SIMMERING tension between rival bikie gangs exploded on the Gold Coast yesterday with the drive-by shooting of a tattoo parlour in the heart of Bandidos territory. Police fear the attack could be a push for territory by the Hells Angels as the outlaw gang seeks a toehold on the lucrative Glitter Strip. Less than 24 hours after police commissioner Bob Atkinson told the Bulletin that bikie gangs were "one of the greatest challenges to face law enforcement", the Bandido-protected Mermaid Beach tattoo shop was hit by at least four shots in the early hours of yesterday morning.  High-ranking police yesterday said it was "inevitable" that the violence that has plagued Sydney would eventually spill across the border. "We do not believe it is directly connected to the war between the Hells Angels and the Nomads that has been unfolding in New South Wales," said police. "But it is a similar style of attack. "We know the Hells Angels have been pushing to establish a chapter on the Gold Coast -- that push is coming from Sydney. "Tradelink Drive is not their most profitable chapter." While detectives have attempted to play down the shooting, police say there is "no doubt" it was intended as a warning. The Bandidos are the largest and one of the most secretive bikie gangs on the Gold Coast. The club has gained strength as its main rival -- the Finks -- have been severely weakened with so many senior members behind bars and Bandido territory stretches south from Broadbeach. Police said last month's Hells Angels National Run was intended as a direct message to all gangs on the Gold Coast. More than 200 patched gang members descended on Surfers Paradise for the run. "These clubs are so well organised, they do nothing without a reason," police said. "You can bet they had some purpose in coming to the Gold Coast. "They taunted the Finks and nothing happened, now the Bandidos tattoo shop is shot up in the same way the gym controlled by the Hells Angels was hit a few months ago. "You join the dots." The shop is owned by a senior member of the outlaw gang who has been a patched member of the Bandidos "for years", police say. In an exclusive interview with the Bulletin, Mr Atkinson said the danger of bikie gangs was "under-rated" by the community. "The outlaw motorcycle gangs nationally present one of the greatest challenges to police. "I think the degree of that challenge and the risk they present to our society is underrated." The Gold Coast has one of the highest populations of bikie gangs in the country. Mr Atkinson said he would not be surprised if the Hells Angels were not considering a move closer to the Glitter Strip. "They are businesses, they look for opportunity so that wouldn't be a surprise," he said. "They market themselves as a group of mature men who have a love and interest in motorbikes and they do that very cleverly. The reality is they are highly sophisticated, well organised criminal enterprises that pose a genuine risk to the community and many are well represented by the finest and best lawyers who they retain to represent them." South East Region Assistant Commissioner Graham Rynders said the gangs were constantly looking to expand. "One of things about OMCGs is they look for opportunity for criminal enterprise," Mr Rynders said. "Throughout Queensland, throughout the country, probably throughout the world they are looking to expand. It is obviously dictated to by territory, depending on who or what other groups exist in what areas."

