Genetic vs trial per-unit estimates
The argument
Because genetic (Mendelian randomization) studies put the per-mmol/L reduction in coronary heart disease at roughly 50-55% while statin trials reduce major vascular events by about a fifth per mmol/L, the genetic estimate is roughly threefold the trial estimate; the per-unit benefit growing with duration of exposure explains why lifelong genetically lower LDL yields a larger proportional effect than years-long treatment begun in mid-life.
Does it work?
Not yet evaluated.
Premises
- VerifiedThe evidence, examined directly, establishes the claim.constitution →Mendelian randomization studies estimate roughly 50-55% lower coronary heart disease risk per mmol/L lower LDL cholesterol
- VerifiedThe evidence, examined directly, establishes the claim.constitution →Statin randomized trials reduce major vascular events by about a fifth per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol
- UnassessedNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitution →The cardiovascular risk reduction per unit of LDL lowering increases with longer duration of exposure
Where it is made
Passages where sources make, criticize or mention this argument. They record where it appears, not how strong it is, and none has precedence over another.
No source is recorded as making it.
Earlier ratings
- Jul 20, 2026
The inference is a straightforward comparison of two per-unit estimates and goes through. Both premises it rests on are now verified: the genetic per-mmol/L estimate of roughly 50–55% and the statin-trial estimate of about a fifth, whose ratio of roughly two-and-a-half to threefold is what "roughly threefold" asserts. The per-unit benefit growing with exposure duration is not needed for the arithmetic but explains why the two estimates diverge, so the comparison stands as a genuine finding rather than a discrepancy to be explained away.
- Jul 19, 2026
The inference is a straightforward comparison of two per-unit estimates and goes through. It rests on the genetic per-mmol/L estimate of roughly 50-55% and the statin-trial estimate of about a fifth; their ratio of roughly two-and-a-half to threefold is what "roughly threefold" asserts. The per-unit benefit growing with exposure duration is not needed for the arithmetic but explains why the two estimates diverge, so the comparison is not a discrepancy to be explained away.
- Jul 19, 2026
The inference is a straightforward comparison of two per-unit estimates and goes through. It rests on the genetic per-mmol/L estimate of roughly 50-55% and the statin-trial estimate of about a fifth; their ratio of roughly two-and-a-half to threefold is what "roughly threefold" asserts. The per-unit benefit growing with exposure duration is not needed for the arithmetic but explains why the two estimates diverge, so the comparison is not a discrepancy to be explained away.