Drive To Put More People On Statins Intensifies

| February 13, 2014

Yesterday, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published draft proposals concerning the use of statins for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Previously, NICE advised doctors to recommend treatment in those with a calculated 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease of 20 per cent or more. Now, NICE is proposing that this threshold will be reduced to 10 per cent.

I have not read the draft proposals, but I have read this piece in the Daily Mail penned by Professor Colin Baigent, a vocal promoter of statins and part of the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists (CTT) collaboration which has produced reviews that traditionally are very enthusiastic about the benefits of statins and advocate widespread use of these drugs.

You’ll notice in this piece (if you care to read it) that Professor Baigent is unequivocal in his support of statins: the benefits clearly outweigh any risks, even in those at relatively low risk of developing cardiovascular disease. The risks of statins are utterly downplayed.

His comments essentially parrot the findings of his own research. Back in 2012, the CTT published a meta-analysis (grouping together of similar studies) of statin trials [1]. Part of this meta-analysis involved assessing the impact of statin therapy in individuals deemed to be at relatively low risk of cardiovascular events such as heart attacks and strokes. One of the stand-out findings of this study is that statins led to a statistically significant reduction in risk of ‘major vascular events’. This was even true for individuals at less than 10 per cent risk of vascular events over a 5-year period. This has led to the suggestion that statins use might be widened to even people at low risk of cardiovascular problems.

Before we swallow this idea, though, it is perhaps a good idea to see just how effective statins were found to be in this meta-analysis. First of all, what is meant by ‘major vascular events’? Actually, this is a term that includes many different potential outcomes including fatal and non-fatal heart attacks and strokes and ‘revascularisation’ procedures (such as placing tubes called stents in the coronary arteries). When a lot of different outcomes are grouped together, it makes it much more likely that ‘statistically significant’ results will emerge.

When the outcomes are narrowed a little, the results are less impressive. For example, when we look at risk of death from any vascular event (a heart attack or stroke), we find that statins did not reduce risk in individuals deemed to be at low risk (

The ‘positive’ findings from this study have, as is often the case, been expressed as reductions in relative risk. The risk of vascular events overall was 21 per cent lower for each 1 mmol/l (39 mg/ml) reduction in levels of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). This is a theoretical risk reduction, based on an extrapolation of the data. In reality, though, there is not a clear association between the degree of cholesterol reduction in trials and the clinical benefit derived from this. This may be because the primary mechanisms of action of statins have little or nothing to do with cholesterol reduction.

And besides, even if statins and cholesterol reduction do lead to ‘significant’ reductions in risk of cardiovascular events, when overall risk is low, then a relative risk reduction might not amount to much in real terms.

We’re told by the authors of this meta-analysis that treating with statins prevented 11 major vascular events for every 1,000 people treated for a period of 5 years. Put another way, 91 people would need to be treated for 5 years to prevent one major vascular event. Or in other words, only about 1 per cent of people treated with statins for 5 years will benefit (and about 99 per cent won’t).

Overall, lowering LDL-C by 1 mmol/l was found to reduce the risk of death by 9 per cent over a 5-year period. Again, this might sound like a positive finding to some, but the actual reduction in risk of death was 0.2 per cent per year. What this means is that at this level of cholesterol reduction, 500 individuals would need to be treated with statins for a year for one person to have his/her life saved.

The authors of this meta-analysis give us some soothing reassurances about the fact that the benefits of statins vastly outweigh the risks of adverse events such as myopapthy (muscle pain and weakness). They quote of the excess incidence of myopathy as 0.5 cases per 1,000 people over 5 years. However, the source they quote is based on diagnosing myopathy once the marker for muscle damage (creatine kinase) is at least TEN TIMES the upper limit of normal. Many individuals will have significant pain and weakness with much lower levels of creatine kinase. Statins are also linked with adverse effects on the liver and kidneys, and increase risk of diabetes too. Overall, adverse effects of statins affect about 20 per cent of people who take them.

The numbers of people who need to be treated with statins for one to benefit are big, and many more people will have adverse effects than those who benefit. These are the facts, and it’s about time some people were straight with them.

Here's to a healthy heart

Dr John Briffa
Editor
for The Cholesterol Truth



If you enjoyed this content or found it useful and educational, please share this article with your friends and family.



Bear in mind we are not addressing anyone’s personal situation and you should rely on this for informational purposes only. Please consult with your own physician before acting on any recommendations contained herein.


Reference:

1. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaborators. The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised trials. The Lancet epub 17th May 2012

Print Friendly

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Category: The Great Cholesterol Con

Comments are closed.

Don't Forget Your Free Blood Pressure Report...

Just RSVP below for immediate access to this valuable report, with our sincere compliments.

As you'll discover in your FREE report, there are safe, natural ways to protect your heart without the use of risky, side-effect-ridden drugs.

And that's not all. When you enter your email address, you'll also receive the Daily Health e-letter. Each day in the Daily Health, you'll get:

• News on the latest cutting-edge natural health breakthroughs.
• The truth behind mainstream health headlines
• First access to new product releases
• And much, much more!

Enter your email address below to receive your FREE report, 10 Drug-Free Ways to Lower High Blood Pressure and Protect Against a Heart Attack or Stroke. We'll deliver it straight to your inbox in a matter of minutes.

10 Drug-Free Ways to Lower High Blood Pressure and Protect Against a Heart Attack or Stroke

Just RSVP below for immediate access to this valuable report, with our sincere compliments.

As you'll discover in your FREE report, there are safe, natural ways to protect your heart without the use of risky, side-effect-ridden drugs.

And that's not all. When you enter your email address, you'll also receive the Daily Health e-letter. Each day in the Daily Health, you'll get:

• News on the latest cutting-edge natural health breakthroughs.
• The truth behind mainstream health headlines
• First access to new product releases
• And much, much more!

Enter your email address below to receive your FREE report, 10 Drug-Free Ways to Lower High Blood Pressure and Protect Against a Heart Attack or Stroke. We'll deliver it straight to your inbox in a matter of minutes.