Andrew Huberman· PhD
So any patient that's having a response to statins that's adverse, we'll try this other thing.
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
So any patient that's having a response to statins that's adverse, we'll try this other thing.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
this is high-risk patients there have Statin intolerance so high risk primary prevention Statin intolerant yes and secondary prevention patients with Statin intolerance
since women are more likely to have statin-associated muscle symptoms and this agent doesn't cause that this may be a good choice as an oral therapy for women who can't get their LDL control on a Statin or tolerate a Statin