Statins, which are used in treating heart disease, are among the most widely prescribed medications in the U.S. Diabetes is associated with a very high risk of heart disease. So the thinking has been that a pre-emptive statin, before heart symptoms appear, would be beneficial for those patients. But statins accelerate the progression of diabetes. A new study tries to determine their downsides.
At least 10% of the U.S. population is currently taking a statin to help lower cholesterol. But can statins help prevent dementia? More importantly, can these same statins accelerate dementia? And how can we explain how statins are responsible for such dramatically different responses? Let's take a look.
The Lancet reports on a polypill containing aspirin, blood pressure medicine and a statin. For a large at-risk population, it reduced major cardiovascular events by 20 to 33% ... and for about $1.25 a month.
Those with elevated cholesterol frequently have identical risk factors for developing Type 2 diabetes. Statins are known to increase the incidence of diabetes. But is this a result of confounding or a separate concern? A new study tries to untie this Gordian knot of confounders.
Let's consider statins, a medication used by millions of Americans. Before we push to get more patients treated, perhaps we should get the ones already being treated to take their medications properly (if at all).
In the 60-and-older category, 50 percent of men and 38 percent of women are on cholesterol-lowering drugs. Is that really necessary?
Should we all be taking the cholesterol-lowering drugs known as statins? Even if one has never had a heart attack or stroke, should they be on a statin for so-called primary prevention? The USPSTF has reviewed the data and answers with a qualified "yes."
While it's true that statins are effective in preventing a recurrence of cardiovascular events (e.g. heart attack or stroke), the evidence that they are useful for primary prevention in older people isn't robust. Should the prescription of these drugs be extended to our expanding geriatric population, or is this an example of over-medicalization?
A recent meta-analysis published in BMJ Open journal suggests that LDL, which is commonly known as 'bad' cholesterol, does not increase the rate of death from heart disease. But before dumping your statins, it's important to review key flaws in the data.
A recent study says negative news coverage of statin drugs makes some patients discontinue their use, subsequently producing more heart attacks (and death) as a result. But, one of the authors was paid by the drug maker as a consultant. Does this automatically nullify the study? Or, is there something else going on?
A new report highlights the number of Americans who are candidates for reducing their risk of heart and vascular disease because they have elevated LDL levels. It also reveals how many of them are actually taking lipid-lowering drugs, such as statins. And as it turns out, it's not enough.
Two new studies, which deal with the extra information a calcium scan can contribute to risk calculation for predicting coronary heart disease events over a 10-year course, found that coronary artery calcium scores of very low or zero reduced the likelihood of CHD events by about half. This can eliminate the need for statins.