• Guest, the forum is undergoing some upgrades and so the usual themes will be unavailable for a few days. In the meantime, you can use the forum like normal. We'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Lost the battle with cholesterol, any particular type of Statin is better?

B

brightstation

Active Member
So my GP has given my 6 months to reduce my cholesterol without resorting to statins and reluctantly agreed to extend it by a further six, unfortunately levels remained constant at 5.6 (3.7 LDL).

I know ultimately it is my decision but I am now considering going along (please no need to tell about the cholesterol myth etc) and was wondering if it is best to request a particular type of Statin (and why would be great)? I am T2 controlled by diet and exercise and A1C came out at 38/5. 6 (a success here as it was 8.6 12M ago)

Many thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well they all seem to try you on simvastatin as it is cheapest but I would try it but keep an eye out for probs and get back to them for alternatives if the one you are on gives probs.
(this statin of choice may change as the proprietary brands come out of patent)
 
Simvastatin didn't work for me at all, and they caused problems through side effects. Atorvastatin has been somewhat better and caused no side effects at all, but the biggest effect on cholesterol and triglycerides was from cutting right back on carb intake and increasing cardio.


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
 
Reducing Cholestrol in the body by natural means is very difficult . There are several herbal remedies including a brand of Spread that is promoted and claims to reduce Cholestrol. Only problem to be effective you would practically have to live entirely off of this particular product for it to be effective despite what all the TV advertising claims.
Most of the 'Statins' work in the body in that same way (I've personall been on Simvastatin for years now) and never evperienced any problems with and which is best taken at night before bedtime, where the active ingredient is then most effect and when the body is producing the greatest quantity of Cholestrol.
Cholestrol reading should also be broken dow into the HDL/LDL and VLDL levels of Cholestrol, rather than just quoting the Total Cholestrol as is so often the case. The LDL and VLDL levels being the more important (The higher reading the better) where-as the HDL should be kept as LOW as is possible.
 


You sure you got the LDL/HDL argument the right way round? if not I have not problem with 'bad' cholesterol
 
brightstation said:
You sure you got the LDL/HDL argument the right way round? if not I have not problem with 'bad' cholesterol
Click to expand...
i'm sure Lazybones has accidently got them mixed up.
Thommothebear,
I can't rcall the fancy names but the "large fluffy" LDL is innocuous and the small dense LDL is the bad one!
 
FergusCrawford said:
i'm sure Lazybones has accidently got them mixed up.
Thommothebear,
I can't rcall the fancy names but the "large fluffy" LDL is innocuous and the small dense LDL is the bad one!
Click to expand...

Some other things to note.

1) The lower your trigs score the more likely LDL is made from the large fluffy good stuff.
2) The ratio of your total divided by your HDL is a far better indicator than just total

When you have a cholesterol test your LDL score is derived mathematically from your total, trigs and HDL scores. LDL is not measured directly by the test. You can ask the doctor to get a breakdown LDL test to see how much good fluffy LDL you have but the test costs loads and I've never heard of one person who has successfully persuaded a gp to get that test done.
 
I have been taking Simvastatin for the last four years without any problem and have never had any side effects from them
 
I've been on Atorvastatin for 5 months now and no side-effects -- it had an instant and very good impact on trigs, LDL and HDL levels. I am on the smallest possible dose, though, and my GP is monitoring it carefully -- I had a whole gamut of tests after the first month to check liver function etc. I suspect that that is the key, really: don't sign up for life, but make sure that your GP is treating it as a carefully monitored experiment. Do ask whether, once the statin has brought levels down, you can then have some time trying to maintain the lower levels with diet and lifestyle changes alone.

My cholesterol had generally been OK -- total usually in low 4s, and different elements all within acceptable range -- but I had heart problems and it was those that made the statin inevitable for the time being.
Good luck!
 
A low carb diet and lots of exercise can reduce cholesterol significantly. It is common for trigs to drop to 1 or better and HDL to go up. LDL can go up temporarily for a while-but usually settles down. See what diabetes.co.uk say.


Very sound advice.

FB
 
Not used statins myself, but my trigs are always significantly better when I have been taking more exercise and drinking less wine.

In terms of statins, both my parents were on Simvastatin until middle last year and out of the blue their GP wrote to them and said it has been shown to ineract badly with several other drugs and he was taking them off it and putting them on Atorvastatin instead. Apparently the MHRA wrote to all GPs drawing their attention to the following:

http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Safetyinformation/DrugSafetyUpdate/CON180637

So I'd probably avoid Simvastatin just as a precaution.

Smidge
 
"Not used statins myself, but my trigs are always significantly better when I have been taking more exercise and drinking less wine."

High trigs are an indicator of being an alcoholic also an indicator of high consumption of carbohydrates and injected insulin.
.
FB
 
Last edited by a moderator:

LOL - I don't drink that much wine honest!

Smidge
 

That is good news desidiabulum and sound advice about monitoring the progress when on ststins.


smidge said:
Not used statins myself, but my trigs are always significantly better when I have been taking more exercise and drinking less wine.
Click to expand...



Not sure about the drinking of less wine Smidge but in all seriousness you've quite right about exercise having a positive impact on cholesterol levels.
 


I'm on Atorvastatin too. I didn't have any side effects with Simvastatin, but saw a locum a few months ago who was really into his statins. He did a bit of a medicine review and said that he wasn't happy with me being on the simvastatin, switched it to Atorvastatin. I've never had a single side effect or problem.
 
I am supposed to be taking Atorvastatins but everytime I take them I get aching legs and arms, dull headaches and end up having vivid dreams every night (never usually dream at all). I am fed up with them so I'm going to refuse to take them anymore.
My Mum had real bad problems with Simvastatin after about 3 or 4 years and ended up hardly being able to walk. Once she stopped them she began to improve straight away.
Some folks get no problems but I have met more that do than don't unfortunately.
I would say to anyone by all means try them but make sure you tell your Doctor if you have any side effects at all as serious muscle damage does not seem to be easily reversible afterwards.
Just my opinion, take advice from your GP etc.
Angie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…