Discussion about this post

User's avatar
The Real Dr. Steven Horvitz's avatar

These guidelines are not free from bias. Who writes them? Where do they get their data and statistics?

Who came up with the 25% risk reduction?

What about the study that shows on a population level people who take statins for 5 years live 3-4 DAYS longer than those who don’t?

Statins have become more of a belief system than something that can be questioned.

I view these population based guidelines for individuals the same way I view weather forecasts. A 25% chance of rain means in your area there is a chance of rain over 25% of that area, but they never know which…..

Isn’t that what we are doing with population based studies when trying to extrapolate to the individual?

Expand full comment
Ernest N. Curtis's avatar

My advice to patients over many years of practice was to ignore things like risk calculators. They are based on inaccurate and mostly meaningless data such as cholesterol levels. Preventive medicine is largely a wishful fantasy. The doctor's function is to diagnose and treat disease. The figures on prevention are pretty pathetic. If you think that changing diet or exercise patterns will help you stave off disease, then go for it. But don't take medication that may alter your normal physiology. I would also spend time explaining how the figures quoted for risk reduction are very misleading. Typically, a 25% relative risk reduction means something like reducing absolute risk from 2% to 1.5%. Pointing this out usually reduces the enthusiasm for the "preventive" treatment.

Expand full comment
55 more comments...

No posts