Statins - Do I or Don't I?

[Pasha]

Hi Mike

Since being on a VLCHF diet I have been able to greatly improve my lipid profile and now take just 10 mg Simvastatin per day. Thats equivalent to about 5 mgof Lipitor/day.
FYI my typical results with 10 mg/day of Simvastatin are,
Total cholesterol 131 mg/dl
HDL 55 mg/dl
LDL 62.9 mg/dl
Triglycerides 66 mg/dl

I also did a trial period of three months WITHOUT statins, and got the following results.

Total Cholesterol 176 mg/dl
HDL 70 mg/dl
LDL 91.6 mg/dl
Triglycerides 70 mg/dl

[my ref 25-6-2014]

 

[MikeZ]

Hi Mike

Since being on a VLCHF diet I have been able to greatly improve my lipid profile and now take just 10 mg Simvastatin per day. Thats equivalent to about 5 mgof Lipitor/day.
FYI my typical results with 10 mg/day of Simvastatin are,
Total cholesterol 131 mg/dl
HDL 55 mg/dl
LDL 62.9 mg/dl
Triglycerides 66 mg/dl

I also did a trial period of three months WITHOUT statins, and got the following results.

Total Cholesterol 176 mg/dl
HDL 70 mg/dl
LDL 91.6 mg/dl
Triglycerides 70 mg/dl

[my ref 25-6-2014]

Very interesting... those 3 months without! I want to get to where I am comfortable trying that. Maybe 6 months from now if things keep on course.

 

[LucySW]

Just listened to today's Malcolm Kendrick interview with Jimmy Moore and sitting here gobsmacked by one of the pieces of information he discussed about possible side effects of statins. He said his wife works in the field of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (a disease I was diagnosed with in 2009) - he said if you understand anything about the metabolic pathways, it's understandable that the incidence of this disease has increased along with statin prescription. Never occurred to me that the two could be related, but now I have to wonder.

The frustrating thing is that I had my annual review on Monday - I wish the interview had been played last week so I could been forearmed to discuss the possibility with the doctor.

Makes me even more glad that I only took the bloody things for less than a year. Gawd only knows what state my lungs would be in now if I'd continued taking Crestor. As it is, I'm very lucky that there's been no progression of the disease since I was diagnosed.

Malcolm Kendrick is very good isn't he. I only just discovered him. Excellent. Not partisan, just applying the logic.

Where's the interview Indy?

 

[carol anne]

Well personally I have way more faith in the British Heart Foundation than I do in any dubious blogs or internet diet gurus who say that cholesterol doesnt matter but then I would as I also dont believe that sat fat is harmless either.

What I do know is that my cholesterol is fine so I have nothing to worry about but if like yours it was 7.4 I would take a statin, better to be safe than rely on the internet gurus I always say, but of course the choice is yours.

I have taken statins for 15 years type 1 for 40 years all good

 

[Daibell]

Well personally I have way more faith in the British Heart Foundation than I do in any dubious blogs or internet diet gurus who say that cholesterol doesnt matter but then I would as I also dont believe that sat fat is harmless either.

What I do know is that my cholesterol is fine so I have nothing to worry about but if like yours it was 7.4 I would take a statin, better to be safe than rely on the internet gurus I always say, but of course the choice is yours.

Sid, it's probably worth saying that Malcolm Kendrick, mentioned in later posts is a UK GP and also a cardiac consultant. Do read his books if you can. I recently read 'Doctoring Data' and it's an eye opener. He is more than just an Internet blogger. He makes the point based on looking at the data and hopefully analysing it more critically that having low-cholesterol could actually shorten your life rather than the opposite.

 

[graj0]

She didn't know (a) there are different kinds of LDL and (b) other kinds of lipoproteins are not measured e.g. IDL, and (c) that LDL is an estimated figure.

Must have a bit embarrassing for her.

 

[graj0]

I have taken statins for 15 years type 1 for 40 years all good

There's taking statins and then there's taking statins. There's Atorvastatin (Lipitor), Atorvastatin/ezetimibe (Liptruzet), Fluvastatin (Lescol, Lescol XL), Lovastatin (Mevacor), Pitavastatin (Livalo), Pravastatin (Pravachol), Rosuvastatin (Crestor), Simvastatin (Zocor), Simvastatin/ezetimibe (Vytorin). The strength of these things varies enough for there to be a conversion chart should your GP decide to change the brand of statin. My problems started because my GP swapped my Atorvastatin which was causing some problems for the cheaper (at the time) Simvastatin which caused me heaps of problems.

If you're one of the lucky ones that has no side effects that's great, the muscle pain is like you've run a marathon without doing the training, the sleep problems turn you into the grumpiest git going and the brain fog is very troublesome to say the least. These are all problems recognised by the NHS and worse than that, the muscle pain was recognised by the Merck, one of the manufacturers as far back as 1990.

That doesn't come from an internet guru of any sort, no conspiracy theory, just plain facts, easily verifiable.

 

[noblehead]

@graj0 , you have to accept that not everyone suffers side-effects from taking statins, as with all drugs some people get side-effects where others don't.

 

[dannyw]

@graj0 , you have to accept that not everyone suffers side-effects from taking statins, as with all drugs some people get side-effects where others don't.

Everyone does suffer side effects from statins. A side effect is a sign of any drug. Some side effects are unwanted though, if so, see your doc for an alternative. As to take them or not, this discussion could go on and on. Discuss pro's and con's with doc and research yourself to make an informed decision.

