 |
 |
-see ADVERSE EFFECTS OF STATIN AS WEAPONS AGAINST BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3306?tab=responses El 21/05/2014 16:20, Juan Gérvas escribió: > -thanks Lejla > -indeed the BMJ has being a rock helping physicians to work well > -but about statins side effects now we have many "Doctor Cholesterol" > -they say/writte that "statins have no side effects" or "give statins > to all over-40" or "they should be made available for sale over the > counter and without the need for a prescription" or "statins have been > around for 25 years, so we know the long-term results", etc. > -most scientifics answer with questions around clinical trials and > theway they hide adverse events > -but no one even remember hundreds of people that have died because > rhabdomyolisis a little more than ten years ago, with cerivastatin > (having no single death during the clinical trials) > http://www.healthyskepticism.org/global/news/int/hsint2002-06 > <http://www.healthyskepticism.org/global/news/int/hsint2002-06> > -in general, the statins mortality risk from fatal rhabdomyolysis is > approximately 0.3 per 100,000 person-years > http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002914905021508 > <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002914905021508> > so we can expect in the UK (when 12 millions under statins treatment > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10632047/Statins-12-million-Brits-will-be-advised-to-take-cholesterol-lowering-drug.html > ) 36 deaths per year > -Dr Cholesterol set the agenda "statins have no side effects" and "no > debate about the lack of effectiveness of statins in primary prevention" > -behind the agenda, no doubt, is the objetive to weak BMJ position and > its editor role > -un saludo > -juan gérvas > > El 21/05/2014 15:38, Lejla Halilovic escribió: >> Great and timely article on every front, Juan: appropriate and >> informed patient treatments, journal independence, clinical data >> transparency, balanced and fair scientific debates. >> >> Patients around the world and we all stand a lot to lose if BMJ >> succumbs to these unreasonable (and might I add /unknightly/) pressures. >> >> Recently, Swedish Medical Association joined AllTrials, which is >> promising. Physicians around the globe need to understand these >> important transparency debates. >> >> BMJ's motto is: /Helping doctors make better decisions./ It seems we >> all now need to/help BMJ help doctors make better decisions. >> / >> I encourage all on this list, especially physicians, to join the >> debate and voice their opinions in form of rapid responses to BMJ's >> recent editorial <http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3306>. Read >> responses published thus far here >> <http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3306?tab=responses>. >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Lejla >> >> >> >> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Juan Gérvas <[log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >> >> Adverse effects of statin as weapons against British Medical Journal. >> SUMMARY >> It appears that the adverse effects of statins are being used as >> a smokescreen to avoid the debate over its lack of effect in >> primary prevention. The ultimate intention is likely to change >> the line of independence of the British Medical Journal, to >> change its editor and to promote industrial interests. >> (attached, with references and in >> http://www.nogracias.eu/2014/05/21/adverse-effects-statin-weapons-british-medical-journal/ >> >> >> >> --- >> Este mensaje no contiene virus ni malware porque la protección de >> avast! Antivirus está activa. >> http://www.avast.com >> >> > --- Este mensaje no contiene virus ni malware porque la protección de avast! Antivirus está activa. http://www.avast.com