Statin-related side effects: the recent Lancet publication is biased toward false-negatives

Even though I hate null hypothesis significance testing, I don’t believe that the statistical methods used for analysis of AEs are the explanation for not finding safety concerns, and find @ESMD most convincing. A better Bayesian analysis would convince even more, e.g. for lots of AEs compute P(absolute risk increase > 0.01 or odds ratio > 1.15) scrapping p-values which can detect trivial risk increases. @ESMD I wonder if you agree with me that reporting counts of AEs in labels shares some of the fault. I’ve always thought that absolute risks should be emphasized much more.