• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Statins Increase for diabetics??

The subject of diagnosis creep (in particular as regards statins) was one of many subjects discussed in this week's edition of our ABC Program "Catalyst" called "Too Much Medicine?"

Definitely worth watching:

 
Kazz94 said:
I have heard this elsewhere and it fills me with fear. My GP gave me one test that came back just in the diabetic range and was talking about statins on the phone call before she'd even seen me. She hasnt done a 2nd test and took a bit of persuading not to give me statins, metformin and blood pressure meds. I have been 2 weeks on the LCHF diet along with 16/8 IF and I have lost 6lbs but more importantly, I got a BG meter today and all my results are in the normal range. I accept that I need to carry on and that if I had been eating loads of carbs the result would have been higher but I could have been on all those meds now and would probably be unable to go to work, last time I took BP meds i came to a complete standstill!! Oh and my BP is down too.

I have decided not to go to the DESMOND course as I have lost all faith in the medical profession. My employers have arranged for me to see their own Occ Health instead and i have private healthcare where i do have more of a say in how I am treated.

Reading some of these posts and other research i have done leaves me feeling appalled at the lack of understanding i.e how carbs affect BS. This is basic stuff that is being ignored and i wonder if anyone on here has done anything to raise awareness? How many others are there out there who are blindly following their doctors orders. Evidently the biggest killer of humans right now in the world is prescribed medication!
Click to expand...
Understood and all, Kazz, but you can say No, you know. If your decision is against, surely the doctor has to accept that. They can put a note on the file that you refused. No? So don't despair.

I'm in Denmark, which of course is completely different, but here the docs are quite clear. They have no duty to force you to accept treatment. It's their duty to make sure you understand the choice, if you decline their recommendation.
 
Indy51 said:
The subject of diagnosis creep (in particular as regards statins) was one of many subjects discussed in this week's edition of our ABC Program "Catalyst" called "Too Much Medicine?"

Definitely worth watching:

Click to expand...
I really like the sound of this Indy. Going to watch soon.

Cheers, Lucy
 
I just came back from a GP appt that I was requested to make "to discuss my test results". When I phoned up to check which results, as I haven't had a blood test in two months, I was told it was something different which made me really worried, but the (new) GP just wanted to talk to me about cholesterol. She brought up my results from the end-of-August test, which I'd already discussed with my regular GP shortly after. I was too relieved that the other issue was actually fine (I asked), so it didn't even occur to me at the time to complain about this unnecessary appointment, but now I'm fuming. Here's the jist of what I've been told:

1. My cholesterol has been consistently high since 2012, regardless of the recent weight loss. It's around 5.5 [Is that really high?]

2. I should either reduce the fat in my diet or start taking statins [I have actually eliminated cheese and cream in the last few weeks; the numbers are from August]

3. My likelihood of a heart attack in the next 10 years is 7%, and it's thanks to my reducing my HbA1c. As I am over the age of 40, once it goes over 10%, (if I put weight back on or my BG is in diabetic range again) I will be prescribed statins. [Is 7%, or even 10%, really a high correlation?]

I responded that I would not take them, as there is not enough evidence that they work for women, but plenty of side effects. I got the spiel that we all hear about side effects, but not from people for whom statins work well... She also mentioned that there is documented evidence that statins mend the heart muscle after a hear attack, and isn't it better to not let it get there in the first place. Obviously, the perfect retort only came to me as I was leaving the surgery - isn't it like saying that immobilisation helps a broken limb mend, so we should all put our arms and legs into plaster casts to prevent a break...?
 
Larissima said:
I just came back from a GP appt that I was requested to make "to discuss my test results". When I phoned up to check which results, as I haven't had a blood test in two months, I was told it was something different which made me really worried, but the (new) GP just wanted to talk to me about cholesterol. She brought up my results from the end-of-August test, which I'd already discussed with my regular GP shortly after. I was too relieved that the other issue was actually fine (I asked), so it didn't even occur to me at the time to complain about this unnecessary appointment, but now I'm fuming. Here's the jist of what I've been told:

1. My cholesterol has been consistently high since 2012, regardless of the recent weight loss. It's around 5.5 [Is that really high?]

2. I should either reduce the fat in my diet or start taking statins [I have actually eliminated cheese and cream in the last few weeks; the numbers are from August]

3. My likelihood of a heart attack in the next 10 years is 7%, and it's thanks to my reducing my HbA1c. As I am over the age of 40, once it goes over 10%, (if I put weight back on or my BG is in diabetic range again) I will be prescribed statins. [Is 7%, or even 10%, really a high correlation?]

I responded that I would not take them, as there is not enough evidence that they work for women, but plenty of side effects. I got the spiel that we all hear about side effects, but not from people for whom statins work well... She also mentioned that there is documented evidence that statins mend the heart muscle after a hear attack, and isn't it better to not let it get there in the first place. Obviously, the perfect retort only came to me as I was leaving the surgery - isn't it like saying that immobilisation helps a broken limb mend, so we should all put our arms and legs into plaster casts to prevent a break...?
Click to expand...

