Still confused about statins

[bobrobert]

Very true.
I take them, they work for me, I know because I tried them, stopped them, tried a different type, and am happy with the outcome.
So it's purely personal experience, and because it's personal, it can't be translated to any one else.

Can you be more explicit and explain how they "work for you" Taking any medicine is an act of faith because if you don't take them you can't really have anything to compare with. Just feeling better isn't proof because we don't really know what is happening inside our bodies. I have been on statins and decided to stop but feeling better could be down to other factors. You are obviously feeling "better" which makes you happier?

 

[douglas99]

can you explain what you mean by 'feeling better', as its not in my post, so if you can give me some context on how you expect to 'feel better' on statins, and I'll try to answer

 

[bobrobert]

can you explain what you mean by 'feeling better', as its not in my post, so if you can give me some context on how you expect to 'feel better' on statins, and I'll try to answer

"happy with the outcome"

I equated that with feeling better. A reasonable paraphrasing?

 

[Denthezen]

My cholesterol was 5.9 when first diagnosed a1c 7.9 I don't want medication so decided to go on diet only. for that to work the cholesterol HAS to be as normal as possible. I took statins cut down on dairy food and three months later cholesterol 3.5 and hba1c 6.0. Still test regularly BG average hasn't been above 6.0

 

[douglas99]

"happy with the outcome"

I equated that with feeling better. A reasonable paraphrasing?

Not really.

'Feeling better' is more like how I feel when I take painkillers for a headache, or lemsip for a cold.
Or even, I would imagine, for a different category of drug entirely.

But, in a philosophical way, statins do make me feel better.
But, probably in a long, rambling way, why do statins make me, personally, feel better?

I like my doctor.
She seems to like me.
I suspect she is trying to keep me alive, not kill me. (this is reinforced by the fact her kids play with my kids, they have sleepovers, so I don't think she would want me to die and upset her kids friends)
So when she does lots of blood tests, I believe getting all the figures back in a 'normal' range not only makes me happy, but she's probably pleased as well.
But, even so, I believe that the ranges are based on the standard population, in the normal range, set by statistics that should show this is what the average population normally achieve.
You can question that, you can try to fine tune it, you can simply say it's wrong.
You can achieve your figures, then find research to show yours are better then the average.
I don't do that.
Me - I like to see the lack of exclamation signs.
So, that does indeed make me happy.
So that's the first tick in my happy box.

I also know I'm diabetic.
I know it's progressive.
I can't run from it, I can't simply mask the symptoms, I can't pretend I'm normal.
But, I can live with it.
If I accept it, and make it part of my life, I'm not part of it, so that makes me happy.
So I do that.
I accept I may have symptoms, I accept I'm more at risk than others to some complications.
But then I figure, if I can delay those complications, I may well be dead before I see them
That makes me happy
It ticks another space in my happy box.

So, statins.
They reduce my cholesterol into the figures that make me happy.
They make me happy because I don't get exclamations on my blood tests.
They make me happy because a lack of exclamations on my blood tests means, to me, my blood is in the same range of normality as the rest of the normal population.
So the complications should be slow.
I won't see them.
Another tick in my happy box.

I want to see my kids grow up, and have their kids.
I want to be the sort of grandparent that gives them back, completely hyperactive, well after their bedtime, then go down the pub for some peace and quiet, and do the same next time.
Payback is good.
And statins seem to give me more chance of living longer.
That's another tick on my happy list.

But, the point is, this is what makes me happy.

I'm happy, because I have decided the NHS targets for statins are my targets.
I eat, and, yes, medicate, to achieve those targets.

I don't have side effects.
I did on some, that made me unhappy, but the increase in cholesterol figures when I stopped taking them made me more unhappy, so I changed to another statin.
And that's another balancing act I made my judgement on.

I started on simvastatin, which got my cholesterol to a happy level. (based on my own happy definitions). But I got shoulder ache. So, I decided to stop them, as a purely unscientific test as it may just have been the draughty doors at home. I also then went on holiday, and ate a lot of food I don't normally eat. (My BG was good though, so I was happy). I came home, went for a blood test, my cholesterol had gone up. I was unhappy. I decided to try Atorvastitin, but also modified my diet, and my cholesterol went down.
So, anyone could argue any one of those changes worked, or didn't. Or all did, or some worked, and others didn't

But, I know, my diet, my dose of atorvastatin, gives me a cholesterol count, across the board, that is within the NHS guidelines.
I know that that represents the average population.
I know the average population gets to wind up their grandchildren, then go down the pub for a drink.
And that makes me happy.

I'm not chasing immortality.
I'm just living untiI I die.

And I'm happy with that as well.