Statins

[Northerner]

Do you take statins? I've been on them since diagnosis and always been uneasy about taking drugs that interfere in what is a pretty significant way with my body chemistry. Last night I decided to stop taking them, after reading 'The Great Cholesterol Con' - see my review at http://www.diabetessupport.co.uk/boards/showthread.php?t=4114

I accept that I may be taking a risk with my future health by doing this, and wouldn't recommend it to anyone until they have read up about it and, if necessary consulted their doctor. But the way I see it as far as I am concerned the benefits of taking them are far outweighed by the potential risks.

Just wondering if others have come to this conclusion, or what people perceive as the benefits - beyond the usual media hype about 'wonder drugs'?

 

[am64]

I was put on them when 1st diagnoised along with 2x metaformin ..but taken off when pratice nurse saw me taking one of kids to see doc and said you look awful get an appointmtnt asap...which i did, was taken off statins and reduced my metaformin to 1x daily...colestrol still high (trig 3.8) but im working on it!

 

[AlisonM]

I was put on statins a few days after being diagnosed. My cholesterol is sky high it seems. I don't seem to have had too many side effects* but am very concerned about the long term implications. In the short term however I'll keep using them, I need all the help I can get. It's only been a month.

*Not that I could tell as they seem to be the same as the ones for Metformin and I was miserable anyway.

 

[C*5_Dodger]

But Why Take Them

Do you take statins? I've been on them since diagnosis and always been uneasy about taking drugs that interfere in what is a pretty significant way with my body chemistry. Last night I decided to stop taking them, after reading 'The Great Cholesterol Con' - see my review at http://www.diabetessupport.co.uk/boards/showthread.php?t=4114

I accept that I may be taking a risk with my future health by doing this, and wouldn't recommend it to anyone until they have read up about it and, if necessary consulted their doctor. But the way I see it as far as I am concerned the benefits of taking them are far outweighed by the potential risks.

Just wondering if others have come to this conclusion, or what people perceive as the benefits - beyond the usual media hype about 'wonder drugs'?

Dear Northerner,

I agree with your point about risk and benefit, but the real point at issue is the reason they are prescribed. The overwhelming reason is that they lower cholesterol because it is believed that high cholesterol causes heart disease (did you watch Malcolm Kendrick's video that I included in a recent post?). However, it is now becoming clear that cholesterol and saturated fat do not cause heart disease. Statins work because they are powerful anti-inflamatory drugs so unless you have elevated C reactive protein they should not even be considered and even then only if it's elevated due to inflamation connected with heart disease. BTW, I note VBH has stopped them also!

Regards Dodger

PS Good review - found it very illuminating too

 

[Northerner]

Hi Dodger, I think this is the key point I took away from the book - cholesterol levels have not been proven beyond doubt to contribute to heart disease and statins only appear to be of benefit in a way that is not related to their cholesterol-lowering properties!

I'm beginning to view the medical establishment in much the same way that I view greedy bankers, I'm afraid. Doctors get paid for keeping patients' cholesterol levels low (via statins), researchers get paid for interpreting results of trials (designed by pharma giants) in a way that will increase the market for drugs, pharma giants just get paid - full stop! How can it be that we are now being made to believe that everyone over 50 should be on largely unproven drugs for the rest of our lives?

I haven't decided yet whether to tell my GP, but it will be interesting to see what my cholesterol levels are next time around. As I mentioned, I was 2.4 last year, but I did stop them for several weeks as we tried to pinpoint some side effects I was having from all the drugs I was on. My subsequent reading was 3.7. I went back on the statins,despite still being below the 'recommended' 4.0 and in spite of the fact that I have no history of heart disease and statins are shown to have NO value in increasing lifespan with no history. Last week I was 3.2 - a level I now consider potentially dangerous rather than 'the best they've ever seen'!😱

So - the next thing I need to do is get my blood pressure under control so that I can stop that pill! Then there will only be aspirin remaining...down from 11 different drugs after diagnosis, not including insulin (don't plan on stopping that!)

p.s. I have read elsewhere that Dr Kendrick's explanation of the chemistry of saturated fat is flawed. I'm prepared to accept that everything he says is not gospel by any means, but the underlying message is extremely persuasive.

 

[C*5_Dodger]

Hi Dodger, I think this is the key point I took away from the book - cholesterol levels have not been proven beyond doubt to contribute to heart disease and statins only appear to be of benefit in a way that is not related to their cholesterol-lowering properties!

