Statins - Do I or Don't I?

[Lesleywo]

My cholesterol has always been elevated (mainly LDL) but my HDL has always been good, as well as triglycerides. I have just had a load of blood tests and my total cholesterol was 7.4, LDL 4.9, HDL 1.4 and trigs 2.7(!) I have attributed this rise to doing LCHF for some time and the increase in saturated fat.

I have always been against statins and believe the part cholesterol plays in heart diseases is somewhat overrated. My homocystiene is good which I believe is a better indicator of heart disease than cholesterol. However, my GP wants to put me on Crestor. I have a family history of heart disease; my father had a heart bypass at age 58 (a year older than me).

So, the doc is wanting me on Crestor as he reckons I have a 1 in 5 chance of having a heart attack over the next 5 years (thanks for that cheery news .. not). But at the same time he is telling me one of the side effects of Crestor is an increased risk of diabetes! Over the last 12 months I've 'reversed' my insulin resistance (if that's possible) and lost 9kg. So I read up on Crestor and as well as the muscle pain and diabetes, also an increased risk of cancer. I honestly feel 'damned if I do, damned if I don't'. I don't feel at all comfortable taking statins; even a cardiologist once told me 'stay from statins, mark my words, in 10 years time all this statin nonsense will come crashing down around our ears'. But then again, on the other hand, I don't really fancy a heart attack either!

Any thoughts?

 

[Totto]

You do know that high cholesterol and in particular high LDL is a sign of hypothyroidism? You may benefit from tweaking you thyroid meds a bit.

I think @Indy51 has information on middle aged women and cholesterol?

 

[Lesleywo]

You do know that high cholesterol and in particular high LDL is a sign of hypothyroidism? You may benefit from tweaking you thyroid meds a bit.

I think @Indy51 has information on middle aged women and cholesterol?

I am seeing a new endo next week so I will run it past him, see what he says.

 

[Indy51]

Thanks @Totto.

There's a long poll thread on the forums and I posted a few links there on the subject of statins and women that you might want to look at: http://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/poll-side-effects-from-statins.58409/page-5#post-558202

Dr Kendrick has also just published an article on the subject of low cholesterol and all cause mortality as we age, ie the lower the cholesterol, the higher the risk of death: http://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2015/05/18/hats-off-to-the-japanese/

 

[DeejayR]

I have just stopped taking statins after 6 years, with the co-operation of my GP, because I have no evidence that they have done me any good. By stopping for six months I hope to discover (if I haven't already had a heart attack or something ) whether they were effective.
The "statistics" are stacked against me but I've learned from this forum that the figures used by the medical profession to project probabilities are often incomplete and misleading.
During the statin years my cholesterol has gone from the low 4's to 5.1, but the very few breakdown readings of HDL, LDL & triglycerides recorded have been fine. So it's another leap of faith, like LCHF.
None of this is intended to tell you what to do. "I don't feel at all comfortable taking statins", you say. I'd start from there.

 

[noblehead]

I am seeing a new endo next week so I will run it past him, see what he says.

That's a good idea Lesley given your high cholesterol levels and family history, good luck and hope you get some answers.

 

[Pinkorchid]

Only you can decide if you want to take them or not . Statins are a can of worms on here and always generate a lot of responses. Some are adamant they would never take them, some have had side effects and stopped them and others take them quite happily with no problems at all

 

[Diamattic]

Thanks @Totto.

There's a long poll thread on the forums and I posted a few links there on the subject of statins and women that you might want to look at: http://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/poll-side-effects-from-statins.58409/page-5#post-558202

Dr Kendrick has also just published an article on the subject of low cholesterol and all cause mortality as we age, ie the lower the cholesterol, the higher the risk of death: http://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2015/05/18/hats-off-to-the-japanese/

I am really happy that you posted this!

