Originally Posted by
elcruxio
... [snipped]
Also as a side note. I kinda feel you guys on the whole statin thing. Where i'm at it's done right and I heard from my SO that in many places in the US it's done pretty badly.
Finland => Start with a minimum dose of statins and increase gradually until you get effects or side effects occur. Side effects are handled by cutting back the dose or taking another med.
US => Full dose, stay course, patient hates side effects and stops. Not how it should be done.
Now of course there are variations to this but she just was on a lecture which outlined the differences in statin use between the US and Winland. Surprisingly the doctor holding the presentation thought the US system was superior. Weird.
That was an interesting and well thought out response. Thank you...
As for your side note... I am not accustomed to defending the American health care system -- for which I do not have a great deal of respect. However, in this case the treatment regimen you describe in the US
has not, historically been common practice. Rather, that was the guidelines issued by the AHA/ACC committees -- which typically comprise 'the bible of care'. But, unfortunately, they failed at least part of accepted medical research which is to let findings pass through a "peer review process" before setting them in stone. They sort skipped that step and went directly from meta-data research to the guidelines you mentioned... At this point, their guidelines have not been well accepted into common clinical practice and, in fact, have received a fair amount of criticism...
But, while disagreeing with the specifics of your side note, I do very much agree with its overall point that we should use statins with caution and prudence in mind and not assume that they are a completely safe wonder drug with minimal side affects.