Majid Ali, M.,D.
AMA now admits that the cholesterol theory of heart attacks is false. When do you think it knew this truth?
A Crucial Question
When did The New England Journal of Medicine know that lowering blood cholesterol level with statin drugs does not prevent heart attacks?It was more than twenty years ago. Consider the following direct quote from the Journal:
“The West of Scotland study found an absolute reduction in cardiac mortality of 0.7 percent after five years of pravastatin therapy (40 mg per day, costing $100 per month). Therefore, 143 men with hypercholesterolemia must spend a total of $858,000 (drug cost only) to delay 1 such death…The problem is that outcome events in primary prevention are always rare, even in coronary disease, leading to the paradox that pravastatin is both highly effective and of very little benefit (Rogers S. More on pravastatin and coronary disease. N Eng J Med 1996;335:1239-40).
Links to Videos of Dr. Ali’s 14-Video Cholesterol Library
1. Three Very Simple Cholesterol Questions
2. In How Many Ways Do Cholesterol Drugs Hurt the Heart
3. Cholesterol Deception for Life. Really!
4. Cholesterol Drugs and Brain Function Loss
5. Nearly 50% Heart Attacks Associated With Low Cholesterol
6. Cholesterol Drugs or Spices
7. In How Many Ways Does Cholesterol Protect Muscles
8. What Does High LDL Cholesterol Mean
9. Cholesterol Prolongs Life
10. Eggs Are Great But Times Magazine Does Not Apologize
11. Cholesterol Deceptions – Eggs Are Great But Times Magazine Does Not Apologize
12. Cholesterol Drugs Cause Fatigue
13. Cholesterol Drugs Increase the Risk of Cause Breast Cancer
14. The Heart- Stomach Connection
Science and Ethics of Cholesterol cardiology
Scientific claims are testable, hence refutable. Advocates of science rightfully welcome and honor self-retractions. It is sobering to learn that self-retractions ascribed to honest error account for less than 20% of the total.
We physicians also claim to practice science in our craft but the case of self-retraction in medicine is quite different. There is seldom, if ever, any real concerns in matters of loss of papers, waste of time, author disputes, or legal hassles for editors. There are three real issues here: (1) what is the cost of publications that are retracted, often years or decades later; (2) who bears the burden in terms of the financial cost and physical suffering; and (3) who escapes accountability? I elaborate my point by presenting two case studies: the case of claiming scientific benefits of statins for lowering cholesterol to prevent and/or treat cardiovascular disease, and health advice offered by ‘nutrition experts’ for health presersation and disease prevention. Consider the following texts reproduced from The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) concerning cholesterol and statin drugs prescribed to lower blood cholesterol levels: