STATINS. Anyone found a good one?

[Fairygodmother]

At my yearly check with the Consultant I was prescribed a hugely increased dose of atorvastatin - 80mg. The Consultant said he wished to protect my kidneys. He had in front of him some dire results: eGFR (39) and (related) creatinine (108) of a blood test I’d had done for the hospital. The fact that I wasn’t told these results at the time’s another story - grrrrrrrr. They came through to me eight weeks after the appointment. I think there’s been an admin problem when people started leaving because of wage cuts. More grrrrrrrrr.
Back to those frightening results and the submarine size statin pills.
Cheerfully the Slippery Slope results were contradicted by a set of results in a test undertaken later for the DSN - eGFR 77. Whoop!
Another test, six weeks after the cheerful one, confirmed that kidney function was fine.
Relief!
However, I’d been downing the horse-pill statins for some weeks; I then halved them when I received the happy result.
I’m still getting the occasional night time cramps and daily joint and muscle aches that began when I was taking a high dose. I take care to maintain hydration.
Who’s taken statins that are kind to them?
I know there’s a big discussion about the need for statins but as I’ve had T1 for 48 years now I’m keen to keep my kidneys working as well as my eyes, my cardio vascular system, my peripheral nerves, etc etc. I want to eliminate all possible threats to a decent, active life. If some bombproof scientific evidence arrives that statins make no difference then I’ll stop taking them but I’ve not yet seen any.
So what I’m eager to find out is whether anyone else has had bad side effects from statins.
And has anyone discovered a statin that hasn’t evinced side effects?

 

[hankjam]

Sorry can't help with a good one. I've tried the three main line ones and come off each one after liver tests showed up as not happy. There is a fourth my Dr mentioned, but so far unwilling to give him the go ahead.
The discussion on statins is indeed complicated and not helped by the lack of transparency out of Oxford.
I wish you well.

 

[sally and james]

If some bombproof scientific evidence arrives that statins make no difference then I’ll stop taking them but I’ve not yet seen any.

Sometimes it is useful to turn a question upside down: I would be looking for bombproof scientific evidence that statins actually did some good and if there wasn't any, well, I wouldn't take them. But I come from the school of thought that says don't interfere with the complex chemistry of your body unless absolutely necessary (eg Insulin for T1), simply provide good nutrition and let your body get on with it.
Sally

 

[phdiabetic]

I have no clue about statins but want to express my sympathy that you had to wait weeks for your results! I get mine back the same day, usually (unless it's a slow test like vitamin D) and I spend the few hours between the test and the results acting like a crazy person. Couldn't imagine waiting so long!

 

[bulkbiker]

Hi @Fairygodmother
I'm interested that your GP thinks that statins are good for kidney problems.. there are a few things that google brings up that imply they may not be good for our kidneys. There is a school of thought that if you have kidney disease already that statins may help to prevent CVD (but this of course is based on the old idea that high cholesterol is bad).

 

[Fairygodmother]

Sometimes it is useful to turn a question upside down: I would be looking for bombproof scientific evidence that statins actually did some good and if there wasn't any, well, I wouldn't take them. But I come from the school of thought that says don't interfere with the complex chemistry of your body unless absolutely necessary (eg Insulin for T1), simply provide good nutrition and let your body get on with it.
Sally

Yes, in my younger days I was like you but in the last few years I’ve found that various parts of me are beginning to show their age a bit.
I’m in better nick than a lot of my contemporaries, for which I’m very grateful, but have also encountered a few people who’ve not taken medical advice and have declined rapidly.
It’s a bit of a minefield really.

 

[FantomPoet]

Hi @Fairygodmother
I'm interested that your GP thinks that statins are good for kidney problems.. there are a few things that google brings up that imply they may not be good for our kidneys. There is a school of thought that if you have kidney disease already that statins may help to prevent CVD (but this of course is based on the old idea that high cholesterol is bad).

