Statins and Alternatives
Cardiovascular conversation for the unhealthy Western World that we are growing into.
MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.
11 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment
Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.
This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.
I am presently faced with the same thing, discussing this pill.
So thanks for the information, it’s better than my doctor gives.
It was interesting, looking at the effect of covid.
Was our response correct, racing to get a vaccine.
And now we get research, showing more heart attack cases.
Because covid was not a game, we need to study it.
There will be a next time, would we be so fast with a vaccine.
Millions have died, but we have no idea numbers of those saved.
Was the bad effect of the vaccine, small vs the good effects.
I am very sceptical about such data, there could be many reasons.
The vaccine may of had a risk, some people did react to the vaccine.
Was it vaccinated then infected, was it infected then vaccinated.
Did the lockdown have stress, did it change lifestyle badly.
Was it more men dying, because more men were doing hard work.
Lazing around for to long on lockdown, triggering a heart attack.
Like the video says, what was the effect of slower response times.
This doctor says the statin medication, is mostly unnecessary.
When my own risk gets to 10%, I will likely be taking it.
Strange when the evidence is weak, but I would listen to my doctor.
The trick is, being healthy so you don’t get to 10%.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 21st January 2024 @ 10:15 pm
Political will has become more important than science, more important than medicine, influenced by commerce and driven by a manufacturing of credibility.
This is New Zealand as we live in it now. Employees in government departments don’t do their job, they work to preserve their employment.
Responsibility becomes optional and disposable.
Our mainstream media is too closely aligned with this elitist culture reporting on a selective basis and the public becomes uninformed.
In alternative media this is very visible. Particularly to older people who have a comparative experience from their own past.
In this particular case we see a complete melt down in a Royal Commission intended supposedly to prepare the country for any similar event.
It’s sitting in limbo, minus one Commissioner who resigned before the election, and pending a review on its terms of reference.
It is essentially a look-good mechanism designed to not discover that which could be damaging to political credibility.
Commissioners paid $1600 a day plus expenses to not discover what would benefit the people in the event of another health crisis and that doesn’t necessarily need to be as severe as another pandemic.
This is not confined to our domestic situation. The editor of the Wall St Journal at the WEF meeting in Davos talking about media influence told the conference that the mainstream no longer has control of the narrative, no longer owns the facts.
You might say the truth bit them on the arse with the the advent of social media and alternative media.
This is simply not a man’s world where there is so much that’s not working. It’s an intolerable situation.
Post election with a change of government there is always change – we have people scrambling to save their butts.
To say that the situation is so dysfunctional that it affects our regional and global contribution is not an understatement but this continues because journalists are not following that story, not following that thinking, not engaged with that story.
No visibility, no sunlight, no disinfectant, no accountability, and that allows anyone trying to be productive to be squashed.
Too many people have their credibility at stake.
That’s socially self-defeating until we again demand accountability.
This year is already not off to a good start in that respect with people coming out of the Christmas break hoping to bury what they can and carry on.
Others, not my job, I see nothing.
Comment by Downunder — Mon 22nd January 2024 @ 7:52 am
At times the media is shocking, the bias is absolute.
If journalism was blind, Fox or CNN could not exist.
There is good journalism, hard talk on BBC can be just that.
But media companies, is very different to social media.
While one seems corrupted, the other has no limits.
We have to wait and see, what the inquiry finds about Covid.
Is it going to examine media, after all its them that failed us.
Where was the demands for action, from the very beginning.
The disease was weeks without action, until it was too late.
The media then created hysteria, and the humans panicked.
The media went from complacent, to predicting doom.
Next is the experts, who were advising politicians.
Those weeks without action, is there failure as well.
I don’t blame the politicians, they had on the spot decisions to make.
Well for the most part, sending the sick to rest homes an example.
Is the inquiry looking at them, as to the limit of there powers.
What are the rules next time, for lockdowns or masks and planes.
Many can say things went to far, but that’s in hindsight.
As I understand it, the inquiry is limited.
Next time may be worse, I hope they get it right.
Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 22nd January 2024 @ 6:23 pm
“At times the media is shocking”
This is where you don’t understand media and journalism. You listen to general complaints: media is shocking media is biased and you probably visibly see some of that.