Awful that you had to PAY for that! (Did you? I hope not!)

I too have had to stand firm against such medical opinion, and yes, a relief to know we have scientific evidence on our side - that unless you are a middle-aged man who has already had a heart attack/stroke, there is little positive point in taking statins. In fact, quite the opposite, as you so rightly say. And then there is the cholesterol-phobia to deal with.

One of the most disappointing medical experiences I have had as a diabetic was having a panel of endocrinologists (3) who were supposed to be focussing on my T2D, choose to spend that precious session with me by trying to talk me into taking statins for my high cholesterol. I argued with them about it, very charmingly I promise! (I did this by saying I took my 82 year old father's lead, who is very physically able, and put the statins prescribed in a a bottom drawer and keep them there! Well - I thought it a charming tale!)

THREE endocrinologists! I could have cried! (In fact, I think I did! When I got home.) I am just super grateful that I have spent so much money on medical expenses as a diabetic, I didn't have to pay for it - which is how it works in Sweden - there is an upper limit of medical fees, and after that you use what they call a 'free card'. Easy to get there as a diabetic. Hopefully the next generation of diabetics after we are long gone won't have to put up with this nonsense as part of our healthcare. Maybe we won't have to wait that long for things to change and catch up with recent research and the findings of CVD risk. (Gee I hope so! But I fear not.)

Watch the doco' 'Cereal Killers' for inspiration? (If you haven't already.) The doco-maker chappie had beautiful large LDL particles, but conventional medical professionals on tape were concerned about his high cholesterol, but good ol' Tom Noakes put him right.

Just imagine you are going to Tom Noakes instead of that GP? - sigh. Diabetic medical dreamers we!

Good on your for sticking up for yourself - and the truth!
 
AloeSvea said:
Awful that you had to PAY for that! (Did you? I hope not!)

I too have had to stand firm against such medical opinion, and yes, a relief to know we have scientific evidence on our side - that unless you are a middle-aged man who has already had a heart attack/stroke, there is little positive point in taking statins. In fact, quite the opposite, as you so rightly say. And then there is the cholesterol-phobia to deal with.

One of the most disappointing medical experiences I have had as a diabetic was having a panel of endocrinologists (3) who were supposed to be focussing on my T2D, choose to spend that precious session with me by trying to talk me into taking statins for my high cholesterol. I argued with them about it, very charmingly I promise! (I did this by saying I took my 82 year old father's lead, who is very physically able, and put the statins prescribed in a a bottom drawer and keep them there! Well - I thought it a charming tale!)

THREE endocrinologists! I could have cried! (In fact, I think I did! When I got home.) I am just super grateful that I have spent so much money on medical expenses as a diabetic, I didn't have to pay for it - which is how it works in Sweden - there is an upper limit of medical fees, and after that you use what they call a 'free card'. Easy to get there as a diabetic. Hopefully the next generation of diabetics after we are long gone won't have to put up with this nonsense as part of our healthcare. Maybe we won't have to wait that long for things to change and catch up with recent research and the findings of CVD risk. (Gee I hope so! But I fear not.)

Watch the doco' 'Cereal Killers' for inspiration? (If you haven't already.) The doco-maker chappie had beautiful large LDL particles, but conventional medical professionals on tape were concerned about his high cholesterol, but good ol' Tom Noakes put him right.

Just imagine you are going to Tom Noakes instead of that GP? - sigh. Diabetic medical dreamers we!

Good on your for sticking up for yourself - and the truth!
Click to expand...
At least I didn't have to pay for this appointment (specifically - national insurance payments from my salary do go towards the NHS), but it was a waste of my time, the GP's time, and ultimately the NHS funding her salary!

I can't believe that your 3 endos focused on statins instead of their specialism, the pancreas and diabetes. It would be funny if not so frustrating...
 
Larissima said:
At least I didn't have to pay for this appointment (specifically - national insurance payments from my salary do go towards the NHS), but it was a waste of my time, the GP's time, and ultimately the NHS funding her salary!

I can't believe that your 3 endos focused on statins instead of their specialism, the pancreas and diabetes. It would be funny if not so frustrating...
Click to expand...

Indeed! I still can't laugh about it, seven months later. :( It sounded so exciting - to have three specialists talking about MY pancreas and my personal blood glucose, lol. (OK - now I am laughing about it. Thanks to you! :))

I'm pleased you didn't have to specifically fork out for that appointment, but point taken re your time. And energy, indeed. Hmmm, I wonder if your point about her being funded has anything to do with it... Or would that be too cynical? Hard to know isn't it?!

I prefer to think they genuinely believe they are suggesting statins in our own best interests. (I don't want to know if it isn't true! Too hard living in THAT world!) (I already have a hard enough time with lawyers!) I had a very nice locum GP in my subtropical clinic (as opposed to the subarctic one currently frequenting) who was very very kind in prescribing me statins. He looked deeply into my eyes, and gently said, 'it is important, I believe, that we get your cholesterol level down'. (He hadn't had me resisting medication for three decades like my usual one.) I took the prescription, and even got it filled, just because he was so gentle and well-meaning. Then I put them in the bottom drawer and left them there! (Like my long-living father does.) The trouble with that is, when I turned up for an only indirectly related appointment at a hospital - that specialist had a print-out saying I was not only taking metformin, but I was on statins. So. I realised if I was ever in a traffic accident or something, and ended up in hospital I would be pumped full of both medications! So I got onto the phone to my medical practice nurse pronto smart, and asked for those medications I am not on, to be taken off my records. The nurse is used to me, so she just said she quite understood.