@bulkbiker you mention the 'old idea that high colesterol is bad', What is the new idea? I was not aware there was a new one. (I say this in a tone of wow this could be cool)

 

[Fairygodmother]

Hi @Fairygodmother
I'm interested that your GP thinks that statins are good for kidney problems.. there are a few things that google brings up that imply they may not be good for our kidneys. There is a school of thought that if you have kidney disease already that statins may help to prevent CVD (but this of course is based on the old idea that high cholesterol is bad).

I’ve looked on the net too and tried to find good sources.
It seems it’s agreed that statins are a good prophylactic but can cause damage when kidney failure has already occurred.
The results the Consultant has in front of him indicated not failure but moderate damage so I expect that’s why he thought it ok to up the statin dose. The two sources below may explain the Consultant’s action.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases...rol/in-depth/statin-side-effects/art-20046013
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1770345/
He also sought to reduce my blood pressure and prescribed amdropoline, which reduced it so well that I was faint and wobbly and feared I’d fall into the pond We were relining and refilling - an untimely end and a real waste of medication if that had happened!

 

[rab5]

Statins is something I would not take.

Have a look at this for starters brilliant video

 

[hankjam]

Statins for kidney's was interesting.
I had BP issues and was put on perindolperil and since losing a bunch of weight my BP is improved, so asked Dr about coming off the peri.... "No" she said, it's good for your kidney function!

 

[sally and james]

The phrase, or variations of it, "it will protect your kidneys", seems to one of those thrown about with abandon by some medics. I had a conversation with a consultant a few years ago and he said, "if we don't know what is causing a problem, we tend to say it's probably a virus". I wonder if "it will protect your kidneys" is medical speak for "I haven't got a clue what it will do, but I'd look better/be richer if you took it".
Why do any of us need to swallow a chemical to protect a particular organ? Surely much better to remove the thing (foodstuff/ pill/ drink) that is causing the damage, rather than add to chemical cocktails and polypharmacy. Ask yourself, is my body defficient in this chemical?
Sally

 

[bulkbiker]

@bulkbiker you mention the 'old idea that high colesterol is bad', What is the new idea? I was not aware there was a new one. (I say this in a tone of wow this could be cool)

check out this video

Also if you haven't seen him already Ivor Cummings or "The Fat Emperor" just google him... has a hugely detailed debunking of cholesterol on his sites.

 

[Fairygodmother]

Yes, I agree, it becomes confusing when one finds such opposing science.
He certainly exposes the statistical sleight of hand which is only too prevalent (see John Pilger’s Work on this) and looks at other causes of cardiovascular disease. His dietary advice is mainly directed at obesity and the growing incidence of T2.
I’ve already concluded that low bs and bp as well as good hydration are essential for renal health.
I think I need to look at more studies before making a decision about statins.

 

[EllsKBells]

@Fairygodmother try googling Ben Goldacre and his work on Statins. He's been involved in doing a lot of meta-analyses, looking at all the data, and he is a critic of them, to say the least.

 

[Fairygodmother]

@Fairygodmother try googling Ben Goldacre and his work on Statins. He's been involved in doing a lot of meta-analyses, looking at all the data, and he is a critic of them, to say the least.

Thanks, I will.

 

[NicoleC1971]

At my yearly check with the Consultant I was prescribed a hugely increased dose of atorvastatin - 80mg. The Consultant said he wished to protect my kidneys. He had in front of him some dire results: eGFR (39) and (related) creatinine (108) of a blood test I’d had done for the hospital. The fact that I wasn’t told these results at the time’s another story - grrrrrrrr. They came through to me eight weeks after the appointment. I think there’s been an admin problem when people started leaving because of wage cuts. More grrrrrrrrr.
Back to those frightening results and the submarine size statin pills.
Cheerfully the Slippery Slope results were contradicted by a set of results in a test undertaken later for the DSN - eGFR 77. Whoop!
Another test, six weeks after the cheerful one, confirmed that kidney function was fine.
Relief!
However, I’d been downing the horse-pill statins for some weeks; I then halved them when I received the happy result.
I’m still getting the occasional night time cramps and daily joint and muscle aches that began when I was taking a high dose. I take care to maintain hydration.
Who’s taken statins that are kind to them?
I know there’s a big discussion about the need for statins but as I’ve had T1 for 48 years now I’m keen to keep my kidneys working as well as my eyes, my cardio vascular system, my peripheral nerves, etc etc. I want to eliminate all possible threats to a decent, active life. If some bombproof scientific evidence arrives that statins make no difference then I’ll stop taking them but I’ve not yet seen any.
So what I’m eager to find out is whether anyone else has had bad side effects from statins.
And has anyone discovered a statin that hasn’t evinced side effects?