I followed your links and the actual published paper is available online for free in PDF here - http://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/381654

I look forward to reading through this! It is however making wish I had higher cholesterol levels though lol

 

[robertconroy]

In the US, on major news stations they just announced cholesterol is no longer considered a risk factor for heart disease. Now they are saying saturated fat is no longer considered a risk factor. New studies show a post Menopausal woman on a statin has a 71% increased risk for t 2 diabetes. Men, 50% increased risk.
It's not the LDL levels that create risk, it's the particle sizes that matter. Saturated fat makes these particles big and fluffy and can do no harm. High glycemic carbohydrates like, grains, potatoes, and all sugars make the tiny VLDL particles. These are the ones that create foam cells, atherosclerosis, and heart disease. A US Astronaut and flight surgeon has something to tell about statin drugs:
http://spacedoc.com/

 

[caretaker]

statins.....
still not sure but . drug company's have made a lot of money out of them. and if there making money they don't make cures..
you should see my GPs new car.

 

[graj0]

I have attributed this rise to doing LCHF for some time and the increase in saturated fat.

I went the LC?F route, in that I don't deliberately increase the fat in my diet, at the same time I don't treat cheese as the enemy like I did in the low calorie, low fat high carb days of my dieting career. You might find this graph from the British Heart Foundation interesting. Basically shows that CVD increases as the Total Cholesterol goes above 5.4 and also as it goes below 5.4. On top of that it's different from country to country suggesting other factors, for example smoking. There's a lot of controversy over the effects of saturated fats on cholesterol levels with some recent research suggesting that saturated fats aren't so bad. It's a difficult one, there's too much for a mere mortal like me to comprehend.

I have a family history of heart disease; my father had a heart bypass at age 58 (a year older than me).

My family history made it difficult for me to stop taking statins after 17 years of muscle pain, poor sleep and brain fog, all recognised by the NHS as side effects and don't forget that the BMJ (might have been The Lancet) did a straw poll of 500 GPs and 60% said they would not prescribe it for themselves or a family member. Just lowering my carb intake dropped my total cholesterol to just over 3 and now I've not taken them for 18 months, it's still only 5.4.

So, the doc is wanting me on Crestor as he reckons I have a 1 in 5 chance of having a heart attack over the next 5 years (thanks for that cheery news .. not).

Looks like your GP has followed NICE guidelines and done your risk assessment, you can check that 1 in 5 figure by doing the online claculation at http://www.qrisk.org/ (I think it's the same as GPs use, there are others if you google).

But at the same time he is telling me one of the side effects of Crestor is an increased risk of diabetes! Over the last 12 months I've 'reversed' my insulin resistance (if that's possible) and lost 9kg. So I read up on Crestor and as well as the muscle pain and diabetes, also an increased risk of cancer. I honestly feel 'damned if I do, damned if I don't'. I don't feel at all comfortable taking statins; even a cardiologist once told me 'stay from statins, mark my words, in 10 years time all this statin nonsense will come crashing down around our ears'. But then again, on the other hand, I don't really fancy a heart attack either!

Any thoughts?

It seems to affect different people in different ways and certainly lower doses don't seem to cause the muscle pain. My suggestion would be to let your GP know that you'll try them but any muscle pain and he better start looking at the alternative medication because there is one and I can't remember the name (remember the brain fog? Never went, muscle pain and poor sleep did).

All the best

 

[Lesleywo]

thank you everyone for your informative responses. It is indeed comforting to know 'it's not just me' and others are/have been in a similar situation to myself. I see my integrative GP tomorrow and will discuss with him (it was my local GP who wanted me on statins) and see what he has to say. He generally is happy that my HDL is good but trigs are much higher this time.

I have an endo appointment next Wed so will also get his opinion, see if he is happy with my thyroid results.

I was horrified to read that some of you have had sleep problems with statins. I already suffer from insomnia. I have only heard of the muscle problems. My gut instinct is still to say no and I have to admit I felt my GP checking my risk factor for heart attack on a chart on his laptop was using a bit of a 'one size fits all approach'. We are all unique and our bodies work in different ways. The fact that some folk can LCHF and reduce their cholesterol and others find it raises it is evidence enough!

