It appears that he is talking about this trial which has a follow-up performed 8 years later here. This was enrolled in the late 90s, concerned Lipitor, enrolled ~80% men, and included patients from the UK, Ireland, and Nordic countries.
If that is the study, it doesn’t actually agree with what Steve Sailer says. In the first study, there is a 36% reduction in (non-fatal heart attacks + fatal heart disease), but the reduction in all-cause mortality is only 13% and not statistically significant. The trial was stopped early because the treatment arm had become highly statistically significant, which means that the lack of significance in all cause mortality isn’t necessarily surprising.
It appears that he is talking about this trial which has a follow-up performed 8 years later here. This was enrolled in the late 90s, concerned Lipitor, enrolled ~80% men, and included patients from the UK, Ireland, and Nordic countries.
If that is the study, it doesn’t actually agree with what Steve Sailer says. In the first study, there is a 36% reduction in (non-fatal heart attacks + fatal heart disease), but the reduction in all-cause mortality is only 13% and not statistically significant. The trial was stopped early because the treatment arm had become highly statistically significant, which means that the lack of significance in all cause mortality isn’t necessarily surprising.
Thanks for looking up the original study!
Thanks. Fits the description and if that really is the trial what he’s saying doesn’t make much sense.