I'm beginning to view the medical establishment in much the same way that I view greedy bankers, I'm afraid. Doctors get paid for keeping patients' cholesterol levels low (via statins), researchers get paid for interpreting results of trials (designed by pharma giants) in a way that will increase the market for drugs, pharma giants just get paid - full stop! How can it be that we are now being made to believe that everyone over 50 should be on largely unproven drugs for the rest of our lives?

I haven't decided yet whether to tell my GP, but it will be interesting to see what my cholesterol levels are next time around. As I mentioned, I was 2.4 last year, but I did stop them for several weeks as we tried to pinpoint some side effects I was having from all the drugs I was on. My subsequent reading was 3.7. I went back on the statins,despite still being below the 'recommended' 4.0 and in spite of the fact that I have no history of heart disease and statins are shown to have NO value in increasing lifespan with no history. Last week I was 3.2 - a level I now consider potentially dangerous rather than 'the best they've ever seen'!😱

So - the next thing I need to do is get my blood pressure under control so that I can stop that pill! Then there will only be aspirin remaining...down from 11 different drugs after diagnosis, not including insulin (don't plan on stopping that!)

p.s. I have read elsewhere that Dr Kendrick's explanation of the chemistry of saturated fat is flawed. I'm prepared to accept that everything he says is not gospel by any means, but the underlying message is extremely persuasive.

Dear Northerner,

Good on you mate! The only drug I take is Valsartan for BP and ofcourse Asprin - like you I will never stop that! I may have to start insulin soon, since my "controlled" carb diet is really becoming "low" now. I think after 15 years my beta-cell function is just about shot.

Regards Dodger

PS Kendrick oversimplified the chemistry of fats but there is much more persuasive info' out there that says saturated fat is not evil

 

[Northerner]

Dear Northerner,

Good on you mate! The only drug I take is Valsartan for BP and ofcourse Asprin - like you I will never stop that! I may have to start insulin soon, since my "controlled" carb diet is really becoming "low" now. I think after 15 years my beta-cell function is just about shot.

Regards Dodger

PS Kendrick oversimplified the chemistry of fats but there is much more persuasive info' out there that says saturated fat is not evil

Dodger, I know you are committed to your controlled carb diet, but I did read recently that extremely low carb diets can adversely affect thyroid function - but you have probably already researched that, no doubt!

 

[C*5_Dodger]

Dodger, I know you are committed to your controlled carb diet, but I did read recently that extremely low carb diets can adversely affect thyroid function - but you have probably already researched that, no doubt!

Yup, I read about the thyroid thing but, as you are aware, things are never what they seem in the nutrition game.

Regards Dodger

 

[Sue P]

Like you, I've never been happy with the idea that I should take an unproven drug just because my GP gets paid more if I do. I was prescribed them a few months back when my cholesterol was 5.2. My diet hadn't been great, so I joined slimming world, cut back more on carbs and sugar (as I know I already should have done). My glucose levels improved so much I began to think my monitor was broken as i kept getting readings of 5.6 - better than I had done for years. Next month I get my cholesterol tested again and am hoping this is also a lot better. If not, no doubt he will try to persuade me but I know so many people who have had problems that I really do not want to take them.

 

[Northerner]

Like you, I've never been happy with the idea that I should take an unproven drug just because my GP gets paid more if I do. I was prescribed them a few months back when my cholesterol was 5.2. My diet hadn't been great, so I joined slimming world, cut back more on carbs and sugar (as I know I already should have done). My glucose levels improved so much I began to think my monitor was broken as i kept getting readings of 5.6 - better than I had done for years. Next month I get my cholesterol tested again and am hoping this is also a lot better. If not, no doubt he will try to persuade me but I know so many people who have had problems that I really do not want to take them.

I think because I've never really been near doctors until developing diabetes, I always assumed they know best on these things. I think that the numerous stories about their lack of knowledge about diabetes has demolished that myth, and now I question things - particularly if they appear to be driven in some part by financial incentive.

Well done on all your efforts Sue, I hope that you are well rewarded for them with some excellent results that match your superb BG levels!🙂

 

[Peter C]

Do you take statins? I've been on them since diagnosis and always been uneasy about taking drugs that interfere in what is a pretty significant way with my body chemistry. Last night I decided to stop taking them, after reading 'The Great Cholesterol Con' - see my review at http://www.diabetessupport.co.uk/boards/showthread.php?t=4114

Hi there Northerner,
Does Kendrick mention postprandial hyperlipidemia and Hyper responders to dietary cholesterol at all?
If he doesn't discuss those 2 items you could probably chuck the book in the bin ( I find it difficult to take a "medical" book seriously that has the word "con" in the title anyway ).

