Replies

“The only thing ‘impressive’ about statins is the increase in heart attack that results from their use.”

Nice “sound bite”, but please address the results of the Jupiter Study that I mentioned. The results are exactly opposite to your statement. In short, the risk of cardiovascular events, in the selected group, is significantly reduced with the use of Rosuvastatin, by 47%. Of course, I am guessing you knew this. Why your comment is exactly opposite to the study results on this particular drug is unknown to me, but the readers of this thread are always welcome to Google +”jupiter study” +”rosuvastatin”.

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/NEJMoa0807646

To summarize the article for those that are Google adverse, The New England Journal of Medicine discussed the results of the study in November of 2008. I warn you that the data is going to make most folks eyes cross unless they’re statisticians.

“We verified that the assumption of proportional hazards was not violated during the follow-up period, and we found a robust benefit of rosuvastatin in analyses restricted to events occurring more than 2 years after randomization. These findings, as well as the demonstration that rates of hospitalization and arterial revascularization were reduced by 47% within a 2-year period, suggest that the strategy tested could be cost-effective.”

The article concluded that,

“In conclusion, in this randomized trial of apparently healthy men and women who did not have hyperlipidemia but did have elevated levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, the rates of a first major cardiovascular event and death from any cause were significantly reduced among the participants who received rosuvastatin as compared with those who received placebo.”

This is just one study, but it is a relatively large and significant study. While Crestor/Rosuvastatin is no panacea, a nearly 50% reduction in cardiovascular risk is nothing to sneeze at. If one matches the parameters of the group that was studied, I would consider it an acceptable risk.

It is rather interesting that there was a reported increase in diabetes for Rosuvastatin users. I’m not terribly sure how to evaluate this bit of information, or why it was even considered “significant” by the researchers. By my reckoning, the risk of developing diabetes, for those studied, only increased from ~2% for the placebo group, to ~3% for the statin users. With a ~50% reduction in cardiovascular events, I would be sorely tempted to accept the slight increase of developing diabetes (but that’s just me).

This is just one study though. There are obviously others, and Google is our friend if we choose to use it. This bit of research is a bit more than slightly interesting to me now. While Jupiter utilized a 20 mg dosage, there are others where 40 mg./day was used. What was interesting, is that reductions in plaque load were reported. That dosage is going to make you sore for sure, but for many it is an acceptable discomfort considering the ravages of cardiovascular disease. Personally, I would consider that dosage level to be something of a stopgap while lifestyle changes bore fruit. I doubt most docs are going to keep their patients on that dosage level on a perpetual basis.

After 3-4 years, those taking statins tend to maintain their cardiovascular risk, while those in placebo groups tend to begin to increase their risk of cardiovascular disease on what appears to be an exponential basis. What is rather nice about statin research, is that enough of it has been done to show real benefits from its use. While I realize that herbal solutions have been with us for a really long time, there are not a lot of scientific studies that back up the claims of their adherents (good old aspirin being a noted exception). I would really welcome some solid scientific studies on various herbal remedies, but sadly I see very few of them if they even exist. It takes money, but without the numbers to prove it, it is difficult for some patients (myself included) to consider them as a viable solution to ominous problems.