You live with the misconception, you are in possession of the facts, that there isn’t a story you haven’t been told, or a version of that story that’s not available to you.
That you haven’t been the victim of selective reporting rather than a story slanted in favour of an administration or critical of it.
“While one seems corrupted, the other has no limits.”
You’ve reinforced that opinion here, and the msm helps you out by telling you, social media is all misinformation, conspiracy theories and cookers.
And yes there are some misinformed people but far from all.
I pointed out above, “We no longer control the narrative, no longer own the facts” … said another way, the truth is escaping, that other voice, the other side of the story has risen up to meet us.
You ask, how do I get fooled … I’ll give you an example …
During the height of covid you read an article that had 10 points about covid. All on the fearful death side but slipped in there was one line that says something about vaccines not establishing herd immunity.
It’s not that it wasn’t in this case reported but how it was reported and how you perceived this.
Your view of no limits in social media is biased to being full of bad stuff that knows no bounds and needs to be controlled, rather than unlimited in its ability to correct the mainstream media.
“We have to wait and see, what the inquiry finds about Covid.”
This is why you own this misconception.
This is not a Royal Commission run by a high court judge managing an independent inquiry.
It’s a manipulated and highly managed diatribe run out of the Department of Cabinet and Prime minister assisted by a former Treasury employee who runs the “inquiry”.
It’s a propaganda machine, an extension of the Podium of Truth, organised by the Cabinet in the last government to manipulate an outcome.
You haven’t read the terms of reference, probably haven’t even looked at their website.
Some alternative journalists have, and this was realised in the lead up to the election. One Commissioner resigned. The reporting date was extended to September 30 2024.
The ACT Party went as far as a policy of 6 weeks of public submission on just the new terms of reference alone for a new inquiry.
What you’re not seeing here is the real journalism within social media making politicians act in a way that is inconsistent with what’s in the mainstream version.
These decisions haven’t been made post Christmas.
You haven’t yet accepted that msm became so propagandist that journalism was reborn in social media.
This limited controlled inquiry is one such example of the mess left by Ardern and Hipkins. It’s a bloody great mess which is a headache for the new coalition about how to deal with it.
A nightmare for those who are trying to manipulate their way out of their previous involvement – many of whom believed they were acting in the best interests of solving a health emergency.
The public can’t see the disparity between what rolls through social media and what’s not being reported in the mainstream.
The consequence of this is a growing conversation underneath, a word of mouth conversation the new government is aware of, because people are talking to each other again.
We are yet to see how these inquiries, including the role of the media, are to be formed.
Comment by Downunder — Tue 23rd January 2024 @ 7:40 am
Well I do watch some interesting stuff, looking at social media.
Plus if I’m watching TV, I’m probably watching a news channel.
So I cannot deny, my thinking is poisoned by experience.
It’s hard to see the lying, until you watch the other channel.
Do any of us have any chance, of actually knowing the truth.
If someone is doing an inquiry, we have to wait until it’s finished.
Like a judge in a court case, we should try not to judge ourselves.
When the result is printed, yes the media will be interesting.
You never know we may get lucky, the inquiry may be a good read.
You are correct that I spend no time, researching Covid as a subject.
Comment by DJ Ward — Tue 23rd January 2024 @ 7:11 pm
The new terms of reference are a matter for the Department of Internal Affairs and their minister and the public is assured there will be consultation.
One would expect though that a new timeline would end much later than the current September 2024 date.
That doesn’t mean that various other mechanism aren’t and won’t be used as avoidance tools as they currently are.
Comment by Downunder — Tue 23rd January 2024 @ 7:45 pm
It’s very interesting times, medicine is changing rapidly.
Covid may be an example, where things happened to fast.
It’s not rational to say, the vaccine was properly tested.
It was rushed into production, as fast as politicians could get it.
That is a question for all medicine, what are we really taking.
My illness for example, all the patients are experimental.
New drugs are tested safe, but is it really safe.
Do we find out much later, of a really bad side effect.
There is pills for everything, but where is the inquiry for them.
Are we being ripped off, the profits are extortionate.