Police discovered a grisly scene on Sept. 10, 2000, when they entered a Cogmagun Road home in Hants County. “It was a very brutal scene,” Cpl. Shawn Sweeney, who was a constable with the Windsor rural RCMP detachment that day, testified Tuesday in Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Kentville. It was the second day of trial for Leslie Douglas Greenwood, 42, who is charged with two counts of first-degree murder in connection with the deaths of Barry Kirk Mersereau, 48, and his wife, Nancy Paula Christensen, 47. Sweeney, a Crown witness, testified that he and four other police officers who responded to a 911 call found Christensen sitting upright in a chair in the living room of her Centre Burlington home with a bullet wound in her left cheek, under her glasses. She had a cup of tea in her hand and a small dog was sitting in her lap. There were several bullet casings and lead fragments scattered on the floor. Mersereau was lying face down, with pools of blood around his head and body. Another dog, believed to be a German shepherd-Rottweiler mix, was hiding under covers on the bed in the master bedroom. A third dog was tied to the front porch and another had run off into the woods. Sweeney told Chief Justice Joseph Kennedy and the seven-woman, five-man jury hearing the case that the house appeared to be neat and orderly, with no signs of struggle. “It didn’t appear to be a house that was rifled through or things thrown around,” Sweeney testified. Const. Glenn Bonvie told the court it was immediately obvious that Mersereau and Christensen were dead. “There was no movement. There was no doubt that they were deceased.” Crown witness Ronald Connors owned a hunting cabin in the woods about half a kilometre away from the couple’s house. He testifed that he heard several shots at about 8:15 p.m. on Sept. 9. Connors said he heard six shots fired in quick succession, followed by a pause and a couple more shots. Moments later, there were more shots. He said he thought at first someone might be jacking deer, but Connors concluded that the shots didn’t sound like those from a high-powered hunting rifle. The jury was shown a video of the two bodies as they were found. Former RCMP officer David Clace, then in charge of the RCMP’s forensics identification unit in New Minas, said a large amount of money was found in plastic bags in a gym bag in one of the bedroom closets. The bag was later determined to contain about $65,000 in cash. Crown attorney Peter Craig has told the court that the victims were shot to death in their home in an execution-style killing as part of a Hells Angels-ordered killing. “They were killed in their home in a quiet community, with a teapot on the stove, with no signs of struggle and their baby in the next room,” Craig told the jury. He said evidence presented by as many as 40 Crown witnesses will show that Michael Lawrence and Greenwood murdered the couple on the orders of Jeffrey Lynds, a former Hells Angels operative who died recently in a Montreal jail of an apparent suicide. Lawrence, who owed Lynds money, pleaded guilty last January to three charges of first-degree murder and was sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for 25 years. Also killed that day, by Lawrence, was Charles Maddison, an innocent man who picked Lawrence up hitchhiking. Lawrence shot him to take his truck to commit a planned robbery. Craig said Lawrence, expected to be a crucial Crown witness, will testify that he and Greenwood shot the couple, one with a .357 Magnum, the other with a 32-calibre handgun, in what he called “planned and deliberate” killings. The couple’s 18-month-old baby boy was safely recovered from the house by neighbour Ruby McKenzie, who went to the victim’s home the day after the shootings. McKenzie said she brought the baby back to her mobile home and called police. Greenwood sat quietly during the proceedings, occasionally exchanging comments with his lawyer, Alain Begin. Begin is expected to argue that Greenwood went to the Mersereau house the day of the shootings to buy drugs, and that Lawrence shot the couple while Greenwood was waiting outside. Also charged with first-degree murder in the killings is Curtis Blair Lynds, 36, who is serving time in a federal prison for drug trafficking. A preliminary inquiry in his case is scheduled to begin July 16.

The cowboys have persuaded thousands of  our vulnerable pensioners — many in their 80s and 90s — to give up huge stakes of their property in exchange for investments that will never make a penny. 

The schemes are often sold by rogue financial advisers who exploit weak consumer laws on  the Continent by falsely claiming to be bona  fide accountants.

Most of the victims are Britons who retired to Spain or France and wanted to use the cash in their homes to help with soaring living costs. 

John Parsons, founder of the Costa del Sol Action Group that is helping some of the victims in Spain, says: ‘The effect of all this worry is enormous. The stress has brought on a lot of serious health issues and they are extremely worried about their futures.

‘These people were not greedy or stupid. They were on fixed pensions and being financially squeezed, so jumped at the possibility of solving that situation.’

The latest crisis follows a Money Mail  investigation in 2008, which exposed how hundreds of British pensioners living on the Costa del Sol had gambled their homes in a risky equity-release scheme run by failed Icelandic bank Landsbanki.

Now we can reveal how thousands more pensioners have fallen for other risky equity-release schemes on the Continent and are being hounded by banks demanding hundreds of thousands of pounds.

During the property boom at the start of this century, around 100,000 pensioners left Britain to live out their days in southern France and Spain — attracted by a warmer climate and cheaper way of life.

Many had a small pension, but hundreds of thousands of pounds from the sale of their UK home, which had soared in value over their lifetime.

This money was used to supplement their incomes and buy a new home abroad. But soon after they moved, the cost of living in some areas soared as hundreds of thousands of Britons and Germans bought second homes.

Many pensioners found they needed extra cash, and became easy prey for unregulated financial advisers who had left Britain to tap into the new wealth in these regions. 

Local rules meant they were able to act unchecked, selling investments from banks based anywhere in the world.

Sometimes they claimed to be chartered accountants, but were not — many had never even registered with local authorities. 

In Spain in particular, these advisers could largely sell whatever they wanted — including types of investments and equity-release schemes outlawed in the UK. These paid handsome commissions that could net advisers a £50,000 payday.

Banks offering equity-release loans included Icelandic bank Landsbanki, Scandinavian banks Nordea and Sydbank, and UK private bank Rothschild. However, Money Mail understands they are not the only banks involved.