 

[noblehead]

Everyone does suffer side effects from statins. A side effect is a sign of any drug. Some side effects are unwanted though, if so, see your doc for an alternative. As to take them or not, this discussion could go on and on. Discuss pro's and con's with doc and research yourself to make an informed decision.

Side effects are unwanted symptoms caused by medical treatment:

http://www.nhs.uk/chq/pages/997.aspx?categoryid=73&subcategoryid=108

 

[CheeseJunkie]

Must have a bit embarrassing for her.

She seemed flustered.
Kept on saying value was 'normal' when I repeatedly asked her for specifics. Until I got up and went over to screen and pointed out the value to her. She seemed unfamiliar with reading the data format.
She didn't want to hand over a printout either. Tried to make excuse for not doing so. Apparently she only wanted to show pretty charts!
Perhaps she has a routine for 99.9% of patients.

 

[Indy51]

Malcolm Kendrick is very good isn't he. I only just discovered him. Excellent. Not partisan, just applying the logic.

Where's the interview Indy?

Well worth a listen: http://www.thelivinlowcarbshow.com/...rts-out-medical-advice-from-medical-nonsense/

I've been hooked on Dr Kendrick since reading The Cholesterol Con - he sure has a way with words.

 

[graj0]

. . . . . . . you have to accept that not everyone suffers side-effects from taking statins, as with all drugs some people get side-effects where others don't.

That's exactly why I referred to you as one of the lucky ones. I do realise that it doesn't affect everyone. I also realise that dosage plays a part in this because the people I know on low doses don't have the same problems. I'm not sure why you think I didn't realise that. My other concern is that in 1997 it was OK to have total cholesterol below 7. Then it was six, then 5, and now it's supposed to be below 4. Very convenient for the manufacturer or does that sound like conspiracy?

You can delete the next bit if you like because I have no axe to grind. Whether you take or do not take statins is a personal choice. There are alternatives.

What I will also say is that the number of people it has affected is documented in several studies. The studies done by the manufacturers isn't available for public distribution and even Professor Sir Rory Collins, whose research was funded by Pfizer, is to re-examine trial data after concerns over the drug. The statistics on the number of people who just stop taking them is quite surprising, estimated at nearly 40%. So, if it doesn't affect you, great, you are one of the lucky ones.

 

[noblehead]

@graj0, I don't take statins although it was suggested to me after a health scare a few years ago which turned out to be unrelated to CVD, however I have had two family members who have taken statins and tolerated them well without any side-effects, as said like with all medications some suffer side-effects as where others don't, my reasons to tag you earlier was because you quoted Carol Ann post because she said she takes statins and doesn't have side-effects, we must be respectful that some people have no alternative but to take a drug like a statins if they have a condition in their family like Familial hypercholesterolemia.

 

[graj0]

I was not being disrespectful, and I think we're seeing how poor the written word can be when it come to meaning and interpretation. There was absolutely no disrespect intended.

 

[kesun]

I don't know about other people but my experience with my GP was that doctors do not just go on cholesterol levels to advise statins
There are other things they take into consideration like any heart problems in the family, your lifestyle how active your are, smoking or ex smoker, alcohol consumption and obviously any other medical conditions you have to assess your heart attack and stroke risk over the next 10 years

My GP did take those factors into account, but not in the way I'd have expected: I thought that being healthy etc. would be a reason not to take them, but the opposite was the case. He said that since I'm fit, not overweight, not a smoker, don't drink to excess, eat LCHF, don't take other medications and don't have any serious medical conditions but my TC is high, I should go on statins. In other words, because there weren't any lifestyle changes I could (or in the case of LCHF would) make or any other illnesses it might impact, I should take statins.

Kate

 

[Sid Bonkers]

Sid, it's probably worth saying that Malcolm Kendrick, mentioned in later posts is a UK GP and also a cardiac consultant. Do read his books if you can. I recently read 'Doctoring Data' and it's an eye opener. He is more than just an Internet blogger. He makes the point based on looking at the data and hopefully analysing it more critically that having low-cholesterol could actually shorten your life rather than the opposite.

Is Malcolm Kendrick really a GP and a cardiac consultant?

Most junior doctors choose either to go into general practice or stay in the Hospital system specialising in a particular speciality over a number of taers and work towards becoming a hospital consultant and then perhaps a professor, Ive never heard of anyone doing both especially as it says on the internet that Malcolm Kendricks has been a GP for 25 years and has written a couple of books, im surprised he found time to moonlight as a cardiac consultant as well.

But sarcasm aside we are all capabler of making our own discussions and I choose to believe what the British Heart Foundation say over any internet blogger and writter, GP or not.

 

[Indy51]

For another look at this subject, Prof Grant Schofield from Auckland University of Technology has written a post about the 7 things you should know before taking a statin: http://profgrant.com/2015/05/12/the-7-things-you-should-know-before-taking-a-statin/

 

[PatsyB]

I get confused on this.... so statins for or against

 

[noblehead]

I get confused on this.... so statins for or against

Don't get confused, the decision to take them or not is up to the individual at the end of the day, there's a really good summery of the statin debate in the following by Dr Sarah Jarvis:

http://www.patient.co.uk/blogs/sarah-says/2014/05/the-great-statin-debate