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.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (19011)	8/28/2010 12:49:15 PM
From: skinowski	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

That should help the PFE stock price... g/ng. It was noted long ago that Pravachol doesn't do very much. Many people will decide to change to Lipitor, and they should. I think I mentioned this study in the past on this thread - still can't find the study itself: Statins increase life expectancy, study finds (WJLA-TV) UPDATED 2006-10-09 Statins like Crestor, Zocor, and Lipitor can increase the life expectancy of elderly patients, a new study has found. University of Arkansas researchers tracked 1.5 million patients and found that elderly statin users lived an average of two years longer than non-statin users. The researchers were surprised by this statistic because elderly patients are usually only prescribed statins if they already have health conditions that increase their risk of death. healthcentral.com

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (19011)	8/28/2010 6:40:32 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

""Have at it--statement of premise and supporting scientific data, if you please..."" You neglected to state the premise. The reason I specifically suggested that you do so was that it isn't clear from your original statement just what your premise is. Your original statement: "my primary... has adjusted my statin dose to reduce my LDL with a target of 70...my numbers are very close to that.... At that dose, plaque buildup is actually supposed to reverse..." The premise, as originally written, is not clear. Your statement, parsed, is that your dosage ("at that dose") is the dosage that will reverse plaque (possible premise1). I don't think you meant that. It's awkward to talk about a dosage reversing plaque. It makes more sense to talk about an LDL level reversing plaque and 70 is a common target mentioned in that context. So, given the context, I expect that you intended as your premise that getting LDL down to the 70 level is what's supposed to reverse atherosclerosis (possible premise 2). Given the lack of clarity, I left it open to give you the opportunity to pick whichever premise you had in mind. Or even to fiddle with the premise a bit if you needed some wiggle room to "revise and extend" your statement, as they say in Congress. But you didn't take the opportunity. If you don't state your premise, then how would you or anyone else know that you had found scientific data to support it? unless, of course, obfuscation is your strategy... Nonetheless, trudging ahead, I will evaluate the data you offered against each of your two possible premises. I was already familiar with the study you offered and knew when I selected that statement that REVERSAL wouldn't satisfy the premise. First of all, there's nothing in there about a LDL level of 70. Everyone in the study had LDL of 125-210 so that study is not applicable to possible premise 2. As for possible premise 1, if you were taking atorvastatin at a dosage of 80 mg, I'd give you a pass on a squeaker even though the reversal result wasn't statistically significant and the study is usually characterized as stabilizing but not regressing plaque. But you've told us what you're taking and that ain't it. So, bzzzz! No match. Do you want to try again? (Hint--I'm all but certain it would be futile.)

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (19011)	4/21/2012 5:43:19 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

Reading this reminded me of your efforts to get your LDL down so low. FYI. Higher cholesterol levels lead to a longer life This study was published in the Journal of Gerontology 1993 May;48(3):M103-7 Study title and authors: Morbidity and mortality in rural community-dwelling elderly with low total serum cholesterol. Ives DG, Bonino P, Traven ND, Kuller LH. Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh. This study can be accessed at: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov The objective of this two year study was to examine the association of cholesterol levels with death rates in the elderly. The study included 3,874 participants aged 65 to 79. Those with cholesterol levels of less than 150 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/l) were compared with those with cholesterol levels between 200-240 mg/dL (5.1-6.2 mmol/l). After two years the study found that 12.8% of those with low cholesterol had died, whereas only 7.3% of those with the higher cholesterol had died. The results of this study indicate that higher cholesterol levels lead to a longer life. Links to other studies: Low cholesterol associated with poor health and increased stroke and heart disease Declining cholesterol rates in people over 65 are associated with a 630% increase in death rates Older men with lower cholesterol have a 54% higher death rate healthydietsandscience.blogspot.com