The majority of victims were told they could borrow the entire value of their property. The loan would incur interest, typically of up to 6.5 per cent. It meant that after ten years, a €500,000 (£412,667) loan would balloon to €681,240 (£562,251). To offset this, a large chunk — usually around 75 per cent of the loan — would be invested in a fund sold by the adviser. 

Pensioners were told returns would be so good that not only would they cover the interest on the equity release, but give the borrowers a little extra to spend.

INVESTMENTS THAT TURNED TOXIC

But the promises made turned out to be very different to the theory. This meant returns did not cover the cost of the interest repayments on the equity release. 

As the fund fell in value, it ate into the capital that borrowers needed to repay the debt. Charges for fund managers and commission also reduced the returns further. 

Worse was to follow when house prices in Spain fell. They had risen by 44 per cent between 2004 and 2008, when many of the victims had bought their homes. They have since plummeted by around 20 per cent.

Those who had borrowed almost all of their property value were soon in negative equity — where the value of the property value was less than the money owed on it — leaving them unable to sell to clear their debt. 

In theory the borrowers were expected to pay off their loan at the end of four years. But because the value of the investments plunged so low, it triggered small print in the equity-release contract that allowed banks to demand repayment early.

In the case of those expats with Landsbanki, the bank collapsed and the investment fund was snatched by company liquidators. Then a further problem struck — the value of the pound plunged against the euro. 

Many of the victims were paid pensions in pounds and relied on converting the money into euros every month. The drop meant the value of their pensions fell by a third.

RETIREMENT DREAMS LEFT SHATTERED

Campaigners estimate thousands of British pensioners have lost money through these schemes. Former actress Julia Hilling, 88, fears her home will be swallowed up in repayments to her mortgage from Rothschild Bank.

She was sold the mortgage in 2005 by a Malaga-based British financial adviser. Today, this company is classed as unauthorised by the Spanish authorities. Her property was valued at €300,000 (£249,966) and she took out a loan for €262,000 (£217,827). Around €17,000 (£14,138) was used for living expenses and she put €245,000 (£203,693) in an investment fund. 

Tempted: Julia Hilling, pictured was an actress in the 1940s, says she went for a scheme because she needed to pay bills

Mrs Hilling, who starred in musicals in the Forties and in revues with Sir Bruce Forsyth at the Windmill Theatre, London, had never invested or even had a mortgage before. 

Since 2005, the fund has plunged by around a third and will no longer cover her mortgage. She owes €330,000 (£274,362) and the debt continues to grow. Mrs Hilling says she is unable to cover these costs and fears the bank will take her property when she dies.

‘I needed the money desperately to pay everyday bills while I was out here, as I didn’t want to rely on my family,’ she says. 

Rothschild told Money Mail it would not repossess Mrs Hilling’s home. It stressed it had not sold the investment to her and was not demanding repayment nor had it paid commission. It urged her to contact the bank. 

Another victim is Eric Mould, 64, who after a career in sales moved to a seaside villa in Puerto Banus, near Malaga, in 2007. He and his wife Mary, 60, sold their four-bedroom detached house in the UK to buy a three-bedroom villa with a swimming pool for €1,188,000 (£990,000).

But five years later they are living in a friend’s flat in the town and battling to pay €2,100 (£1,745) a month in mortgage repayments to Danish bank Nykredit.

Shortly after arriving in Spain, the couple borrowed €1 million against their villa with the bank. They say the British financial adviser who sold them the equity-release mortgage told them it would be a ‘win-win’ situation.

They were told they could free up hundreds of thousands of pounds from the mortgage, and the fund would pay off the loan. They believed the investment they were sold separately through Danish bank Sydbank would leave a little extra to boost their pensions.

To cover the mortgage, the Moulds have rented out their dream home. Their friend is letting them live rent-free in the apartment. The couple fear it is only a matter of time before their home is repossessed. And because property values have dropped, they could lose up to €300,000 (£249,966)

‘This has totally devastated us. It is heart-breaking — we face losing the home we worked for a lifetime to buy,’  says Mr Mould. 

Sydbank would not comment on  the case.

Others who took out equity-release schemes with collapsed Icelandic bank Landsbanki have been told it will settle — as long as they pay part of the money owed, in some cases hundreds of thousands of pounds.

