JCauto

"Conclusions We found a graded, independent association between the intensity of statin use and the risk of hospitalization with AKI, although the absolute magnitude of the excess risk was small." * AKI = Acute Kidney Injury https://bmcnephrol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12882-019-1280-7 "Potential harms and benefits both increased in patients with cardiovascular risks ≥ 20%.1 For patients with elevated cardiovascular risk, the benefits of statin initiation therefore clearly outweigh any increased risk of AKI." "A larger, and more recent study by Dormuth et al investigated the use of high and low-dose statins in more than two million people in Canada, Great Britain and the United States. High-dose statin use was defined as ≥ 40 mg simvastatin, ≥ 20 mg atorvastatin or ≥ 10 mg rosuvastatin daily.2 A 34% increase in the relative risk of hospitalisation for AKI within 120 days of initiation of high-dose statins, compared to low-dose statins, was reported in people without chronic kidney disease (CKD). This risk remained elevated for at least two years of treatment, which was the maximum follow-up period for each patient. Interestingly, the rate of hospitalisation for AKI did not increase significantly in patients with existing CKD. Dormuth et al also calculated a NNH for high-dose statin use. They estimated that 1700 patients without CKD need to receive high-dose statin treatment for 120 days (rather than low-dose statins), for one additional hospital admission due to AKI to occur." https://bpac.org.nz/BPJ/2013/April/statins.aspx So my conclusions based on a quick read are: 1. If you've been prescribed high statin dosages, then you may end up getting some possible kidney issues (AKI) but you would probably experience them within the first 4 months of taking the medication. 2. The increase of likelihood that you'd have one of these issues in the first 120 days is about 1/3 more than patients who typically experience these symptoms, who are along the lines of 1 out of 1,700 people. 3. If you're taking statins at a high dose because of risk of cardiovascular disease, which is pretty much the reason why you take high dosages of statins, then this is a higher risk than for AKI so you're justified in taking them regardless of the low incidence of AKI that slightly increases as a result.

And weirdest of all, zero evidence of even the slightest damage to the ear. No discoloration, no scar, nothing. It's as if it was entirely performance art. I'm with Mercedes, let's get to the bottom of this, was pretty fishy indeed.

Yes, JonnyF, why would one want to vet people who are buying semi-automatic firearms and handguns? What could go wrong? I presume you think that the guy who gave his troubled 14yo a hunting rifle for his birthday after the cops had already talked to him about threats to shooting up a school did the right thing? In favour of the Crumbley's arming their young psychopath so he could murder his classmates? No checking, everyone gets a gun if they want one?

Another armchair expert! Tell us your qualifications first, if you wouldn't mind. Oh, and some accepted medical literature or a study that has been peer reviewed that supports your fear-mongering about statins. I've been taking them for decades, what horrible fate awaits me?

So has anyone seen "stoner" posting at all today? I told him he should lighten up, not light up.

I see our friends are back finally. Why did it take so long for the Russians to craft a response? BTW, did you see that the GOP accidentally released their post-debate response prior to the debate? This is the level of honesty we get from the Right.

Okay, let's see some receipts please. Point to a single post of us Lefties who said who said Biden won the debate. One. No? Yet another desperate lie, and, surprise surprise, gaslighting! Remember what I say pretty much every day because it just keeps happening... Every accusation is a confession. Every. Single. One. And if any further proof is required, all I can say is "as a neutral observer..." ROTFLMMFAO!!!

So, all we've got are KhunLA and ThaiBeachLovers (and they're having a go at each other), one sad comment from JonnyF and that's it? Even our Right-wing friends realize how badly DJT just got his butt handed to him by the supposed "DEI candidate", the one who was completely unaccomplished, the one who's done nothing to deserve the Presidency. This was a "red-headed stepchild", this was a "rented mule", this was a "runaway slave" type of whoopin'.

Excuses...accusations of bias from MSM (?)...lyin' eyes...I didn't watch and don't care...yet I still keep speaking in this thread about the debate I didn't watch and don't care about.... News for you which you may have missed somehow...Presidents aren't appointed, they're elected. I know things aren't going the way you wished and Trump's disastrous debate was on a par with Biden's "dead man talking" performance. It's okay, you're going to be alright, Kamala and the Democrats aren't coming for you. In fact they're going to protect your access to health care so you and your cohort can rest easy in your diapers just like...you know...

Tarrio? He's yet another tough-guy cosplayer, someone who loves running around pretending to be macho and dangerous but soft as butter inside. These guys and many of their followers are just victims of toxic masculinity, it's why they're misogynists and often closeted.

Thereby piling up the meat on the "nothing-burger" of evidence of pretty much anything they claim about the elections and voting. Imagine if instead they focused on creating policy that was popular amongst the populace? But of course, they never would, their "Big Tent" has a minimum wealth requirement of 9 zeros.

Sorry Tug, my post wasn't clear. I was poking fun at Thesestat2013 for demanding links proving that you thought what you thought as if you could somehow substantiate your own opinion with outside evidence...

