Dougie22
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 319
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Other
As far as I can see there are at least two completely different schools of thought within the "statin refuser" community.
School one has decided that the side effects of statins are more important than the cholesterol lowering effects, maybe agree that taking any drug for thirty years is a problem but still think its a good idea to get their levels down if they can by diet etc.
School two has decided that the whole concept that high cholesterol levels lead to greater mortality rates is flawed and that therefore artificially lowering them by diet is pointless.
I belong to school two, except that if I could get the levels down I'd have far less intense and painful meetings with my doctor who believes everyone with T2 over 40 should be on statins, regardless of cholesterol level. (which is the SIGN recomendation.)
My levels freak her out.
I do agree that it is extremely difficult to persist with either view in the face of such pressure and absolute belief from your doctor.
School one has decided that the side effects of statins are more important than the cholesterol lowering effects, maybe agree that taking any drug for thirty years is a problem but still think its a good idea to get their levels down if they can by diet etc.
School two has decided that the whole concept that high cholesterol levels lead to greater mortality rates is flawed and that therefore artificially lowering them by diet is pointless.
I belong to school two, except that if I could get the levels down I'd have far less intense and painful meetings with my doctor who believes everyone with T2 over 40 should be on statins, regardless of cholesterol level. (which is the SIGN recomendation.)
My levels freak her out.
I do agree that it is extremely difficult to persist with either view in the face of such pressure and absolute belief from your doctor.