One couple, Linda and Frances Barlow, aged 63 and 75, who live in Nice in the south of France, believe the bank’s liquidators will repossess their home by May unless they stump up €1.3 million (£1.08 million).

The liquidators proposed a compromise deal, but it would have required the couple to find €500,000, which they do not have.

The Barlows took only a small proportion of the loan as cash. The rest was invested by the bank, and lost when it collapsed in 2008.

‘We wanted some cash to renovate,’ says Mrs Barlow, a musician from London. ‘We didn’t want to take out a big loan, but the financial adviser told us we were foolish to be sitting on an asset and that we should get an equity release to have an income. Now we are going to lose everything.’

THE FIGHT TO KEEP THEIR HOMES

Airlines have warned the Home Secretary that Britain "risks gridlock" at airports including Heathrow and Gatwick over the Easter break due to staff shortages. More than 370,000 passengers will leave Heathrow airport between Good Friday and Easter Monday, and 200,000 will pass through Gatwick. A spokesman for Heathrow owner BAA told the Daily Telegraph: "Immigration waiting times during peak periods at Heathrow are currently unacceptable and we have called on the UK Border Force to address the problem as a matter of urgency. "There isn't a trade-off between strong border security and a good passenger experience. UK Border Force should be delivering both." Meanwhile, Britons attempting to travel by rail and road face delays because of engineering works taking place on motorways and train lines. Stretches of the M1 and M25 will be affected, and the seven million passengers travelling by train over the weekend will see disruption to travel to and from Euston, King's Cross, Liverpool Street, and Waterloo stations in London. British Airways and Virgin Airlines are among 11 firms that have written to Theresa May in anticipation of "unacceptable" delays to hundreds of thousands of passengers travelling over the long weekend. The UK Border Agency is under fire for a lack of staff able to carry out full security checks, which the airlines say must result in a recruitment drive or the relaxing of some of the more stringent measures currently in place. A spokeswoman for Virgin Airlines said: "While the decision on what level of check should be made at the border is, of course, a matter for Government, we are concerned that there is currently a mismatch between policy and resource. "After years of reducing frontline staff, returning to a 100% check system will undoubtedly mean lengthy queues at UK airports over critical holiday periods such as Easter and the Diamond Jubilee."

 Trolling Could Get You 25 Years in Jail in Arizona One of the Internet's basic tenets—the right to be as much of a myopic, infantile asshat as humanly possible—is currently under attack in Arizona. A sweeping update to the state's telecommunications harrasment bill could make naughty, angry words a Class 1 misdemeanor. Or worse. It's a dangerous precedent, yet another bill written and supported by legislators who fundamentally don't understand the nature of the internet. And I'm not just being a, well, you know. Arizona House Bill 2549 passed both legislative houses last Thursday and is now awaiting approval from Arizona's governor Brewer. The statute states that: "It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use a ANY ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL DEVICE and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person." Emphasis added. If the electronic devices and means are employed to stalk a victim, the penalty bumps up to a Class 3 felony. For those not intimately familiar with Arizona penal law, a Class 1 misdemeanor is punishable by a $2,500 fine and up to six months in jail (it's the most aggressive misdemeanor charge the state can bring). A Class 3 felony, meanwhile, carries a minimum sentence of 2.5 years for non-dangerous offenders with no prior record. And a max of 25 years in jail. Opponents of the bill argue that the wording is overly broad and could easily be interpreted to include not just one-on-one communications but public forums like 4Chan, Reddit, and anywhere else that allows commenting. You thought the banhammer was bad? Try handcuffs. It could also have a chilling effect on free speech by prohibiting shocking or "profane" language online. And since the bill stipulates that the offense only has to occur on Arizona soil (since a Facebook comment is definitely a geographic place, right?) that basically puts the entire Internet on notice. The bill's supporters argue that the steps are necessary to prevent online bullying. Despite the public outcry, the bill has seen very little resistance from elected officials. However, given how well Arizona's other recent, short-lived, and generally draconian propositions—-including its racial profiling, anti-gay adoption, and anti-immigration bills—-have fared, House Bill 2549 might not be a law for long, assuming Governor Brewer even signs it.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued new safety information about these cholesterol-lowering drugs that are prescribed to millions of Americans to lower the risk of heart disease. If you're among them, you should understand what the FDA's new guidance means for your health. "Before anyone gets too concerned, you should know that statins are so widely used because they have a long track record of safety and effectiveness," says Dr. Mark Taber, a cardiologist with SSM Heart Institute at St. Joseph Health Center. "All in all, statins have a very high benefit to risk ratio. The widespread use of the drugs, when indicated, probably accounts to a significant degree for the improvement in life expectancy in this country." The FDA called attention to the threat of liver damage as a rare side effect of statins and advised that regular liver enzyme testing is no longer considered useful in predicting or preventing liver injury. "Actually, in general they liberalized the follow up needed for liver function tests on patients taking statins, due to the very low incidence of true liver issues," Taber says. The main warnings related to a slightly higher incidence of developing diabetes while on statins, and a poorly substantiated claim that statins could result in cognitive impairment. Taber points out that cognitive problems, such as confusion or memory problems, were not documented in clinical studies, only by patient reports to the FDA website. "By stating these concerns, the FDA is raising awareness about the potential side effects of statins, but cardiologists already know that there are inherent risks, and we monitor patients appropriately to help ensure that side effects do not occur or are dealt with quickly," Taber notes. "If there is any evidence of a side effect that could be problematic, we can change the medication. But the fact remains that it's important to decrease risk of heart disease, and for many people statins are needed when diet and exercise alone don't result in acceptable cholesterol levels." Whenever a new prescription medication is started, you should look over the package insert to learn about potential side effects. Signs of liver damage, for instance, include fatigue, loss of appetite, right upper abdominal pain, dark urine and jaundice. Any of these symptoms should be reported to your doctor for evaluation. It is important to remember that you should not stop taking a medication without consulting your doctor first. Discontinuing use of a prescribed drug can be far more dangerous than the side effect you're worried about. "All the side effects listed by the FDA are rare, and the risk of heart attack is far more concerning," Taber says. "Some patients may need extra monitoring or may need to try more than one statin before we find the optimal choice, but in general statins are very well tolerated and don't cause problems for the people who take them." The advice above is universal when it comes to your health. Concerns should be discussed with your doctor, and decisions should always be made as part of a team approach to creating a healthy life.

