In their paper "Evidence for Caution: Women and statin use" authors Harriet Rosenberg and Danielle Allard make the following statement,
"Our review of these fields identifies a troubling disjuncture between the widespread use of statin medication for women and the evidence base for that usage. What we found instead was evidence for caution."
Then in their conclusion they state
"We have assessed the impact of statin use on women starting from the assumption that if a woman is put on a drug for the rest of her life, the reasons for doing so must be based on the highest quality, most credible data possible. There must be solid evidence of advantage over harm and careful analysis of any serious adverse outcomes that may arise immediately or with years or decades of use or when used in conjunction with other drugs commonly prescribed for women. In other words, a Canadian woman should be able to take a pill, safe in the knowledge that its benefits and safety were tested on women like her. She should embark on long-term commitment to a drug therapy with the understanding that she is highly likely to derive a clear advantage in terms of health and longevity and also feel confident that information about any risks will be explained to her in meaningful and accessible language.
These expectations have not been met. Instead we have found a pattern of overestimation of benefit and underestimation of harm."
Please read the full article HERE.