I've posted about the effect of the cholesterol synthesis blockers known as statins on mitochondria before. This week though a couple of updates on the national news seem worthy of comment.
The first was a a publication from the University of Columbia detailing the source of the muscle pain side-effect associated with statin use. The work was very detailed at the molecular level and demonstrated clearly that the pain was associated with in infux of calcium ions into muscle cells.
The second was a finding that most of the very many side effects of statins as described on the crib-sheet supplied with the drugs were actually not attrubutable statins at all. The muscle pain side effect though was.
The above findings are interesting at the scientific, the linguistic and legal levels equally. The first finding regarding the influx of calcium ions is important because it is well known that mitochondria rapidly and unselectively absorb these ions, swell and may burst as the outer membrane gives way.
Nearly fifty years ago my first paper showed that mitochondria became more fragile to swelling with age. Then we did not know so well that their rupture and release of weakly bound Cytochrome C ( this binds less tightly with age) triggers cell death ... we know it well now and it is the source of muscle wastage (sarcopenia) in old age. So, Columbia's research shows why a side effect of statins is muscle pain but it's findings infer that all mitochondria will swell as a result of the drug. It's just that it is not always fatal to the cell! Do this to damaged, senescent mitochondria in aged cells and the cell will die as the mitochindria rupture.
The second finding's announcement was laughably 'straw-man' and linguistically manipulative. The imaginary side effects listed on the drug sheet turn out to be, well, imaginary so can be crossed off, and the confirmed side-effect (see above) is very rare so please ignore
... so the authors conlclude that the drugs are actually 'safer' than we thought and their role in tackling 'bad-cholesterol' is an even better option for now reassured people.
Outrageous, my dim GP will no doubt be persuaded by this Pharma's ChatGtp bot generated blurb but this week's message is actualy the opposite. It's that statins cause severe change in calcium flux in muscle cell and this side effect is confirmed as real, ... and the reasearch provides a clear causal path to sarcopenia in the vulnerable populations prescribed the wonder drug.
To get the message above though you will need at least a PhD in mitochondrial biochemistry and a working ability detecting thematic meme reasoning.
Or in the opposite scenario, to be reassured, you will need a) a trust in big Pharma struggling to sell its wares, b) faith in your GP's scientific knowledge and c) an admiration for the Mandelson level of manipulation reached by generative AI
