The reality of primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular complications 
in people with diabetes is alarming, even in developed countries with a 
well-structured medical system. Even though therapeutic targets have been more 
clearly defined during the last decades, their implementation is still 
suboptimal. Financial and structural reasons, insufficient information of 
physicians and patients, along with a low compliance of the latter are only a 
few reasons that have been incriminated. To eliminate some of these 
inconveniences, attempts to standardize and simplify therapies have been made. 
Treatment with aspirin and statin for every patient with diabetes has been 
postulated. Some went even further, developing the concept of a "polypill," an 
integrated pharmacological agent with up to six different compounds meant to 
prevent cardiovascular disease in the broad population. Likewise, the idea of a 
"polymeal" tries to implement healthy nutrients into the populations' lifestyle 
in a standardized fashion. Our article highlights some of the advantages and 
pitfalls of these concepts and reflects our point of view with regard to some 
treatment aspects in people with diabetes. As part of a pro and contra 
discussion, our article is arguing against the use of statins in all patients 
with diabetes and especially against the indiscriminate use of a polypill.