By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Your browser seems to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser.


Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.


Government drugs agency insists statins are 'safe'

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency has published an overview of the benefits and risks of statins, in the wake of recent publicity about the drugs.

Its latest Drug Safety Update for health professionals states that most side-effects are mild and the most frequently reported are muscle pain.

Dr June Raine, the MHRA’s director of vigilance and risk management of medicines, said: “Large clinical trials have shown that statins can save lives.

“We will update the prescribing advice for statins in light of any substantial new evidence of safety concerns,” she added.

Earlier this month, the British Medical Journal announced it was investigating two research articles that it published on statins in October, with the possibility they could be retracted.

The articles, which were widely covered in the media, claimed statins might be unsafe – though they attracted criticism from other experts at the time.

The study authors recently withdrew incorrect figures used in the papers, which suggested up to 20% of users would suffer harmful side effects, such as liver disease and kidney problems.

Maureen Talbot, senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, said: “All medicines can have side effects, but the millions of people who take statins in the UK are reducing their risk of having a heart attack or stroke.

“We welcome the MHRA’s review of the evidence and the reassuring message to patients that statins can have life-long health benefits for those assessed to be at high risk from heart disease.”


Readers' comments (2)

  • It is preposterous for the MHRA to make such a statement when the research referred to relies on meta-analysis of multiple trials, the data of which from each of these trials is not fully disclosed or transparent to independent researchers to validate the claims made by big pharma and those on the payroll of big pharma that influence government policy and guidelines. Just look at the following weblinks for further interesting reading:

    Enough said, point made!

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • whatever but they must not be pushed on healthy elderly individuals who are totally asymptomatic unless they want them.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Related Jobs

Sign in to see the latest jobs relevant to you!