John Cassidy, a staff writer at The New Yorker, understands clearly the poor judgment of economics professors. In How Markets Fail he said the Nobel Prize in Economics has made things worse, because it has often been given for worthless work. Outside of economics, however, he can write this:
That such a smart well-informed non-party-liner can believe Lipitor is wonderful shows Orwell was right: with enough repetition, people can be convinced war = peace. Here is the truth about Lipitor:
Statin therapy is extremely efficient in lowering cholesterol numbers, but unfortunately not without adverse effects on the body. To prevent a first heart attack, for every life that is saved – 1% over 10 years of use – statins cause an equal number of adverse deaths due to accidents, infection, suicide and cancer — 1% over 10 years’ use and significantly greater levels of serious side effects and suffering. . . . In a study to see the effects of raising the Lipitor levels from 10 to 80 mg (more sales) on patients, those taking 80 mg had increased liver problems, that is the rate of raised liver enzymes was six times higher than those given 10 mg of Lipitor. Even though the total deaths due to CVD in the 80 mg group was fewer (126) than in the 10 mg group (155), the total deaths due to other causes was higher in the 80 mg (158) than the 10 mg (127) group. There was no difference in the overall mortality rate.
Lipitor, the miracle drug. Taken by millions at a cost of billions. This is what happens when you — such as those in charge of health care — have little understanding of a problem: You aren’t good at solving it.
Cardiologists believe that high cholesterol causes heart attacks. Their depth of understanding was illustrated by the cardiologist at my Quantified Self talk about butter who said that the Framingham study showed that diet caused heart attacks (no, it found new correlations between heart disease and “risk factors” such as cholesterol — see also this) and that the recent reduction in heart attacks is evidence of our improved understanding (e.g., the science behind Lipitor). That a thousand other things changed over the same time period he apparently hadn’t considered. He simply couldn’t defend — at least then — his core belief that butter was bad. A cardiologist! How many thousands of people has he told to eat less butter?
Cassidy’s article about the harm done by the financial industry, from which that quote was taken, is excellent.
Seth-
I recently stopped taking Zocor [a statin, like Lipitor]. I started taking it at the same time I started using a CPAP machine to treat sleep apnea. While my sleep was more restful, I remained fatigued. After a year of Zocor, I was diagnosed with ADHD. Following this diagnosis, I tried a string of medications – adderall, stratera, and ritalin. I even became depressed and was put on an SSRI. My memory and mental prowess faded and became extremely spotty at best. I would use IQ apps on my iPhone to measure my mental prowess — and usually scored in the 75-100 range! (Prior to Zocor, similar, computerized IQ tests would yield answers from the 130s to the 170s.) Even moderate exercise would wipe me out for days – unless I was taking the maximum dosage of adderall.
So I quit taking Zocor. (Initially, I tried using COQ10 to moderate the effects, but it proved ineffective.) Even though I am obese, I can now exercise in moderation with no ill effects. My mind is back, as are my computerized IQ scores. I no longer arbitrarily stop talking in the middle of sentences after losing my train of thought.
I’m not sure I buy either side of e statin argument (am currently on statins myself).
An interesting article which is vaguely related: https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/22/AR2010112203503.html
Wayne, do you know if the statins you take are lowering your IQ? See the previous comment. Cholesterol lowering has been associated with more death from suicide and accidents. If this association is due to cause and effect, it implies that cholesterol lowering makes your brain function worse. Suicide rate and accidental death rate are very insensitive measures of brain function, more sensitive measures of brain function might show a strong association.
Hmm. On a related topic, https://www.thejuliagroup.com/blog/?m=201010 is about failures of statistics (among other things).
I didn’t think the finance article was excellent. It raised a bunch of standard well-known issues, but offered no insight into how to weigh those factors.
I thought it was excellent because it was a well-written description of those well-known issues. I agree it did no more than neatly package them.