Contrary to popular belief, cholesterol is a healthful substance. Studies have shown that those with higher cholesterol live longer than those with low. Cholesterol is a raw material for many of your hormones, for healthful substances such as Vitamin D, and for the cell walls of every cell in your body. What is harmful is oxidized cholesterol, which can be a factor in clogging blood vessels, and this can be prevented by high quality nutrition.
Statins, such as Lipitor, Crestor, Mevacor, Pravachol and Zocor, are a class of drugs which are very effective in lowering your serum cholesterol. The manufacturers admit to the following minor side effects: headache, joint pain, muscle pain, musculoskeletal pain, muscle spasms, throat & neck pain, weakness, dizziness, nausea, abdominal pain, upset stomach, insomnia, and urinary tract infection. Most people would be willing to put up with these discomforts if there were a clear benefit. But, they also admit to serious and life-threatening conditions such as muscle weakness, liver dysfunction, and rhabdomyolysis (rapid breakdown of muscle tissue) with acute kidney failure. Others have reported increased risks of other problems such as kidney failure, cataracts, cancer, loss of mental accuity, peripheral neuropathy, diabetes, and who knows what else.
One of the main side effects is muscle weakness, and since your heart is a muscle, statins will weaken it, eventually leading to cardiomyopathy (heart muscle weakness), and to congestive heart failure. The older you are, in general the quicker this happens. So, your doctor prescribes statins for you, and months later you end up with congestive heart failure. Not a good tradeoff if you ask me.
Statins lower cholesterol by inhibiting an enzyme system in your liver which produces cholesterol. This same enzyme system produces Coenzyme Q10, a critically necessary substance for all your cells. In fact it is also called ubiquinone (ubiquitous to all your cells), and is the “spark plug” for your cells. Obviously lack of such an essential substance is going to cause muscle weakness and other problems. You can counteract some of the bad effects of statins by supplementing with Coenzyme Q10, but that most likely is not as good as not taking statins at all.
It seems preposterous that such wildly best-selling drugs could be doing you such harm. However, you have to look at the hard evidence and let nothing else deceive you. So, what do the manufacturers themselves say about their own drugs? Here is an image captured from a recent Crestor TV Ad, which you had to be very alert to see and read fast “CRESTOR has not been shown to prevent heart disease or heart attacks”:
Noting carefully what they said in the TV ad, the only explicit claim they made was to reduce cholesterol. So in view of the deadly (over time) side effects, what rational person would take these drugs? And, here is a magazine ad stating the same thing:
What about Lipitor which for many years has been the best-selling drug in the world, at over $10 billion sales per year? In about 2004 www.lipitor.com had the following disclaimer at the bottom of every page: “Lipitor has not been shown to prevent heart disease or heart attacks.”
This was in a graphic so that the search engines would not find it, and was in low-contrast small print so that as few people as possible would notice. And, they said the same thing in their magazine ads:
Below is a very recent Lipitor TV ad, showing their disclaimer in big letters. First off, does “FDA approved” mean the same thing as “clinically proven”? Undoubtedly not.
And, does “reducing the risk of heart attack and stroke” actually mean “reducing the incidence of heart attack and stroke”? Probably not.
And at the bottom of the ad, they mention that “low good cholesterol” is a risk factor for heart disease. Does Lipitor reduce good cholesterol along with the bad? If so, in this way at least, Lipitor increases the risk. (I am looking for the answer to this last question.)
On www.lipitor.com there is also a statement very similar to the above, but certainly these disclaimers sound much better than “Lipitor has not been shown to prevent heart disease or heart attacks.” However on analysis, it is exactly the same statement. On their website, they have in addition carefully limited the conditions under which they claim benefit, and have added exercise as a factor. If you take three medicines at the same time, without additional information it is impossible to know which medicine caused which reaction. Mathematically, this is called one equation with three unknowns, which cannot be solved by itself: diet + exercise + Lipitor = benefit. Therefore in this case, diet and exercise could be so beneficial that they overcome any harm of Lipitor, giving a net benefit. In other words, they claim that “diet plus exercise plus Lipitor” has benefit, and that “diet plus Lipitor” has benefit, but they make no claim that “Lipitor alone has benefit”, so clearly it does not or else they would have said so. Or in other words, you’d be better off with just correct diet and exercise. So it is all just a clever way of saying exactly the same thing as before: “Lipitor has not been shown to prevent heart disease or heart attacks.”
So, there are no claimed benefits to your heart, and they admit to serious and life-threatening side-effects. Therefore, the only possible conclusion is that there is likely a net harm to your health, possibly very serious.
Another type of statement they like to use in their ads, websites and published literature are of the form: “Drug-X can (provide certain benefits)”, or “Drug-X may help (certain conditions), or “Drug-X is indicated for (certain conditions)”, or “High cholesterol may (cause certain conditions). These kind of statements say nothing of the probability of overall benefit or harm. I read of a case where a person was actually partially struck by lightning and her arthritis was actually instantly cured and she was otherwise not harmed. So saying that “lightning can cure arthritis” is a true, legally defensible statement because it actually happened. But I believe that everyone would agree that the probability of benefit from being struck by lightning is extremely small. So making these kinds of statements without stating the probabilities and without saying it is “clinically proven”, is not a valid basis for claiming any demonstrable net benefit.
Knowing all that, and given the deadly side effects (usually over time), who in their right mind would knowingly take this kind of medicine. It can only be because almost everyone is deceived, even including your doctor. That a deception so complete and pervasive could be carried out in plain sight is truly astounding, and is clearly a Harbinger of the Apocalypse. “and there shall be … pestilences …” (Jesus speaking of the end times) Luke 21:11a
Since I am not a doctor, none of this can be considered medical advice. It is your health that is at stake, so you must do your own research and come to your own conclusions and make your own decisions, and then you will reap the benefit or harm of your decision. Don’t believe me, but get the facts for yourself, and then a wise decision would be based on hard evidence and nothing else.
After analyzing their careful disclaimers, it is clear that upper management is aware of the deception, and surely high-powered lawyers have spent many hours making sure that nothing can be legally challenged. In fact, they are so extremely dilligent to protect themselves legally, that they post their carefully crafted disclaimers on virtually every page of their websites. They may not be legally and technically committing fraud, but it appears to me that ethically they are clearly comitting great fraud by knowingly and seriously harming the health of countless persons, and sending many to early graves. Obviously, the greatest motivator of this would be the large amount of revenue brought in by sale of the drugs themselves. But also, revenue from treating the harmful effects of the drugs could be even more than from the sale of the drugs themselves.
So if statins are not the answer, then what is? Genuinely good nutrition would be an almost complete answer, which you can find elsewhere on this site, or in great detail at www.mercola.com and www.naturalnews.com, and elsewhere on the web. I am not against science based medicine, but trusting in medicine is in a certain sense trusting in man, and trusting in the nutrition that God gave us is a form of trusting in God. Trusting in God in this way is likely to offer you the best health possible.
You will find on the web widely contradicting opinions, many scams and the like, so you must study enough to be able to discern between truth and fiction. Once you do, you will find a great wealth of health information promulgated by many very honest, sincere and helpful people. Just because someone is selling something is not sufficient reason to discard what they say (though it may be reason to be a little more careful) for the Bible says: “… The laborer is worthy of his hire.” 1 Timothy 5:18b. And if you are skeptical just because someone is making money, then you need to be very skeptical of your doctor and the medical system because odds are they are making way more money than just about anyone you know.