HI do remember in a discussion on statins it being said that there have been no definitive studies that have shown statins to be of benefit to women at all. Not sure of the veracity of that statement but tend to believe it.
Hmmn .... I've just replied to you John and have somehow deleted it! Yes, I'm inclined to believe that statement too, it's just that since my other dr left I have to contend with one of those "Do as you are told, we know what is good for you" types now. However as I consider myself in good health I think I'll stand up to him and resist the statin.I do remember in a discussion on statins it being said that there have been no definitive studies that have shown statins to be of benefit to women at all. Not sure of the veracity of that statement but tend to believe it.
That is so true. The meds set themselves up as Gods and expect us mere mortals to believe what they say without question. I have become such a sceptic since I realised that the NHS guidelines on the 'healthy eating plate' were so way off the mark. It has made me not want to believe at face value a thing they say.True.. but NICE also publish lots of stuff about Type 2 which a lot of us choose to ignore. The fact that they think that lowering cholesterol is a good thing, which is not a black and white issue, would make me question any of their recommendations on this subject. They are wrong on diabetes they could well be wrong on this as well.
I take Losartan for blood pressure and have done so for 3.5 years, it's just that when I go for the 6 month review they do these risk assessments [Qrisk] and the powers that be [NICE] say anyone over 10% should be on a statin. They reduced the figure from 20% about a year ago. Trouble is the Qrisk rises with every birthday so the same set of figure can give you a low risk at 50 yrs and a high risk at 74. Stands to reason that the older you get the more you are likely to die of all causes.
Statins have a bad press and big pharma refuses to acknowledge the muscle damage they can cause yet they refuse to disclose their data which is more to the point -I saw a Prof Collins on TV who is paid by big pharma saying muscle pain was all in the mind - that made me start to look into the question. What I have read - and there is plenty - makes me sceptical. I am of the opinion that we women need our cholesterol.
My cholesterol a year ago was: Total C.6.6 mmol; HDL 2.8; non hdl ch 3.8; ratio 2.4. The dr at the time was OK with these figures but I am due another test so expect to be bullied by a different dr. The HbA1c was 41% and I was dismissively told that would rise. I weigh 57 kilos and am 172 cm high. Is the cholesterol too high?
Furthermore, It is noted in some research that too little potassium reduces the making of insulin. Maybe a good thing for insulin resistant patients, further research is being done. Magnesium might be my downfall.
I bought a lovely book. In middle of it. A magnesium one too.could also be that the insuline produced is of a worse quality, but who knows ?
here is som explanation of why pottassium helps lower blood pressure :
http://www.bloodpressureuk.org/microsites/salt/Home/Whypotassiumhelps
I bought a lovely book. In middle of it. A magnesium one too.
I'll ask if gp willing to test my levels, tomorrow.
I have a nasty feeling they do...I tend to believe that too, it's just resisting the dr's bullying that can be so hard. Sometimes I think they get a bonus for every patient they manage to persuade onto a statin.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?