.

Btw, statin drugs have been shown to reduce certain cancers like colorectal cancer. That's a plus.

Wrote this 10 years ago:

http://web.archive.org/web/20111113064055/http://healthyfixx.com/15/the-truth-about-statin-drugs-may-cause-heart-attacks

"Btw, statin drugs have been shown to reduce certain cancers like colorectal cancer. That's a plus."

Where is the evidence for this claim?

One study from england...
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201013124108.htm

This one mentions different kinds of cancer...
https://www.cancercenter.com/community/blog/2021/03/statins-and-cancer

Here's one that says it may prevent breast cancer in women....
https://breast-cancer-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13058-018-1066-z

Yet Pubmed claims otherwise....
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16391219/


But wouldn't a higher number of positive studies outweigh a few negative studies?

shaftless wrote:One study from england...
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201013124108.htm

This one mentions different kinds of cancer...
https://www.cancercenter.com/community/blog/2021/03/statins-and-cancer

Here's one that says it may prevent breast cancer in women....
https://breast-cancer-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13058-018-1066-z

Yet Pubmed claims otherwise....
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16391219/


But wouldn't a higher number of positive studies outweigh a few negative studies?

This type of research is exactly why news agencies, and almost everyone gets "science" wrong.

Notice, they use words such as may, could so frequently. These are epidemiological studies, meaning, they are
never in proper science to be used to determine causation. So, this sort of news reporting has always been
real science rarely gets sees the light of day, because epidemiological is only performed to establish a hypothesis, not
to prove causation. Only well controlled mechanistic studies followed by studies using placebos on real subjects are required.

Profit over Population Health - at the European Parliament

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcnd3usdNxo

Not news to us here on this forum, ... how data is misrepresented and pharma wanting to role out statins to everybody.
Same British cardiologist, from first video, good to see this called out.