Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Biomaven who wrote (15092)	1/4/2005 3:32:19 PM
From: Stephen O	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

But women are not taking the HRT anymore because of the heart risks. Statins do nothing for women in improving overall mortality. Even for men statins only provide a 1% improvment in the chance of not getting a heart attack if you have never had a heart attack before. I don't know how they got the statin drugs through the FDA for prophylactic use, it really is a big con. Some people get Peripheral Neuropathy from statins and then Pfizer makes more money selling them Neurontin. Listen to this radio program Radio interview cknw.com Thursday 30th Dec at 5pm. Starts at about 5.35pm so you can scroll about halfway along when Windows Media starts. The Dr being interviewed in this radio interview is Dr Bob Rangno who is part of the Therapeutics Initiative group at the University of British Columbia. CKNW is the largest radio station in British Columbia. Hear what he has to say about the drug industry, its marketing of drugs, particularly Lipitor

To: Biomaven who wrote (15092)	1/4/2005 4:23:34 PM
From: Sam Citron	Respond to of 52153

Peter, It could be that Abramson is not being specific enough in focusing on statin intervention, but I think he is trying to undermine the "hype" that lowering LDL cholesterol is the single most effective preventative health strategy. He says that the full report of the NCEP "reveals a picture strikingly different from what is presented in the executive summary. Rather than presenting a balanced interpretation of the scientific findings, the report seems intent on building a case for the greater use of statins, preferentially presenting data that support greater statin use and even misrepresenting findings reported in the original articles." (p. 131) Links here: nhlbi.nih.gov Abramson explains the "essential" role that cholesterol plays in the body's biological functioning: nerve cell transmission, cognitive functioning, building block of stress hormones, sugar-regulating hormones, and sex hormones. (pp. 133-134) He implies that exercise and physical activity are much more cost-effective than statins. (p. 134) He points to bias in the guidelines: "Five of the 14 experts who participated in writing the guidelines , including the chair of the panel, disclosed financial relationships with the manufacturers of statin drugs. Four of these five, including the chair of the panel, had relationships with all three manufacturers of the best-selling statins." (p. 135) Not trying to be argumentative here. Just trying to get at the truth. Sam