Is there a longitudinal study, does the drug have other effects.
As the posts video points out, is the drug even working.
Drugs for depression etc, we are the experiment.
Comment by DJ Ward — Wed 24th January 2024 @ 6:26 pm
@7 “Are we being ripped off, the profits are extortionate”
A very global question and one relevant to the current submission process in New Zealand for the Pandemic Treaty and rewrite of the existing rules. Jan 17 to Feb 18.
This was brought about by the unhealthy negotiation of contracts between pharmaceutical companies and governments during the recent Pandemic.
These contracts are largely secret.
There is known to be a considerable difference in the nature of contracts for the Northern and Southern Hemispheres.
This is part of the reasoning for the South African Court decision publishing their vaccine contracts.
The court describes the contracts as unacceptable commerce that needs to be addressed.
More recently South Africa described the situation as “Vaccine Apartheid”.
While negotiations are being rushed to conclude the Pandemic Treaty at the Geneva Conference in May frustration is building over the UN breaking its own processes in the development of the Treaty and placing limitations on the ability of countries to adequately represent their position.
The Canadian Freedom of Information Agency this week has released their contracts in a redacted form, although it’s not hard to realise what has been redacted from leaked contracts that are being published on an international website.
(The situation is not unlike the court case over the Te Whata Ora data breach)
NZ is currently in the position of still withholding its contracts during our own submission process.
By the time the public becomes aware of our treaty process in parliament submissions at that stage are extraordinary rather than usual.
Most of country coming back from holiday is uniformed and unaware of the manner in which such legislation progresses or that this process is even happening behind our domestic arguments over the Treaty of Waitangi.
Cabinet met for the first time this week and parliament doesn’t resume until the January 30.
While we are not working to a domestic timetable the public process in New Zealand has been deliberately obstructed by the previous government and coincidentally by our recent election.
The situation is once again back with the Ombudsman, and the public participation deliberately obstructed by a group of government agencies who have been left holding their previous decisions without interference from new ministers
Democratic processes are still struggling to cope with the behavior of the last government and public awareness is suffering from a lack of reasonable publicity.
One asks who stands to gain from this?
Evil succeeds perhaps when good men do nothing.
And that might equally be applied to the current Prime minister as much as any member of the public.
Comment by Downunder — Fri 26th January 2024 @ 8:53 am
What did each vaccine cost, and how many did they buy.
Or even masks, was extra paid just to get supply.
What of all the motel money, those contracts must be huge.
F&P Healthcare did well, making things like ventilators.
So not everything is nefarious, just opportunity happened.
Supply and demand, was dictating prices.
There is no doubt some, made billions of extra profit.
If you think of any drug, the numbers can be huge.
Think of just NZ, and something like statin medication.
100,000 take it, and it only cost $1 a day per person.
That’s still $36.5 million a year, the world is 1,500 times bigger.
A company can make billions, but the margins can still be small.
If it’s public money, why is anything secret.
Generally if something is secret, it’s also imbarising
Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 26th January 2024 @ 7:54 pm
The secrecy is more than embarrassing, it is a big red light.
It’s a centuries old concept that the lawmaker and the healer should never be one – we are revisiting that conflict.
The democracy men have fought for in recent centuries is also at risk.
The secrecy represents an act of government without the knowledge of the people.
Unbridled power to negotiate an outcome for the individual without their knowledge or their review.
A global centralisation of power also drives a central government restriction on the democratic processes of individual countries.
Applied outside of health this becomes a template for other decisions in the broader sphere of government administration, education in particular.
The secrecy of the negotiation is what is being reviewed by the Ombudsman but that shouldn’t be confused with the stealth with which the change is being ushered in.
Poland at present rather than abandon the Pandemic Treaty has called for the May 2024 deadline to be abandoned.
We’re not alone in our concerns in NZ when we protest the occasion.
It’s a quiet protest though until more people get an understanding of this.
Comment by Downunder — Sat 27th January 2024 @ 8:16 am
A draft document for new terms of reference for the NZ covud inquiry will be available for public submissions from February 8th.
Comment by Downunder — Fri 2nd February 2024 @ 1:27 pm