Low carb and Statins

[Charis1213]

Nope. I do have another appointment in Jan at which he will probably discuss the results, my first appointment was when he took the tests so my first chance to discuss will be in Jan (almost afraid to go back because I didn't take the statins!). I will ask for an LDL particle test and if he says no, I might pay for a test myself if available. He did refer me to a group of Lipid Nurses that are going around the UK testing certain genes for FH and so on. I don't think I fit the FH profile (and neither did he) but he said it was probably all to do with the genes from both parents merging to give me high cholesterol...or words to that effect. I do know my trigs have always been low and previous cholesterol levels over the years have tended to hover between 5 and 8. Many thanks for your input Bluetit. I am very grateful for all of the referrals my GP's and Consultants have made though, I'm looked after very well in that regard but am frustrated by how they interpret the results and seem to give the same one word answer....STATINS. x

I read somewhere that as we age our cholesterol increases to protect our brains, we need cholesterol to stay healthy , I really believe it should be left alone at the level our bodies make , we are all different . I still wouldn't take statins I really know the side effects seen it first hand with my precious dad .

 

[Charis1213]

Don’t deny the doctor his bonus!

That's funny but its also correct , surgeries get incentives for prescribing statins and I also heard a bonus in their wage package .

 

[richf]

Well, I had my blood taken yesterday for my cholesterol check as I requested. The person taking my blood was not very busy and spent some time going over my previous test readings. Apart from 2009 my readings were generally below 5. I actually managed to get an appointment next week to discuss the results and not a telephone review. (previous telephone reviews might just as well have been a recorded message). I believe the GP I am seeing is a stand in and is pretty straight talking. So I can discuss my concerns and intentions. Will be reporting back towards end of next week.

 

[Bluetit1802]

Well, I had my blood taken yesterday for my cholesterol check as I requested. The person taking my blood was not very busy and spent some time going over my previous test readings. Apart from 2009 my readings were generally below 5. I actually managed to get an appointment next week to discuss the results and not a telephone review. (previous telephone reviews might just as well have been a recorded message). I believe the GP I am seeing is a stand in and is pretty straight talking. So I can discuss my concerns and intentions. Will be reporting back towards end of next week.

Please don't dwell on the total cholesterol number. It is the HDL and triglycerides that are important. The total is just that - a total of the good cholesterol and the bad cholesterol with a bit of OK cholesterol thrown in. I hope you fasted for this test? Try to get a print out of the results BEFORE you see the doctor, so you can be prepared.

 

[pixie1]

What did he have to say about your excellent HDL and trigs? My GP told me they don't look at trigs at all.

I thought trigs is a precursor for heart disease

 

[Bluetit1802]

I thought trigs is a precursor for heart disease

Very high ones might be. Very low ones with high HDL is what to aim for.

 

[richf]

Please don't dwell on the total cholesterol number. It is the HDL and triglycerides that are important. The total is just that - a total of the good cholesterol and the bad cholesterol with a bit of OK cholesterol thrown in. I hope you fasted for this test? Try to get a print out of the results BEFORE you see the doctor, so you can be prepared.

Yes I did fast before the test and I was told I could actually phone for a breakdown of the results before my appointment. I must admit I did indulge a little over Christmas so I guess my readings
could be better!

 

[Bluetit1802]

Yes I did fast before the test and I was told I could actually phone for a breakdown of the results before my appointment. I must admit I did indulge a little over Christmas so I guess my readings
could be better!

Good luck. Let us know how you go on.

 

[richf]

Good luck. Let us know how you go on.

Yes I sure will, because I would like to know what the readings actually mean, as opposed to maybe a "drug company influenced" opinion.

 

[pixie1]

Please don't dwell on the total cholesterol number. It is the HDL and triglycerides that are important. The total is just that - a total of the good cholesterol and the bad cholesterol with a bit of OK cholesterol thrown in. I hope you fasted for this test? Try to get a print out of the results BEFORE you see the doctor, so you can be prepared.

My Gp said they have been told that there is no need to fast. i Said surely that effects the lipid results.
I wonder who makes all these decision.

 

[pixie1]

Very high ones might be. Very low ones with high HDL is what to aim for.

Oops, I should have been precise. I meant high trigs.

 

[Bluetit1802]

My Gp said they have been told that there is no need to fast. i Said surely that effects the lipid results.
I wonder who makes all these decision.

We are all told not to fast these days. It changed a few years ago and is mainly to save us waiting too long for tests. If we all fasted the tests would all have to be earlyish in the mornings, so we would have to wait weeks sometimes for an appointment. Without fasting they can do the tests at any time of day and therefore test many more of us on the same day. It was a NICE recommendation. However, the trigs will be a lot higher if we have recently eaten a meal with fat, so it is best to fast whatever you have been told.

 

[Bananas 2]

Statins have side effects and there are numerous articles warning about them. Personally, I would never take a statin willy-nilly. I would only consider taking them if a serious health-threatening condition truly necessitated them.

I'll just leave this here:
https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news...d-effect-on-pool-of-powerful-brain-cells.aspx

 

[smw99]

I should add that GPs use what is known as the Q-Risk calculation of your risk of a CVD event in the next 10 years compared to everyone else who has the same criteria as yourself. If your risk is above 10% they will push statins on you. However, according this Q-Risk, our risks increase every birthday. It is impossible to be under 10% once we reach a certain age. I believe that GPs are still using an old version of this formula. Here is the old version and also the later version. Have a play with it. It is very worrying because it is a one size fits all scenario and in my opinion, complete rubbish..

https://qrisk.org/2017/

https://qrisk.org/three/ (the latest one)

Your score seems to double, the moment you say you have diabetes type 2. There is no question about HbA1c or control or remission. the irony to me is that if many of us walked into a new surgery and our blood was tested we would be not be diabetic. So my question is if our diabetes is in remission due to diet and lifestyle do we have have a higher risk or not.

 

[bulkbiker]

Your score seems to double, the moment you say you have diabetes type 2. There is no question about HbA1c or control or remission. the irony to me is that if many of us walked into a new surgery and our blood was tested we would be not be diabetic. So my question is if our diabetes is in remission due to diet and lifestyle do we have have a higher risk or not.

In real life probably not.. in QRisk life then yes.. depends if you live in the real world or QRisk world I guess...
No-one knows.. we are such a small subset of the T2 population that we are all anomalies but I can't see any mechanism that would mean that reversed T2 diabetes would have any negative impact on health. We should have the same risks as a "normal" person although in all probability fewer risks as we are more aware of what we fuel our bodies with.