This analysis ignores the issue of negative side effects. The most serious, rhabdomyolysis, occurs in about 0.1% of those taking statins. Liver issues are more common, and the cost of monitoring that might affect the cost/benefit ratio.
It would be nice to have a next generation statin that didn't have the muscle side effect (which appears to be independent of the primary mode of action of statins.)
1. Dietary Cholesterol and the Lack of Evidence in Cardiovascular Disease
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6024687/
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in the United States. For years, dietary cholesterol was implicated in increasing blood cholesterol levels leading to the elevated risk of CVD. To date, extensive research did not show evidence to support a role of dietary cholesterol in the development of CVD.2, Doubt cast on wisdom of targeting ‘bad’ cholesterol to curb heart disease risk
British Medical journal
https://bmjgroup.com/doubt-cast-on-wisdom-of-targeting-bad-cholesterol-to-curb-heart-disease-risk/
Decades of research have failed to show consistent benefit for this approach, say researchersSetting targets for ‘bad’ (LDL) cholesterol levels to ward off heart disease and death in those at risk might seem intuitive, but decades of research have failed to show any consistent benefit for this approach, reveals an analysis of the available data, published online in BMJ Evidence Based Medicine.
The cholesterol panic is great for big pharma and the millions they make prescibing Statins.
For 20 + years I have lived on a high fat diet with 70% of my calories from fats.
My cholesterol has been quite normal