 

[NiVZ]

Hi all,

Reading your replies with interest. I've recently been put on Thyroxine (2 tablets every morning) which I'm ok with. My Thyroid was underactive and latest test shows that tablets are working.

However, my total cholesterol was slightly elevated at 5.2 and I've got 6 months to get it down otherwise they want to start me on statins. I've read there are a number of side effects with statins as well as the two sides of the argument highlighted in this thread.

I'm really determined not to add another pill to my medication needs and I've cut out all my between meal snacks (which were mainly biscuits). I've switched to Olive Oil based spreads, cut out animal fats, and am going to start eating more oily fish. Also read recently that Benecol is good for lowering cholesterol so I might investigate this as well.

NiVZ

 

[bev]

Hmm... bit worried now. My cardiologist told me that my cholestrol was 4.5 and this is ok. Are you saying that i should be under 4? Alex was 3.2 on diagnosis and he is 11. Bev

 

[Northerner]

Hmm... bit worried now. My cardiologist told me that my cholestrol was 4.5 and this is ok. Are you saying that i should be under 4? Alex was 3.2 on diagnosis and he is 11. Bev

No bev, dont't worry - 4.0 is the recommendation for diabetics. 4.5 is pretty much perfect fr you! Can't comment on Alex, as children may be different.

 

[bev]

No bev, dont't worry - 4.0 is the recommendation for diabetics. 4.5 is pretty much perfect fr you! Can't comment on Alex, as children may be different.

Phew - thanks Northerner! Why does it have to be lower for diabetics?Bev

 

[Northerner]

Phew - thanks Northerner! Why does it have to be lower for diabetics?Bev

They think that we have this additional risk factor for cardiovascular disease, so try to keep the other 'risk' factors tighter than for non-diabetics. It's the same with blood pressure, they like that to be lower too.

 

[bev]

They think that we have this additional risk factor for cardiovascular disease, so try to keep the other 'risk' factors tighter than for non-diabetics. It's the same with blood pressure, they like that to be lower too.

It never rains but it pours......

Have you tried the spibelt yet?🙂Bev

 

[Northerner]

Do you take statins? I've been on them since diagnosis and always been uneasy about taking drugs that interfere in what is a pretty significant way with my body chemistry. Last night I decided to stop taking them, after reading 'The Great Cholesterol Con' - see my review at http://www.diabetessupport.co.uk/boards/showthread.php?t=4114

Hi there Northerner,
Does Kendrick mention postprandial hyperlipidemia and Hyper responders to dietary cholesterol at all?
If he doesn't discuss those 2 items you could probably chuck the book in the bin ( I find it difficult to take a "medical" book seriously that has the word "con" in the title anyway ).

The book is more about the misrepresentation of trial statistics and the invention of ad=hoc hypotheses to explain away conficts within the 'expected' results. At one point he discusses 'teleoanalysis' which is a method by which the researchers decide what would happen if a certain trial was done - without actually doing the trial!😱

 

[Northerner]

It never rains but it pours......

Have you tried the spibelt yet?🙂Bev

Going to try it tomorrow! Today was a rest day and yesterday Id already been for my run when it arrived! Will report back!🙂

 

[Northerner]

...However, my total cholesterol was slightly elevated at 5.2 and I've got 6 months to get it down otherwise they want to start me on statins. I've read there are a number of side effects with statins as well as the two sides of the argument highlighted in this thread.

I'm really determined not to add another pill to my medication needs and I've cut out all my between meal snacks (which were mainly biscuits). I've switched to Olive Oil based spreads, cut out animal fats, and am going to start eating more oily fish. Also read recently that Benecol is good for lowering cholesterol so I might investigate this as well.

NiVZ

Hi Nivz, I must admit that, after what I've read lately 5.2 would look perfectly fine to me. It's worth reading the book by Robert Povey for good advice about how to keep cholesterol at healthy levels, and the Kendrick book for the lowdown on statins. I have also read quite a bit on the web about responses to Kendrick's book - there are flaws, but the underlying message leaves me very cynical about the reasons fr prescribing statins.

Hopefully, it won't be an issue for you as you may not be prescribed them!🙂