It makes one humble in the face of modern computer medical records. (And I realise I can't be too polite when pretending to accept medications I have no intention of taking!) (One does not have to be so polite in the present subarctic region. Or, if one really does, and I haven't realised - they will just put it - my blunt refusal - down to me being a rude foreigner! Fine with me.)
 
My diabetic nurse prescribed me statins today, I'm totally in the dark about them? Help!!!
 
I have just had a"disagreement"with my gp. She wants to prescribe statins and I said I wasn't willing to take them. It went down like a lead balloon. She agreed there is much controversy in relation to statins. She was willing to listen, but on leaving consultation said she would monitor for another few weeks and to have my levels checked and I will find that I will be prescribed the statins!!!! What part of listening did she not understand. I take lots of other medications and I just feel something else to swallow. I am not willing to take them, end of story.
 
Indy51 said:
Received an email today from Justin Smith, maker of Statin Nation and Statin Nation II - for a limited time, you can watch a free exerpt from Statin Nation II - about 24 minutes long:

Click to expand...
Further to this post, Justin Smith has made a free screening of Statin Nation II available until November 27. Happy viewing :)

 
When I started insulin, I told my GP one of my concerns was regarding fat building up around my heart (my mother has extensive heart disease and her surgeon said he saw a pattern of that kind of massive heart disease only in insulin users).

GP said if I take the statins I don't need to worry.
 
fred1234 said:
I have just had a"disagreement"with my gp. She wants to prescribe statins and I said I wasn't willing to take them. It went down like a lead balloon. She agreed there is much controversy in relation to statins. She was willing to listen, but on leaving consultation said she would monitor for another few weeks and to have my levels checked and I will find that I will be prescribed the statins!!!! What part of listening did she not understand. I take lots of other medications and I just feel something else to swallow. I am not willing to take them, end of story.
Click to expand...
As I have mentioned in this thread before (I think), take the prescription and politely inform her that while you will help her meet her statin targets for prescribing, you will not be fulfilling the prescription.

The prescription doesn't mean that you "must" take the drug. It is simply an order form for it!

MellitusTrap said:
When I started insulin, I told my GP one of my concerns was regarding fat building up around my heart (my mother has extensive heart disease and her surgeon said he saw a pattern of that kind of massive heart disease only in insulin users).

GP said if I take the statins I don't need to worry.
Click to expand...
Interesting point of view. Was the issue your mother had cardiovascular atheroscleroses or body fat build up around the heart?
 
tim2000s said:
As I have mentioned in this thread before (I think), take the prescription and politely inform her that while you will help her meet her statin targets for prescribing, you will not be fulfilling the prescription.

The prescription doesn't mean that you "must" take the drug. It is simply an order form for it!


Interesting point of view. Was the issue your mother had cardiovascular atheroscleroses or body fat build up around the heart?
Click to expand...

Both - her entire heart was caked in it (i.e. The disease was not localised to one area).
This is relatively unusual, and meant they had no option but to give her heart surgery (quadruple bypass).

Surgeon said he only saw this type of disease in insulin dependant diabetics.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MellitusTrap said:
Yup - her entire heart was caked in it (i.e. The disease was not localised to one area).
This is relatively unusual, and meant they had no option but to give her heart surgery (quadruple bypass).

Surgeon said he only saw this type of disease in insulin dependant diabetics.
Click to expand...
Again very interesting. Sounds like Atherosclerosis in the affected blood vessels, but I guess the additional fatty deposits could be as a result of prolonged hyperinsulinemia.
 
I stopped taking statins a few weeks ago ,my doctor said it was my decision but will have to take a blood test in four months time , my leg muscles have now stopped hurting for the first time in years ,and I am not using my walking stick ,my cholesterol is 4.1
 
Came across this on the Malcolm Hendrick blog.

"Beyond confusion and controversy, can we evaluate the real efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering with statins?" By Michel de Lorgeril and Mikael Rabaeus. Journal of Controversies in Bio-Medical Research Vol 1, No 1 (2015), ie a new journal.

It was published last year by a Swiss and a French cardiologist. Lorgeril is an MD and cardiologist working at the CNRS; so is Rabaeus, but working at a private clinic in Geneva. They compare statins RCTs results classifying by particular methodological factors.

From the end of the abstract:

"In conclusion, this review strongly suggests that statins are not effective for cardiovascular prevention. The studies published before 2005/2006 were probably flawed, and this concerned in particular the safety issue. A complete reassessment is mandatory. Until then, physicians should be aware that the present claims about the efficacy and safety of statins are not evidence based."

Happy reading!
 
Back
Top