Statins in the news again

[wellwell1212]

I read a front page article in yesterday's Daily Express on Statins and their side-effects, it did not read well and they are even suggesting Statins may be bad for us T2's. I have never been what you would call a fan of Statins and more particularly their side-effects, although I know people who can live fine with such as Simvastin quite easily and on the flip side, just as many who can't. I know such as Simvatin are a cheap fix and thus govt authorities are bound to like that but, what I don't get is why they can't develop a Statin that all of us can live with. That said, I was wondering what the current experience is out there and are there any other drugs these days that give that same beneficial effects, with-out bad side-effects :?:

 

[Squire Fulwood]

I have a problem. How did we get from only one person in 10,000 have any problems with statins to where we are at the moment.

To make it clear, I am that one person in 10,000 only it happened three times on three different kind on statins.

I have relatives who won't take medicine. Strangely they will go to see their doctor when they are ill but one of them in particular would come home and say, "I'm not taking that muck". It is her choice I suppose.

What I want to know is, am I the only one taking the medicine and are there 9,999 people out there who are not getting side effects because they are not taking the medicine but are included in the stats.

 

[Anonymous]

Quite honestly, would you believe anything that is written in the Daily Express?

 

[owain2]

Quite honestly, would you believe anything that is written in the Daily Express?

No! But I believe all the posters on here and elsewhere whose lives were nearly ruined by these things. Mind you, even the papers get it right sometimes.

I spent a ton of money on physiotherapy and painkillers until I dumped the statins.

I think one reason the figures are distorted is because people, such as myself, collect the pills each month and then dump them. The reason being that my doctors are obsessed with them. I have better things to do than argue with intransigent HCPs!

Owain

 

[GraceK]

I have a problem. How did we get from only one person in 10,000 have any problems with statins to where we are at the moment.

To make it clear, I am that one person in 10,000 only it happened three times on three different kind on statins.

I have relatives who won't take medicine. Strangely they will go to see their doctor when they are ill but one of them in particular would come home and say, "I'm not taking that muck". It is her choice I suppose.

What I want to know is, am I the only one taking the medicine and are there 9,999 people out there who are not getting side effects because they are not taking the medicine but are included in the stats.

People are entitled to go to their GP for their GPs opinion and advice and for a diagnosis. That's helpful. What isn't helpful is this blanket prescribing of meds whose side effects may or may not agree with the patient. Patients are entitled to use their own critical thinking when it comes to what medication and treatment they're offered. I was advised that I need statins and BP meds because I'm now diabetic. My BP and ECG were both normal, so why give me meds for a problem I don't have? I agreed straight away to Metformin because I knew I needed help to lower my BS, no probs with that. But I don't accept meds simply because NICE guidelines say I must have them.

 

[GraceK]

Quite honestly, would you believe anything that is written in the Daily Express?

No! But I believe all the posters on here and elsewhere whose lives were nearly ruined by these things. Mind you, even the papers get it right sometimes.

I spent a ton of money on physiotherapy and painkillers until I dumped the statins.

I think one reason the figures are distorted is because people, such as myself, collect the pills each month and then dump them. The reason being that my doctors are obsessed with them. I have better things to do than argue with intransigent HCPs!

Owain

To save arguing with my GP if I feel they're not listening, I accept the first prescription, but then I don't renew it next time. I ask only for the meds I know are helping me and that I can tolerate. If I'm asked why I'm not taking the others - I'll tell them why.
Like you, I ended up paying for acupuncture after I became virtually crippled with 'arthritis' after some antidepressants I was on several years ago. The doc just wanted to add painkillers rather than look at the fact it was side effects. I just took myself off the ADs and went straight to the Chinese acupuncturist round the corner who explained in detail why my joints were aching. I had similar success with a homeopath when I suffered anaphlyactic shock due to another antidepressant - he took a blood sample there and then and showed me on his computer, how my live blood was behaving. He knew I was diabetic two years before anything showed up on NHS blood tests. That's why I question the efficacy of NHS diagnostics.