Hi. I don't take statins (female with no evidence of heart disease therefore I know they will not benefit me) but have had diabetes for 36 + years and have slightly leaky kidneys. I have never been offered a statin but am taking a class of drug called a sartan which is usually used as a BP lowering tablet but happens to also help protect the kidneys. I don't understand why cutting the metabolic pathway that makes ldl cholesterol in your liver would benefit your kidnesys.....My sartan has the benefit of having few side effects whereas statins are in a more dubious class not least because of the side effects you have experienced. My drug is called Irbesartan should you wish to discuss that option with your consultant. Also I found a site called Patients Like Me which allows you to compare notes on drugs so that may help.

 

[Resurgam]

My reaction to Atorvastatin caused my husband to stop taking the statin he was on - one of us had to be compos mentis - and the change in his manner of speaking and his attitude to life is remarkable. The strange thing is that he has no concept of how difficult it was to live with him for the years he was taking the tablets - even though I often broke down in tears in front of him - he has no recollection at all.

 

[ivan 2]

Hi,
It all depends on your cardiovascular system.With cardiac infarct and 4 stents (diabetes 2) I have no choice but take prescribed statins without even contemplating their benefit.As always - lesser evil.

 

[alanjones212]

At my yearly check with the Consultant I was prescribed a hugely increased dose of atorvastatin - 80mg. The Consultant said he wished to protect my kidneys. He had in front of him some dire results: eGFR (39) and (related) creatinine (108) of a blood test I’d had done for the hospital. The fact that I wasn’t told these results at the time’s another story - grrrrrrrr. They came through to me eight weeks after the appointment. I think there’s been an admin problem when people started leaving because of wage cuts. More grrrrrrrrr.
Back to those frightening results and the submarine size statin pills.
Cheerfully the Slippery Slope results were contradicted by a set of results in a test undertaken later for the DSN - eGFR 77. Whoop!
Another test, six weeks after the cheerful one, confirmed that kidney function was fine.
Relief!
However, I’d been downing the horse-pill statins for some weeks; I then halved them when I received the happy result.
I’m still getting the occasional night time cramps and daily joint and muscle aches that began when I was taking a high dose. I take care to maintain hydration.
Who’s taken statins that are kind to them?
I know there’s a big discussion about the need for statins but as I’ve had T1 for 48 years now I’m keen to keep my kidneys working as well as my eyes, my cardio vascular system, my peripheral nerves, etc etc. I want to eliminate all possible threats to a decent, active life. If some bombproof scientific evidence arrives that statins make no difference then I’ll stop taking them but I’ve not yet seen any.
So what I’m eager to find out is whether anyone else has had bad side effects from statins.
And has anyone discovered a statin that hasn’t evinced side effects?

Hi I have been on Statins since they first came out. Tried them all - Simvastatin did nothing for me. The new Pravastatin likewise did nothing to lower cholesterol/lipids. Atorvastatin gave me very bad leg cramps - but was very effective at lowering cholesterol/lipids to normal. Been on Rosuvastatin now for many years and is by far the best one (for me) - only the occasional leg cramps when I stretch - cholesterol/lipids Normal range.

 

[bulkbiker]

I take Atorvastatin. Never had any side effects from it. My last Cholesterol was 3.4 with HDL 1.07.
When it comes to Kidneys I did have early diabetic kidney disease (microalbuminuria) and was told to really take my health seriously to prevent full kidney failure. This was put down to a combination of High Blood Pressure and Poor Diet Choice & Obesity.

That's a very low total cholesterol level. No idea how old you are but you may not be doing yourself many favours running it that low.