| Literature DB >> 30198808 |
Uffe Ravnskov1, Michel de Lorgeril2, David M Diamond3,4, Rokuro Hama5, Tomohito Hamazaki6, Björn Hammarskjöld7, Niamh Hynes8, Malcolm Kendrick9, Peter H Langsjoen10, Luca Mascitelli11, Kilmer S McCully12, Harumi Okuyama13, Paul J Rosch14, Tore Schersten15,16, Sherif Sultan8, Ralf Sundberg17.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: For half a century, a high level of total cholesterol (TC) or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) has been considered to be the major cause of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD), and statin treatment has been widely promoted for cardiovascular prevention. However, there is an increasing understanding that the mechanisms are more complicated and that statin treatment, in particular when used as primary prevention, is of doubtful benefit. Areas covered: The authors of three large reviews recently published by statin advocates have attempted to validate the current dogma. This article delineates the serious errors in these three reviews as well as other obvious falsifications of the cholesterol hypothesis. Expert commentary: Our search for falsifications of the cholesterol hypothesis confirms that it is unable to satisfy any of the Bradford Hill criteria for causality and that the conclusions of the authors of the three reviews are based on misleading statistics, exclusion of unsuccessful trials and by ignoring numerous contradictory observations.Entities:
Keywords: Atherosclerosis; cardiovascular; cholesterol lowering; coronary heart disease; exposure–response; mortality; statin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30198808 DOI: 10.1080/17512433.2018.1519391
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol ISSN: 1751-2433 Impact factor: 5.045