A recent study has ‘shown’ that taking statins will lower the risk of liver cancer by 42%. This study is a meta-analysis, which means they combine the results from a number of other studies, and effectively take an average.
- Reduced levels of fat soluble vitamins (such as vitamin E)
- Reduced level of sterol derived vitamins (such as vitamin D)
- Reduced HDL (also known as good cholesterol)
- Cell membrane fluidity is difficult to regulate
- Reduced levels of Co-enzyme Q10 (Co q10)
- Associated with increased risk of diabetes
- Affect neurological function such as memory and can lead to dementia
- Sore muscles and joints
- Imbalance in several hormones including sex hormones and cortisol
So no imagine I do a meta-analysis of 30 studies which I will pick myself. If I was 100% unbias, they would be random, but if I had an interest in the statin business I would be very tempted to pick 30 studies which showed statins are safe. I now do a meta-analysis of these studies, and unsurprisingly, it shows statins are safe! This is a classic example of bad science.
I am just speculating about the possibilities of the manipulation of results, I have no evidence to show they have been, but if they have been, it is not the first time. It is known that statins are bad for your health. Yes, they do lower LDL, but they increase the risk of so many more ailments which are not easily fixed. Statins should not be used as a quick fix, and unhealthy levels of cholesterol are easily fixed with diet and exercise. The negative effects of statins are not easily fixed. This study certainly is a misguided advert for statins, and does not at all mention any of the negative health effects of statins. They should not be taken lightly.
Images courtesy of Scott Cresswell.