Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:


Statins and The BMJ

BMJ 2014; 349 doi: (Published 07 August 2014) Cite this as: BMJ 2014;349:g5038

Rapid Response:

Following the recent controversy on SARs in the BMJ Prof Collins argues the investigation was not independent and came to the wrong conclusion. (BMJ 'right' in statins claims row. By James Gallagher Health editor, BBC News website

“He told the BBC: "It is not surprising the BMJ investigates itself and exonerates itself.
"The BMJ published misinformation and they've withdrawn one major error, but have not corrected several other major errors.
"My concern is that as before, patients and their doctors are misinformed by those papers and the BMJ's failure to correct them."

“their doctors are misinformed by those papers”

Really! and what about his own study, the HPS[1] report where there are hidden data, inaccurate reporting, etc. and massive misinformation about the value of statins? As shown by de Lorgeril in his expose of skullduggery in clinical research on cholesterol and statins (see: de Lorgeril, Michel (2014-03-05). Cholesterol and statins: Sham science and bad medicine Kindle edition[2]) HPS at the Ultimate in Clinical Research: the Heart Protection Study Section) shows that misinformation and other flaws are present in Collins’ own research and by extrapolation all medical clinical research on Big Pharma drugs.

The problems is now “What and who does anyone believe!” The flaws in statin research[2] are such that it brings disrepute on the whole medical profession, the vast majority of whom are genuine hard-working docs doing their best for their patients but are being tainted by Big Pharma and their complicit medical researchers, the medical establishment and Governments with their DIRECTIVES (aka guidelines).

Reminds me of a 150 year-old quote

“Not only are men who are overconfident in their theories or ideas unlikely to discover anything, they are also very poor observers. Indeed, their observation will necessarily be influenced by their preconceived convictions and, when they are the instigator of an experiment, they are most likely to focus on those results that support their theory. Thus, because they do not point in the desired direction, certain essential facts are often neglected."
Claude Bernard: Introduction à la médecine expérimentale 1865


1. THE LANCET • Vol 360 • July 6, 2002 •

2. Michel de Lorgeril (2014-03-05). Cholesterol and statins: Sham science and bad medicine. Kindle edition

Competing interests: No competing interests

08 August 2014
Michael J. CAWDERY
retired vet researcher
Craigavon BT63 5TD