Reply to Thread

Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the Diabetes Forum Survey 2025 »

Message: <blockquote data-quote="surferchappie" data-source="post: 1832488" data-attributes="member: 454621">Hello, i am a 35 year old type 1 diabetic who was diagnosed at 11 years old.Hba1C's have been poor in the past but over the last 3 years have been much better, today's review saw a 42, best yet but would like to just dip into the 38/39 range for my next one so the hard work continues <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> (self-funding of libre has allowed this - finger pricking is a waste of time and blood).Anyway, i was prompted to consider statins - being inquisitive i asked why as my cholesterol/HDL is 3.9 and there is little to no history of heart disease in my family - i was told that i should have been offered statins to reduce the risk of HD after 10 years with type 1 diabetes and that just by being in this category my risk went up dramatically, so, i got my cogs turning and wondering 'why?' as i sat there quietly. I listened to the doctor but politely declined the statins due to the negative press they receive and figuring i will do some research on the topic first.I have since found that reports from NICE in 2004 suggested no firm evidence base for benefits of the use of statins in type 1 diabetics and furthermore recommended the area as a target topic for in-depth research moving forwards.*A revised report was published in 2014 that, on the back of no additional research having been carried out, strengthened the recommendation for statins to be taken by type 1 diabetics who have had the condition for +10 years, are over 40, or have other cardiovascular risk factors present.*A little more digging and i found the tool used by doctors when recommending the use of statins - the QRISK2 calculator. So, i duly go and find a version and tap in my own details (cholesterol/HDL, age, sex, ethnicity, weight and height and diabetes [type]), sure enough it puts me at 3.4% risk of heart complications inside the next 10 years versus the expected healthy equivalent person being at 0.7%, likely the factor that results in me being offered statins - however - why? What is the additional risk element or cause of damage? Why are my figures so vastly different to Jo Blogs' figures? Sure enough i play with the figures and the only thing affecting the result (3.4% vs 0.7%) was the inclusion of type 1 diabetes.Taking type 1 diabetes out of the equation puts my data back on track with Jo Blogs' score, suddenly i am not at risk of heart complications.What irked me about this was the lack of diabetes-related data being entered into the QRISK2 calculator - surely diabetes as a standalone element is not sufficient enough to add risk regardless of how well it is/is not controlled? There are diabetics out there with c35mmol/mol Hba1Cs that have never ventured from that level of control - the calculator is too rigid in this regard and an Hba1C entry would help to feedback to doctors a better understanding of diabetes and the impact of good vs poor control on future complications like heart disease etc.What are your experiences with this topic?Have you been advised to take statins, if so, have you taken the advice  /has it made any difference?Thanks for reading my rant.NB: type 1 score with my stats was 3.4%, if altered to type 2 it changed to 2.2%* www[dot]practicaldiabetes.com[slash]article[slash]statins-people-type-1-diabetes-treatment-startScreen shots of results from QRISK2:No diabetes[ATTACH]27527[/ATTACH] Type 1[ATTACH]27528[/ATTACH] Type 2[ATTACH]27529[/ATTACH]</blockquote>

Verification

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to Thread