 

[basketcase1002]

Both my husband and I were prescribed Simvastatin, my husband still takes it but I don't.
I got a lot of cramp, bad cramp with them and in the end I was sure I was going to have a heart attack. I would get a tightening cramp pain under my left hand ribs whereby I couldn't move, talk or anything and this would last for minutes at a time. I'd been taking them for about 12 months before I really noticed a great problem with the cramps but then happened to look at the side effects of that medication. After feeling ill for a fair time I decided to stop taking them and the cramps I had stopped, almost immediately.
My doctor agreed with stopping them when I told her what had happened.
You know if you don't get on with some medication so I would just say take it if it doesn't affect you, I wouldn't dream of telling my husband not to take it, he knows what to look out for so will decide for himself if and when it's not right!

 

[Indy51]

Found this interesting article online today - about how women can have different reactions to medications than men. Sounds like you two have found out about it first hand

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health ... 6511287287

 

[basketcase1002]

Cheers Indy51, it certainly makes interesting reading. I'll be certain to monitor any side effects I get from pills after reading that! Once bitten and all that! :?

 

[Dillinger]

Statins do have some benefit, but not very much and probably not for the reasons that are claimed (i.e. benefits from cholesterol lowering). The side effects are seriously under reported because 'statins have minimal side effects' therefore anyone presenting side effects for statins isn't presenting them because 'statins have minimal side effects'.

Here is a famous and old study (1995) that helped open the flood gates for statin use for everybody;

It is the West Of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NE ... 1163332001

The conclusion reads 'Treatment with pravastatin significantly reduced the incidence of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes without adversely affecting the risk of death from noncardiovascular causes in men with moderate hypercholesterolemia and no history of myocardial infarction.'

Fantastic stuff eh?

But here are the actual numbers (from the same study):

The absolute risk reduction of all cardiovascular death was only 0.7% and absolute risk reduction of all cause death was only 0.9% over 4.9 years. Thus, 100/0.7 = 142 men have to take pravastatin for nearly five years to prevent 1 cardiovascular death and 100/0.9 = 111 men have to take pravastatin for nearly 5 years to prevent 1 death overall.

(My bold)

That is frankly rubbish; and it must be related to something other than cholesterol lowering because everyone who takes statins has their cholesterol lowered.

Sounds fishy? That's because it is fishy.

From memory the top of the range statins only improve your chance of CVD/death in absolute terms by about 1% now.

If I sold you a mobile phone that only had coverage 1% of the time you wouldn't use it even thought it has significantly better coverage than not using a mobile phone.

Statins are a joke and alas we are not the ones laughing.

Dillinger

 

[Glynis01]

I have a problem. How did we get from only one person in 10,000 have any problems with statins to where we are at the moment.

To make it clear, I am that one person in 10,000 only it happened three times on three different kind on statins.

I have relatives who won't take medicine. Strangely they will go to see their doctor when they are ill but one of them in particular would come home and say, "I'm not taking that muck". It is her choice I suppose.

What I want to know is, am I the only one taking the medicine and are there 9,999 people out there who are not getting side effects because they are not taking the medicine but are included in the stats.

I am now on Simvastatin. It was given to me as a sort of last resort. I have been prescribed about thirteen meds before that one, and I was asked if I was willing to give it a go before it being prescribed me. I must have the most amazing drs in the country, as they always listen to me and work with me, we are a team. Of course, people are going to have adverse reactions to some meds and not others. So far I have found two that I cannot take. Diclofenac made my short term memory go, and amlodipine made my hair fall out. I told the drs straight away and they changed them for something else. Before I left the surgery with my first prescription for simvastatin, we discussed fully the side effects and the potential effect on muscles, and told if I felt any particular symptoms then to go back straightaway. I had another appointment to go back so they could check the effectiveness of them, and it was only after that appointment that they put them onto my repeat list. Surely I'm not the only person who reacts positively to simvastatin, am I, and surely not the only person who has good drs? Glynis

 

[Sid Bonkers]

I am very lucky that I have naturally low cholesterol so have never taken or even been offered a statin but if my cholesterol was high I would definitely think about taking one, having read all the anecdotal evidence on here I dont think I would like to try Simsastatin as it does seem to get a lot of complaints.

