@Pinkorchid I have been away and have only just spotted this thread. I think we need to divide side effects into two main categories. There's the ones that may be quoted on the leaflets as known side effects (nosebleeds, sore throat, headaches, feeling sick, muscle and joint pain etc). Anyone may or may not get these.
The long term side effects are the ones that mostly concern me. Statins have been linked with higher blood sugars, and therefore they can cause diabetes. They have also been linked with age related macular degeneration amongst other things. I found quite a few studies/articles which said that if you used statins for over a year then there was a risk of this and also a greater risk of becoming diabetic. This is one of the more general links I read about why one shouldn't take statins.
http://drsircus.com/medicine/run-from-your-statin-recommending-cardiologist
My own view which I have stated many times on this forum is that it is well known that statins cause muscle problems in some people. The heart is also a muscle. Why take a drug that may harm the very organ it is supposed to protect? And why mess up other organs whilst trying to protect the heart? It doesn't make any kind of sense to me.
Good point!
If a new medical condition (e.g. Macular degeneration or T2) emerges a year or 5 down the line, who is going to make the connection? The person taking the tablets? The doc who may not even notice the statin prescription when they refer you to a specialist? The optician? I've certainly never been questioned by my optician about other prescriptions.
Interestingly, I have been in exactly this situation with another drug, called Cabergoline.
I have been taking it for nearly 20 years to treat a tumour in the pituitary gland. I know that I read the contraindications listed in the leaflet when I started it, but it was a necessary drug (it still is) because it reduces the amount of hormone the tumour pumps out. I have no criticism of the initial prescription. I still need to take it. At the time I was told it would be used for a couple of years and, with luck, the tumour would atrophy and the problem would disappear.
But 15 years after that first prescription, with no tumour atrophy, no monitoring, and no change in prescription, I casually read the leaflet again.
This time, the following phrases leapt out at me:
'May increase blood glucose levels'
'May cause or increase insulin resistance'
'May increase risk of diabetes'
'Regular monitoring of blood glucose recommended'
'Prolonged use may enlarge the heart.'
'Heart ultrasounds recommended every 3 years'
I pointed these out to the doctor, and received a guilty look of horror, an immediate referral to endocrinology, an ultrasound and a firm denial that my glucose intolerance was anything to do with Cabergoline. Apparently it was because I was fat. Because I eat too much. He had obviously never heard of pituitary gland tumour effects on appetite and metabolism then...
I'm not going to play that little scenario out again with statins, thank you.