If we ate well – most of us would not need statins, writes Dr Catherine Conlon
New research from Oxford University is advising that more people should be taking statins, after finding the side effects have been hugely overstated.
The researchers have called for drug information leaflets to be urgently updated to reflect that the life-saving pills carry virtually no risk.
While the researchers advise more people to take statins to reduce risk of chronic disease, nowhere is there a call to put mandatory warning labels on foods loaded with saturated fat, sugar and salt that underpins the global epidemic of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and dementia.
This highly selective advice underpins the money-making machine that is the capitalistic market telling us to eat more junk and take more tablets, rather than eat better and prevent disease.
The food we eat – every serving in almost every restaurant, snack and packaged meal – is engineered for overconsumption, and that is where the problem lies.
If we ate well – most of us would not need statins.
As it stands, patients taking statins are warned the pills may cause problems including memory loss, depression, sleep disturbance, erectile dysfunction, weight gain, nausea, fatigue and headache. The Oxford study, published in The Lancet, concluded that people were no more likely to experience these symptoms than the general population who were not taking the drugs.
“We now have really good evidence that although these things may happen to people when they take statins, statins are not the cause of these problems,” said Dr Christina Reith, associate professor at Oxford Population Health and lead author of the study.
“Statins are low-cost drugs which have been found to be very effective at preventing heart attacks. They really do significantly reduce premature death and save lives.
“Unfortunately, ongoing confusion and concern, not just in patients, regarding potential statin side effects mean people are not willing to start statins.”
The researchers noted that while seven to eight million people in Britain are currently taking statins, the number benefiting could be doubled – but people are often put off by fears of side effects.
It is estimated that around 250,000 people in Ireland are prescribed statins to lower their cholesterol levels and help prevent cardiovascular problems.
Yet there is barely a whisper concerning the millions of people that could significantly reduce their risk of chronic disease if robust mandatory health warnings were placed on junk food brimming with saturated fat, salt, and sugar.
The researchers highlighted that for every 10,000 high-risk people who take statins, around 1,000 heart attacks, strokes or deaths will be prevented over five years. For every 10,000 low-risk people taking statins, 500 cardiovascular events could be prevented.
Little attention is directed to the degree to which eating ultra-processed food is associated with significantly heightened risk of cardiovascular disease that induces abnormal lipid levels, insulin resistance and systemic inflammation.
One of the top ten most cited researchers in medicine, cardiologist Eric Topol in his book Super Agers (2025) describes the risks in some detail.
“A diet rich in these foods is linked to 80 per cent elevated risk of metabolic syndrome, 40 per cent higher risk of type 2 diabetes, 23 per cent increased risk of hypertension, 55 per cent increased risk of obesity, and 66 per cent risk of cardiovascular death.
“Among older adults, a mere 10 per cent increase of UPF intake is associated with a 16 per cent increased risk of cognitive impairment.”
Regular consumption of ultra-processed meat, including bacon and sausage has been associated with a 14 per cent higher risk of dementia. This is the kind of dose response curve we should be paying attention to and should be underpinning national dietary guidelines and warning labels.
And that’s not all. Topol adds that UPFs are associated with fatty liver disease, most types of cancer, sleep disorders, inflammatory bowel disease, depression and dementia.
A 62 per cent increase in all-cause mortality is linked to more than four servings per day of UPF. That means breakfast cereal, a mid- morning snack bar, a hot chicken roll for lunch, two cookies after dinner.
There is overwhelming evidence that for healthy ageing, UPFs must be restricted to the lowest level possible in the diet. That’s why it’s so important to have robust warning labels and select items without additives, with a minimum of ingredients, and to approach health claims with a generous dose of cynicism. Just because it is low in fat does not meet it is not loaded with sugar and other additives.
And warning labels work. In 2016, Chile began requiring food manufacturers to do exactly that.
Through the introduction of a comprehensive policy that introduced front-of-pack labelling and marketing restrictions, Chile has demonstrated that policy can profoundly influence consumer preference and public health.
The Law of Food Labelling and Advertising (2016) included the introduction of mandatory, black octagonal front-of-package nutrient warning labels alerting consumers to products high in sugar, salt, saturated fat and calories. This was aligned with marketing restrictions aimed at protecting children from pervasive food marketing.
The latest research published in PLOS Medicine (2024) from the University of Chile and the US University of North Carolina showed that since the introduction of the nutrient warning label law, Chileans are purchasing significantly less sugar, salt, saturated fat and calories.
Researchers found that households bought 37 per cent less sugar, 22 per cent less sodium, 16 per cent less saturated fat and 23 per cent fewer total calories from products with warning labels.
These figures clearly show that when consumers are equipped with clear accessible information, they can make healthier choices.
The message is clear – when regulations are clear and enforcement is robust; the food industry has no choice but to adapt.
The success of mandatory front-of-package labels in Chile has sparked a wave of similar initiatives for other countries looking to improve their food environments and the health of their citizens across all age groups and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Throughout the Americas, eight similar policies requiring black ‘stop sign’ warning labels on foods and drinks high in nutrients of health concern were rapidly adopted. This trend demonstrates a growing recognition that health policies can and should prioritise public health over wellbeing over corporate interests.
Eventually, it is likely that ultra-processed foods will be regarded as akin to cigarettes; public awareness of their dangers were suppressed for decades,” writes Topol
“Realistically, they will not be banned but there could be regulation to reduce their toxicity and enforce conspicuous labelling on all foods and beverages that spotlight their risks.”
In the meantime, the high levels of obesity and chronic disease that is now proven to result from diets underpinned by these foods, shows no sign of abating.
Researchers advise changing the warning labels on statins – that they are not harmful. This message only makes sense if it is aligned with robust front-of-package labels on ultra processed junk food that warns of the significant risk of chronic disease that eating this ‘food’ entails. 
Author
Dr Catherine Conlon is a public health doctor in Cork and former director human health and nutrition, safefood.