LOL! Just what I was thinking. For the record, it was longer than his usual posts and contained less spelling errors. So there's some validity to questioning whether it was Tug himself who wrote it. Maybe he dictated the first sentence to his grandchild or something? It's like debating with children. They observe that when they make unsubstantiated factual claims we often demand links for evidence, so think that's what you do whenever you hear something you don't agree with.

Please PM me on how to access my multi-dimensional bank account, could really use an incoming transfer in this time-space continuum. "Jom riap soua" is how to say "Hello" in Khmer. You'd like the place, lovely people and Phnom Penh becoming more like a big city every day.

As I said, bigots will attack Jews, but once they've achieved their ends, they'll easily pivot to attacking Muslims, women, black people, whomever is an easy target for their hatred. You must be very proud of your sterling morals and principles.

Oh, are they all the same then? They're in lockstep and every Muslim country reflects the thoughts, actions and desires of every Muslim outside of that country? You know that this is a definition of Anti-Semitism if you replace "Muslim" with "Jewish" right? This is why Islamaphobia is a cancer just like Anti-Semitism and should be opposed in every instance, it inevitably moves onto the next vulnerable group because bigots pretty much hate everyone who is not like them, just to varying degrees.

Just your regular reminder - every accusation is a confession with these guys. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

If you can solve my directional issues off the tee, then you're a miracle worker. Would enjoy hearing your ideas and I'd always give it a go on the off-chance it works. Heading to Scotland soon for some links golf so better get it under control fast or ill be catching up with ol' Uncle Fescue soon enough.

No, we think that fora that provide a platform for hateful and racist viewpoints without moderation should suffer consequences for it. The only real way for that to happen is for advertisers to decide to pull their revenue away unless they improve the management of the site. This is actually part of capitalism. The power of the market, the "unseen hand", the need for successful businesses to pay heed to their customers and ensure that they're happy with their product.

There you go, there are always possibilities for concurrence. Completely agree that the USA has been most remiss in their management on both sides of the aisle. Ultimately I trace this back to the Reagan revolution, a time when I was living in the USA. Slashing the taxes to starve the government of revenue has been very effective for the GOP, but not so great from a nation-building point of view. America still spends more on health care per capita than all the other G8 countries, but has the worst health outcomes. This is because, in my opinion, health care and education are best left to government to manage rather than the private sector. There's a fundamental contradiction to health care that runs directly counter to capitalist principles and practice, hence why every other social democracy chooses government-run universal health care and thereby achieve better outcomes at a lower cost. On education, I actually much prefer the US university system to my own in Canada, but I am very grateful I grew up where the public education through high school was great so that I could take advantage of it. There's room for private sector solutions to many things but it's pretty clear that public health ain't one. Thanks for the golf pointer offer - I am still hitting the ball very far even after my hip replacement. Problem is where I keep hitting the ball very far, tends to be woody or wet.

Congratulations on your youth and health! I'm over 60 but doing reasonably well I suppose, still can hit a golf ball okay. Just trying to be positive and helpful since you seem to be a bit sensitive. So you're not a Centrist but dislike all politicians on principle? That's kind of nihilist, I don't associate my political positions with particular politicians they're about policy and management. When a politician's views match more of mine, I look upon them favorably but they're unlikely to encompass the full range of my views, nor would I expect them to. One of my biggest issues with Trump is that he doesn't have any serious or consistent policy, he just continuously shoots from the hip, has no interest in detail or understanding of the nuance of most situations, and despite promising policy for years, it's never appeared. It can be effective in some situations, but is highly corrosive in most. So I would describe myself as a Liberal, but you seem to think I'm from the "extreme left". Do tell, what is it that I believe that makes me "extreme left"? I don't believe that communism is the way forward in any situation, I don't believe in confiscating the means of production and placing them in the hands of the proletariat. In fact, I'm a successful capitalist. I just believe in social democracy, that the government should take care of their people, starting first and foremost with the poor and vulnerable. That means an emphasis on health care, education, infrastructure and progressive taxation. I pay my taxes and don't oppose them being raised for the greater good of the society I live in.

"This behavior underscores a cynical strategy that only someone as unrestrained as Harris could pursue—shifting styles and messages to fit the crowd, often without consistency or sincerity." Which of the two candidates would best fit the adjective "unrestrained"? Of the two, whom would you say has a tendency to speak "without consistency or sincerity"? Sincerity means without lying for those who are so numbed by the last decade of drivel that you've lost all understanding of meaning. Cynical? Unlike the optimistic and hopeful campaign of Trump/Vance? Bit of a poor effort, shows how desperate Murdoch's becoming.

That's a relief. Don't know if we'd be able to carry on the highbrow debate without your cogent observations. However, don't ignore those early warning signs! One should always take care of one's physical and mental health first rather than sacrifice it for some absurd charade of pretending to be just a Centrist commenting on US politics.

What utter garbage. Ignoring the blatant anti-semitism and holocaust denial, you're such a maroon that you don't even understand what you're writing. Nobody speaks about the Holocaust in "reverential" terms, other than perhaps extremely racist and hateful people who approved of it. Oh, perhaps like yourself? The good ol' days! I'm quite sure your sort would turn on the Palestinians right after you got through with eliminating the Jews. With friends like you...

Oh dear, are you having a stroke? Perhaps you may need to cut down a bit.