 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / General / January 2005Nissen craps his drawers
Listener's going to have to replace that finely honed gyroscope of his. Zee http://www.forbes.com/2005/01/05/cx_mh_0105crp.html Now lemme see if I get this one: "NEW YORK - -------snip blah blah blah--------- "It's really a big deal," says the Cleveland Clinic's Steven Nissen, the lead author of one of the papers. "It really does turn upside down the notion of how we approach treating these patients. For 17 years, we've focused on treating the elevated cholesterol. It's really now clear that statins do a lot more than just lower cholesterol." Translation: "Golly gee. We were wrong all along. Ooops." Zee zwalanga@yahoo.com (Zee) wrote in part: >Listener's going to have to replace that finely honed gyroscope of his. Zee > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >"Golly gee. We were wrong all along. Ooops." Discovering additional benefits--or confrming them--isn't the same as being "wrong all along." -- Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA jchinnis@alum.mit.edu > zwalanga@yahoo.com (Zee) wrote in part: > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > -- > Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA jchinnis@alum.mit.edu When it comes to disparaging statins (and me, for that matter) it is the same. She's a blathering idiot. What else to make of it? I've got to get back to my gyroscope....if you need me I'll be in my la-BOR-a-tory. :-) L. > > zwalanga@yahoo.com (Zee) wrote in part: > > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >> > >>"Golly gee. We were wrong all along. Ooops." > > Discovering additional benefits--or confrming them--isn't the same as > > being "wrong all along." > > -- > > Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA jchinnis@alum.mit.edu > When it comes to disparaging statins (and me, for that matter) it is the > same. She's a blathering idiot. What else to make of it? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > L. The lower the better Nissen and his cohorts told us. This was the mantra for 17 years. Other voices not backed by pharmas millions claiming there was more to this were derided. Ridiculed. Dismissed as kooks. Uffe Ravnskov and his work were not even worthy of your consideration. Zee I believe what this means is that statins not ONLY reduce cholesterol levels...but also are involved in decreasing inflammation... this is a good thing...years ago when I attended a lecture on lipids and statins...I came home with a new word "pleotrophic"...which I gathered meant "additional or additive"..ie..in this case...the use of statins do TWO important things... but then..Zee is more comfortable waltzing around with a lipid level of 500..and telling my orthopod that casting a shot tendon is NOT the proper thing to do.. am I the only one who wonders what Zee would do or say if she truly was intelligent?? didn't think so...easier for her to pick and choose what to parrot..then leave or ...or misintrepet the entire meaning...only the part that she thinks supports her views... sad that > > > zwalanga@yahoo.com (Zee) wrote in part: > > > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > Uffe Ravnskov and his work were not even worthy of your consideration. > Zee > I believe what this means is that statins not ONLY reduce cholesterol > levels...but also are involved in decreasing inflammation... Exactly what Ravnskov and Kendrick have been saying. And exactly what I alluded to. Zee > this is a good thing...years ago when I attended a lecture on lipids and > statins...I came home with a new word "pleotrophic"...which I gathered meant [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > > Uffe Ravnskov and his work were not even worthy of your consideration. > > Zee > > I believe what this means is that statins not ONLY reduce cholesterol > > levels...but also are involved in decreasing inflammation... [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] > consideration. > > > Zee no...what you said was ...."oops got it wrong" ..it was an added benefit..not a WRONG..... where again did you get all your overwhelming incorrect information regarding pathophysiology?? > > I believe what this means is that statins not ONLY reduce cholesterol > > levels...but also are involved in decreasing inflammation... [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] > consideration. > > > Zee Wrong was that they said for 17 years this was not very important and now suddenly it is. Wrong is that they do not have any good evidence for this change yet move to market. Wrong is that it appears they haven't learned anything from the so painfully recent Vioxx and NSAID debacle in which thousands died from their criminal business practises. And wrong is that for them it is still: business as usual, while they clamour to look after stockholders share, not healthcare. Zee > no...what you said was ...."oops got it wrong" > ..it was an added benefit..not a WRONG..... > > where again did you get all your overwhelming incorrect information > regarding pathophysiology?? > > > I believe what this means is that statins not ONLY reduce cholesterol > > > levels...but also are involved in decreasing inflammation... [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] > > consideration. > > > > Zee this is called progress...advancement of knowledge...not being WRONG why in 1950 the world thought polio was a minor illness... then millions either died or ended up in iron lungs.. did that make it wrong?? or was it an extension of knowledge?? I often wonder how and where you get all these notions that conventional medicine is "out to get the public"..that things like this are invented to expand the market.. sad..pathetic.. > > for this change yet move to market. Wrong is that it appears they > haven't learned anything from the so painfully recent Vioxx and NSAID [quoted text clipped - 118 lines] > > > consideration. > > > > > Zee .... > I often wonder how and where you get all these notions that > conventional medicine is "out to get the public"..that things like > this are invented to expand the market.. Usually, from sources that believe conventional medicine is out to get the public. .... these are NOT sources....they are the alties...who are about as loony as you > .... > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > .... There is no new knowledge. There is only the beginnings of a public relations campaign. Please. Do some research before you log on. Zee > this is called progress...advancement of knowledge...not being WRONG > [quoted text clipped - 131 lines] > > > > consideration. > > > > > > Zee >zwalanga@yahoo.com (Zee) wrote in part: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >Discovering additional benefits--or confrming them--isn't the same as being >"wrong all along." Yeah, but when you're Zee, you never pass by an opportunity to slam doctors. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) wright@clam.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote in part: >Yeah, but when you're Zee, you never pass by an opportunity to slam >doctors. Often, she's right. -- Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA jchinnis@alum.mit.edu > wright@clam.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote in part: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > -- > Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA jchinnis@alum.mit.edu Often, she's right. -- Often, she's right. -- Often, she's right. -- Often, she's right. -- Often, she's right. -- Often, she's right. Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA jchin...@alum.mit.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ {This was going to disappear in 5 days....}. Zee > >zwalanga@yahoo.com (Zee) wrote in part: > > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants > were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) This is so amusing. In another newgroup I post to I am continually accused of defending doctors. I am also honoured to be one of the few in my over 300 person health policy advocacy listserve (veted membership) who isn't a doctor, an academic physician or a health policy researcher. And by the way; Nissen isn't a doctor. Zee >> >zwalanga@yahoo.com (Zee) wrote in part: >> > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >membership) who isn't a doctor, an academic physician or a health >policy researcher. Well, that may be. However, on sci.med, you seem to be unrelentingly negative, and I cannot recall seeing anything posted by you lately that wasn't an article about a medical failure of some sort. I certainly cannot imagine you being accused of defending doctors. >And by the way; Nissen isn't a doctor. I was being generic about matters medical. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT) The stories I post are about doctors? I thought they were about watchdogs exposing unethical pharmaceutical research (Yahoo!) challenges to regulatory agencies to honour their mandate to public safety (Yowza!) toxic drugs being taken off the market and lives being saved (Yippee!) reminding government why we elected them (Whoopee!) and consumer concerns about healthcare and delivery of (Ululate!). All very postive articles because the point of them all is what * is * and *is not* working and what can, and is, being done to make things better. So maybe...negative is in the eye of the beholder? Zee |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.