 

[Defren]

Surely I'm not the only person who reacts positively to simvastatin, am I, and surely not the only person who has good drs? Glynis

I was fine on Simvastatin, but I didn't want to be on Statins at all. My GP agreed to a switch and a lower dose. I then went onto Atorvastatin. That was an unmitigated disaster, I have lost around half of my hair. Thankfully I had exceptionally thick hair, and finally it has stopped falling out.

I have a super GP in every way except Statins. We talk about everything, and he supports me in everything I try. That said we are at total loggerheads over Statins, and because I don't want to be seen as 'non compliant' he writes a script for Atorvastatin, I put it in the bin! My cholesterol is very low, I feel I don't need the **** things, he insists I do. Hence why I bin them. Not an ideal situation, but I just don't want to take medication I don't need!

 

[Hopeful Alfie]

My, my, the old statins keep cropping up :roll:
I was prescribed statins for a cholesterol of 6.4, I took them for about two weeks and came out in a rash, stopped them and the rash went away! I read that porridge oats will lower cholesterol so I tried a daily breakfast of three heaped dessertspoons of the oats, with some ground nuts, a little bran, some Splenda, skimmed milk and water. Result: Cholesterol four point very little. one happy patient and one GP now taking porridge daily

 

[Hopeful Alfie]

My, my, the old statins keep cropping up :roll:
I was prescribed statins for a cholesterol of 6.4, I took them for about two weeks and came out in a rash, stopped them and the rash went away! I read that porridge oats will lower cholesterol so I tried a daily breakfast of three heaped dessertspoons of the oats, with some ground nuts, a little bran, some Splenda, skimmed milk and water. Result: Cholesterol four point very little. one happy patient and one GP now taking porridge daily

 

[basketcase1002]

I've just had another blood test and the old cholesterol has cropped up again. Got to see my diabetes nurse again on 20th Nov. Lets see what her idea might be, but for sure I wont be taking Simvastatin again and i'll make sure we have an in depth convo before I take anything!

 

[Superchip]

Well, I don't take statins, they cause so much muscle damage, and it occurs to me that the heart is a great big muscle. Apart from the obscene profits to made for the pharmas and the 'low fat' food police and gp practices what good are they ?
As I told my consultant at Papworth, who is desperate for me to go on this evil drug, that I'll be at his funeral !
Take the script, don't tick the box, that way gp gets paid for prescribing but the drug isn't doled out by the chemist. Simples.
18 years post transplant, only 2 on statins, in my ignorance.
The writing is on the wall for this foul drug ( bloody japanese ! ), the future litigation will bring down the pharmaceutical companies for sure.

Grumpy Superchip of Suffolk

 

[Virgo123]

I was on simvastatin when first diagnosed. I stopped taking it after I was told by someone else that it slows you down and its cognitive. I experienced those symptoms and immediately stopped taking it. I felt the difference almost immed, and felt even better 3 months later. I was on it for about 6 months. My GP is also great but he is 'statin happy' and not pleased that I told him outright that I wont take it. I dont feel obliged to take a script from him, I just told him an emphatic NO! He suggested a different one, and I just refused.

Why must I take something that MIGHT prevent a heart attack, that make me feel like 'death warmed up' daily. No, Im interested in feeling good today and every day instead of worying about what MIGHT happen in 10yrs.

What is wrong with doctors. Do they lack common sense....

 

[Superchip]

Good post Virgo123 !

You are not a lackie like some of the yes people on here, quite apart from the general public (poor sods)
who take everything their gp says as gospel.

YOU own your disease and must take most of the responsibility for it.

What gp's lack in common sense they make up for with monstrous salaries !

TTFN Superchip

 

[wellwell1212]

Thanks people you have confirmed my opinions of the Great Statin scam :roll:

I hard a mare of a time on them and now only use diet, regular pink grapefruit and exerciser. I am feeling much better than whilst on those things.