Re: another one for the Aussie posters



On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:11:11 -0700 (PDT), Peter C
<peterc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 21 Oct, 23:07, Nicky <ukc802466...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
after

Mmmm, for males aged 65+ who have already had a heart attack.

< smokescreen post deleted>

The statement you made above, that statins have only been shown to
benefit men over 65 who have already had a heart attack, is complete
tosh.
And the CARDS study is one of the papers that disproves what you are
saying, the average age was 62, a third of the subjects were women,
none had had heart attacks and the benefits of the statin held good
regardless of age and gender.

Where's the study detail, Peter - what was their A1cs to start with?
The benefit, if any, of statins is that they have an anti-inflammatory
effect - so where did these study people start from? And why was the
Lancet editorial that accompanied it against universal prescription,
if your statement is true? Without the study, and the editorial, you
have no argument.

Nicky.
T2 dx 05/04 + underactive thyroid
D&E, 150ug thyroxine
Last A1c 5.2% BMI 26
.