Statins cut the Risk of Cancer - High Cholesterol Message Board

babydog · 05-15-2005, 07:48 AM

I was watching TV this morning and heard about a new research study that is showing that taking statins cuts the risk of colon and breast cancer.

I do not know who funded the research, sorry. But curious as to your thoughts on this research.

I don't have many friends. But one of my few close friends was diagnosed with breast cancer in november. It was a miracle that they caught it because it was so small on the mamogram. Her breast was removed and the lymph nodes tested. 24 out of 28 nodes tested positive.

My friend had been taking Lipitor for the last couple of years. Like I said I don't have many friends. What are the odds that I would have a friend who would develop a very aggressive form of breast cancer while taking statins???

I don't think I have to tell you what my opinion is of this latest research.

Your thoughts.

ARIZONA73 · 05-15-2005, 08:38 AM

Yes, that article also appeared in today's Star-Ledger. Claims are being made that statins lower the risk of developing breast, prostate, and colon cancer. How credible is it? I don't know. All I know is that these claims appear to run contrary to earlier animal studies in which these drugs were found to be extremely carcinogenic. Positive claims about statins always seem to make front page news, while the risks are either downplayed or ignored in the media. Keep in mind the fact that these drugs generate enormous profits for the drug companies, and they are always coming up with more reasons why people should be taking them. It's not unusual nowadays to learn that false claims have been made over the years about one drug or another. Do you remember the Neurontin fiasco? Neurontin is an anti-seizure drug, but drug company sales reps (I forget the name of the company) were ordered to make unfounded claims about this drug in order to boost sales. So, nothing they say surprises me anymore, although I do have my doubts about these claims being made about statins. Their carcinogenic effects seen in earlier animal studies is hard for me to ignore.

happybunny · 05-15-2005, 11:24 AM

Arizona

What were the claims that the sales reps were forced to make about neurontin?

babydog · 05-15-2005, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ARIZONA73

Yes, that article also appeared in today's Star-Ledger. Claims are being made that statins lower the risk of developing breast, prostate, and colon cancer. How credible is it? I don't know. All I know is that these claims appear to run contrary to earlier animal studies in which these drugs were found to be extremely carcinogenic. Positive claims about statins always seem to make front page news, while the risks are either downplayed or ignored in the media. Keep in mind the fact that these drugs generate enormous profits for the drug companies, and they are always coming up with more reasons why people should be taking them. It's not unusual nowadays to learn that false claims have been made over the years about one drug or another. Do you remember the Neurontin fiasco? Neurontin is an anti-seizure drug, but drug company sales reps (I forget the name of the company) were ordered to make unfounded claims about this drug in order to boost sales. So, nothing they say surprises me anymore, although I do have my doubts about these claims being made about statins. Their carcinogenic effects seen in earlier animal studies is hard for me to ignore.

Do you know by any chance WHO sponsored this research study??

ARIZONA73 · 05-15-2005, 12:26 PM

babydog,

I don't know, it didn't say anywhere in the article who sponsored the study. But the impression I got was that these findings were only preliminary, nothing conclusive. They did say that more studies would need to be done, and that these preliminary findings may just be coincidental. The article also did say that statins appear to increase the risk of certain cancers in the elderly.

happybunny,

Warner-Lambert illegally instructed its sales representatives to promote the use of Neurontin for at least 12 other conditions which it was never FDA approved for. These conditions included bipolar disorder, various pain disorders, Lou Gehrig's disease, attention deficit disorder, migraines, restless leg syndrome, trigeminal neuralgia, post-hepatic neuralgia. There was never any supportive evidence that Neurontin was an effective treatment for any of these disorders. Doctors were mislead into believing that there was.

Dr. David Franklin, an employee of Warner-Lambert at the time, resigned from the company and became a whistleblower, and a lawsuit was filed on behalf of the U.S. government. In 2004, Pfizer, the parent company, plead guilty and agreed to pay $430 million to resolve all criminal charges and civil liabilities related to the illegal and fraudulent marketing of Neurontin.

I understand that for his part, David Franklin was awarded $24.64 million.