The Care Quality Commission is a newish organisation, with the role of being “the independent regulator of health and social care in England…we regulate health and adult services whether provided by the NHS, local authorities, private companies or voluntary organisations.”

I had rather hoped that various alternative practitioners charging vast amounts for non-evidence-based treatments would be trembling as their doors were knocked on and decent evidence demanded. But so far, no.

This report from GP Newspaper – Watchdog calls for systematic statin checks –  suggests that the CQC will be montioring practices to make sure enough, and the cheaper, types of statins – cholestorol lowering drugs - are being used.

However statins are very unpleasant for some people to take, and many people don’t want to take them when they find that their chance of benefit is rather small. While the cheaper versions are perfectly good for the majority, there are a few people unable to either tolerate or reduce their cholesterol on them, meaning a different, and less cheap, statin might be justified.

I do hate it when the long story of how and why someone came to be, or not be on a statin is reduced to a number on a page. The very best doctor might be someone who prescribed virtually no statins, having explained small benefits clearly and having managed to assist patients to reduce their cardiac risk by other means, such as stopping smoking and losing weight.

Whereas the doctor with all his patients on statins could prescribe them without ever taking time to discuss the pros and cons.

I have no objection at all towards anonymised data being made public. But it’s what you then go on to do with it.