John Holliday had been on a higher 40mg dose of cholesterol pills for only a few weeks when he started to lose his concentration. ‘I’d be watching TV and suddenly find myself unable to follow the plot of a drama,’ says John, 52, a telecoms project manager who lives in Southend-on-Sea, Essex, with his wife Jill, 51, and their two children Adam, 20, and Emma, 16. ‘I’d have to read the same page of a book over and over because I couldn’t take any information in. ‘I’d always been known for my amazing memory — I was great on trivia and had total recall of events that happened 20 years ago, but suddenly I couldn’t remember things and my brain felt fuzzy.’ Just like up to seven million other people in Britain, John had been prescribed a statin to lower his blood cholesterol levels. The drugs are credited by the British Heart Foundation as contributing towards the dramatic 50 per cent fall in deaths from heart attacks in the past ten years. But while there is consensus that statins are lifesavers for people who have previously had a heart attack, concern is growing over their debilitating side-effects. They include muscle weakness, depression, sleep disturbance, sexual dysfunction, muscle pain and damage, gastro-intestinal problems, headaches, joint pains and nausea. Now, official bodies here and in the U.S. have ordered that the drugs must carry warnings for cognitive problems, too. Worryingly, it’s claimed GPs are failing to warn patients of the effect statins can have on the mind — meaning they may mistake them for signs of ageing or Alzheimer’s. ‘When I went back to my doctor after six weeks for a blood test, I told him how dreadful I was feeling,’ says John. ‘But he just said all drugs had side-effects and didn’t mention reducing the dose.’ It's claimed GPs are failing to warn patients of the effect statins can have on the mind - meaning they may mistake them for signs of ageing or Alzheimer's Things came to a head when a friend showed John an electrical circuit he’d built for his car. ‘I’d worked with circuits since I was 16 but it made no sense,’ he says. So John insisted on seeing his doctor again and repeated his concerns about his rapidly declining memory. This time the GP told him he could start on another type of statin when he felt well enough, and so John stopped taking the drugs immediately. ‘It took a few months, but gradually my memory returned and I’ve got my concentration back. I can’t say for sure statins caused these problems, but it seems like too much of a coincidence.’ Earlier this year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the U.S. ordered statins must carry warnings that some users have reported cognitive problems including memory loss, forgetfulness and confusion. This followed a decision by the UK’s Medicines Healthcare Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to add memory problems to the list of  possible statin side-effects in late 2009. The FDA said reports about the symptoms were from across all statin products and age groups. Those affected reported feeling fuzzy or unfocused in their thought process — though these were found to be rare and reversible. The FDA also warned, following U.S. research, that patients on statins had a small excess risk of developing Type 2 diabetes — but stressed that the benefits of taking a statin still outweigh this. The MHRA had 2,675 reports for adverse drug reactions connected with statins between 2007 and 2011. Officially, side-effects are rare —affecting only 1 per cent of people on the pills — but some doctors say they are under-reported. Dr Malcolm Kendrick, a GP and author of The Great Cholesterol Con, says he frequently sees patients suffering from mental confusion in his job in hospital intermediary care for the elderly. ‘Many of the patients I see will have been admitted to hospital after a fall or similar crisis,’ he says. ‘If they appear confused I’ll often advise taking them off statins to see if it has any effect — in my experience, about 10 to 15 per cent of people who appeared to have memory problems experienced an improvement in their memory symptoms after being taken off the drug. ‘I had one dramatic case where a lady was admitted to hospital on 40mg a day of simvastatin with such poor memory function her family asked me about power of attorney. 