I will report back tomorrow will an update.

 

[Squire Fulwood]

Only you can decide if you want to take them or not . Statins are a can of worms on here and always generate a lot of responses. Some are adamant they would never take them, some have had side effects and stopped them and others take them quite happily with no problems at all

I admit to being biased against taking statins. The is not an unreasoned fear of them, in fact I took them for some years and was never so ill as during that period of my life. It included being unable to walk for two separate monthly periods, upper body rigidity and finally something like gastro enteritis.

I am writing this because the people that "take them quite happily with no problems at all" may yet suffer from the possible long term effects but have no way of knowing yet. Once again I trot out Steph who says.

"People on long-term statin therapy start to notice that their hair is receding faster, they're developing cataracts, they can't hear as well as they used to, they keep forgetting things, they can't open the pickle jar any more, and perhaps they'll need rotator cuff surgery soon, as their shoulders are so sore. They think it's just because they're growing old, but these are all side effects that my research, together with my students at MIT, has uncovered, by comparing statin drug side effects with side effects associated with other drugs in age-matched reviews."

The full text is here

http://www.spacedoc.com/why_statins_do_more_harm_than_good

 

[graj0]

. . . . . GP checking my risk factor for heart attack on a chart on his laptop was using a bit of a 'one size fits all approach'. We are all unique and our bodies work in different ways.

If you look at the risk assessment that the GP is supposed to use, you have to enter several variables to calculate the risk assessment, so I don't know how a chart can represent that.

If it was just a chart, I'd be asking some more questions, but then I've met a few GPs who shouldn't have been trusted. I'm even a little cautious with the three smashing GPs at the practice that I now go to.

Have a go at http://www.qrisk.org/ it'll only take a minute and if you want the background to how they do it have a read of http://www.qrisk.org/BMJ-QRISK2.pdf.

 

[graj0]

Sorry, it's not very clear and I can't remember the URL, despite googling. Saving it as a JPG and then viewing with something that will enlarge or zoom in might help. I'll come back if I find the source again

 

[Lesleywo]

I admit to being biased against taking statins. The is not an unreasoned fear of them, in fact I took them for some years and was never so ill as during that period of my life. It included being unable to walk for two separate monthly periods, upper body rigidity and finally something like gastro enteritis.

I am writing this because the people that "take them quite happily with no problems at all" may yet suffer from the possible long term effects but have no way of knowing yet. Once again I trot out Steph who says.

"People on long-term statin therapy start to notice that their hair is receding faster, they're developing cataracts, they can't hear as well as they used to, they keep forgetting things, they can't open the pickle jar any more, and perhaps they'll need rotator cuff surgery soon, as their shoulders are so sore. They think it's just because they're growing old, but these are all side effects that my research, together with my students at MIT, has uncovered, by comparing statin drug side effects with side effects associated with other drugs in age-matched reviews."

The full text is here

http://www.spacedoc.com/why_statins_do_more_harm_than_good

thanks Squire, good to get first hand experience. I am very much swaying against them. The only time in the last 7 or so years that my cholesterol has been 'good' (as in, no asterisks against any of the levels) was when I was following a FODMAPS diet for irritable bowel syndrome. The stand out there was all the oats/oatbran I was eating. It was the only glutenous grain I was allowed to have, so even my bread was made from oats. Consequently I've made up some walnut & raisin oatran muffins like I used to eat in those days and thankfully they are very kind to blood sugar levels. Usually a drop from previous meal.

 

[Lesleywo]

If you look at the risk assessment that the GP is supposed to use, you have to enter several variables to calculate the risk assessment, so I don't know how a chart can represent that.

If it was just a chart, I'd be asking some more questions, but then I've met a few GPs who shouldn't have been trusted. I'm even a little cautious with the three smashing GPs at the practice that I now go to.