'I suggested taking her off statins and within a week her memory had returned to normal. She went home a fit and independent 83-year-old.’ Dr Kendrick says cholesterol is the main constituent of synapses (structures that allow signals to pass between brain cells and to create new memories) and is essential for brain function. ‘It is still not proven that statins have a significant effect on mortality — it has been calculated that a man who has had a heart attack who took a statin for five years would extend his life by only 14 days. 'Too many statins are being given to people at low risk. ‘Even in the highest risk group you need to treat 200 people a year with statins to delay just one death. 'One day the harm these drugs are doing is going to be obvious — the benefits are being over-hyped and the risks swept under the carpet.’ While Dr Kendrick’s controversial view is in the minority, one large review of 14 studies by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, published by the highly respected Cochrane Library last year, concluded there was ‘little evidence’ cholesterol-lowering drugs protect people who are not at risk of heart disease. This review has been criticised by other doctors who say side-effects are rare and that there are still benefits even for people at lower risk who do not have established heart disease. These defenders of statins include Professor Colin Baigent of the Clinical Trial Service at Oxford University, who published research in 2010 showing statins reduced deaths from all causes by 10 per cent over five years. ‘There is relatively little evidence of cognitive impairment — what evidence there is all comes from observational studies.  ‘People read about side-effects and then put two and two together and blame the statins for their muscle pain or other health problems — it’s just not reliable evidence. ‘If you look at the best-quality randomised controlled trial where patients don’t know if they are taking a statin or placebo, there is no evidence of memory problems. 'Even the FDA says the risks of cognitive problems are very small and go away when statins are discontinued. ‘We’re in danger of forgetting just how effective these drugs are.’ Dr Dermot Neely of the charity Heart UK, and lead consultant at the Lipid and Metabolic Clinic at the Royal Victoria Infirmary in Newcastle, agrees side-effects with statins are rare. ‘I’ve been dealing with patients on statins since 1987 and I can count on the fingers of one hand the number whose memory symptoms turned out to be caused by statins.’ However, he said he often saw patients who had not been told about side-effects. ‘It’s important GPs are clear about the drugs statins can interact with, such as certain antibiotics, as this can get overlooked. ‘If a patient notices an adverse effect after starting statins, they should discuss this with their GP —but not stop their drugs suddenly because this can be dangerous.’ Sonya Porter, 73, decided to stop taking statins after her memory problems became so bad that she walked away from a cashpoint leaving her money behind. ‘I was permanently fuzzy-headed and just couldn’t seem to concentrate,’ says Sonya, a retired PA from Woking, Surrey. Then I started to get scared I might have Alzheimer’s. After reading about memory problems associated with statins, I thought it was at least a possibility. I decided to come off the pills to see if it made any difference. ‘I didn’t ask my GP, I just did it — I’d rather die of a heart attack than Alzheimer’s disease. Within a month I felt normal again and didn’t have any problems with memory. ‘I’m terrified that I could have been misdiagnosed with Alzheimer’s.’ John Holliday is also reluctant to go back on statins. ‘I wouldn’t rule it out completely — my latest test showed my cholesterol levels have gone up,’ he says. ‘But on balance, I’d rather take my chances with heart disease than feel as confused as that again. It’s all very well living slightly longer — but it’s about quality of life, too.’