Have a go at http://www.qrisk.org/ it'll only take a minute and if you want the background to how they do it have a read of http://www.qrisk.org/BMJ-QRISK2.pdf.

Hi Graj0

I did the risk assessment as per the link above ... result said 5.8% in next 10 years. http://www.qrisk.org/index.php

I fiddled around with the info I input (apart from stuff I can't change, like family history) and to get my healthy heart age to 58 my Chol/HDL ratio would have to be 2 and I'd have to lose 9kg. Interestingly, the risk factors listed were the negatives, as in smoking, diabetes, kidney disease, blood pressure etc. Funny there were no questions like do you exercise regularly, do you meditate, how many pieces of fruit do you eat a day? (I did a nutrition course and I did an assignment on high cholesterol and one of the findings was with each piece of fresh fruit a day your risk of heart disease reduces). Seems as though they aren't taking everything into consideration?

 

[graj0]

Hi Graj0

I did the risk assessment as per the link above ... result said 5.8% in next 10 years. http://www.qrisk.org/index.php

I fiddled around with the info I input (apart from stuff I can't change, like family history) and to get my healthy heart age to 58 my Chol/HDL ratio would have to be 2 and I'd have to lose 9kg. Interestingly, the risk factors listed were the negatives, as in smoking, diabetes, kidney disease, blood pressure etc. Funny there were no questions like do you exercise regularly, do you meditate, how many pieces of fruit do you eat a day? (I did a nutrition course and I did an assignment on high cholesterol and one of the findings was with each piece of fresh fruit a day your risk of heart disease reduces). Seems as though they aren't taking everything into consideration?

1 in 20 (ish) sounds a lot better than 1 in 5, I can't remember exactly but I think they start wanting to prescribe statins when it's 1 in 10 or worse. You did exactly what I did and it's surprising how much cholesterol has to change to reduce the risk significantly. This little formula is about as good as it gets and as you say it doesn't include the positives, maybe they don't expect them to change the overall result much. Might have to dig into the other link.

I can honestly say that I vacillated for ages about whether to stop or not, it really isn't straight forward. I have a friend who is convinced that they kept her mother alive, but I say that she'll never know because she doesn't know what would have happened had she not taken them.

As I mentioned before, we all react differently to drugs and you might have no ill effects.

 

[Lesleywo]

True .... and they don't take Homocystene into account either, with high levels being a better predictor of heart disease (mine is low, incidently).

And getting really technical, I test positive to the MTHFR generic mutation, for which I take methylated B vits. Bet there's a zillion other folk who have it but are blissfully unaware. The majority of doctors don't know what it is, yet it could be a predictor of heart disease and blood clotting disorders, amongst other things.

 

[Pinkorchid]

I admit to being biased against taking statins. The is not an unreasoned fear of them, in fact I took them for some years and was never so ill as during that period of my life. It included being unable to walk for two separate monthly periods, upper body rigidity and finally something like gastro enteritis.

I am writing this because the people that "take them quite happily with no problems at all" may yet suffer from the possible long term effects but have no way of knowing yet. Once again I trot out Steph who says.

"People on long-term statin therapy start to notice that their hair is receding faster, they're developing cataracts, they can't hear as well as they used to, they keep forgetting things, they can't open the pickle jar any more, and perhaps they'll need rotator cuff surgery soon, as their shoulders are so sore. They think it's just because they're growing old, but these are all side effects that my research, together with my students at MIT, has uncovered, by comparing statin drug side effects with side effects associated with other drugs in age-matched reviews."

The full text is here

http://www.spacedoc.com/why_statins_do_more_harm_than_good

Yes that could be right but it will depend on the individual some people will take them for years and will never have any adverse effects and others will after a relatively short time . I am 76 and have been taking statins for the last 8 years never had any side effects and I haven't got any of the problems you listed but maybe I will in the future who knows only time will tell.