Guzzler
Master
- Messages
- 10,577
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Diet only
- Dislikes
- Poor grammar, bullying and drunks.
Perhaps you might be better trying to lower your triglyceride level rather than your total cholesterol levels.
Never been mentioned at my health screening. It is currently higher than my lowest reading which was 3 with a HDL of 0.97. However I am still in the category of Grossly Obese and waiting for an appointment with a Weight Loss Team.
That's could be because probably 90% of HCP's haven't the first idea about cholesterol but just prescribe statins at the drop of a hat.Never been mentioned at my health screening. It is currently higher than my lowest reading which was 3 with a HDL of 0.97. However I am still in the category of Grossly Obese and waiting for an appointment with a Weight Loss Team.
Hello. I have a been prescribed a few statins over the years before I was diagnose with diabetes. Simvastatin was my first which I took for some years until it became ineffective. I then changed to another one, which I’m really sorry I don’t remember the name of, which didn’t work at all. I was then put on Atorvastatin which was very good at keeping my total cholesterol down. On a visit to my family in Australia in mid 2015 I had a very interesting discussion with my mother who is a retired hospital pharmacist about the statin my father was on for his raised cholesterol. My father is 97yo, is not diabetic (although two of my brothers and I are) and has great difficulty walking. The deterioration in his legs has taken a number of years and my mother is convinced that the cause of his decline in mobility is directly connected with his taking of Atorvastatin. On my return home to the U.K. I took this up with my GP and hospital diabetes team and informed them of my concerns about the loss of muscle in my legs and cramps etc. (I had been taking Atorvastatin for approx 18 months) and between us agreed that I could come off the statins. My legs have improved and I have worked at improving my muscle tone by going to the gym twice a week and attending Pilates. It was not plain sailing with my cholesterol as the total figure gradually rose to 7 ( 2017) but I have persisted without the statins and with diet and exercise got is down to 6.5. I do feel better in myself and physically stronger not being on the statins but I’m aware that what applies to me may not work for other people. Apologies in advance for such a war and peace response.At my yearly check with the Consultant I was prescribed a hugely increased dose of atorvastatin - 80mg. The Consultant said he wished to protect my kidneys. He had in front of him some dire results: eGFR (39) and (related) creatinine (108) of a blood test I’d had done for the hospital. The fact that I wasn’t told these results at the time’s another story - grrrrrrrr. They came through to me eight weeks after the appointment. I think there’s been an admin problem when people started leaving because of wage cuts. More grrrrrrrrr.
Back to those frightening results and the submarine size statin pills.
Cheerfully the Slippery Slope results were contradicted by a set of results in a test undertaken later for the DSN - eGFR 77. Whoop!
Another test, six weeks after the cheerful one, confirmed that kidney function was fine.
Relief!
However, I’d been downing the horse-pill statins for some weeks; I then halved them when I received the happy result.
I’m still getting the occasional night time cramps and daily joint and muscle aches that began when I was taking a high dose. I take care to maintain hydration.
Who’s taken statins that are kind to them?
I know there’s a big discussion about the need for statins but as I’ve had T1 for 48 years now I’m keen to keep my kidneys working as well as my eyes, my cardio vascular system, my peripheral nerves, etc etc. I want to eliminate all possible threats to a decent, active life. If some bombproof scientific evidence arrives that statins make no difference then I’ll stop taking them but I’ve not yet seen any.
So what I’m eager to find out is whether anyone else has had bad side effects from statins.
And has anyone discovered a statin that hasn’t evinced side effects?
Hi I have been on Statins since they first came out. Tried them all - Simvastatin did nothing for me. The new Pravastatin likewise did nothing to lower cholesterol/lipids. Atorvastatin gave me very bad leg cramps - but was very effective at lowering cholesterol/lipids to normal. Been on Rosuvastatin now for many years and is by far the best one (for me) - only the occasional leg cramps when I stretch - cholesterol/lipids Normal range.
At my yearly check with the Consultant I was prescribed a hugely increased dose of atorvastatin - 80mg. The Consultant said he wished to protect my kidneys. He had in front of him some dire results: eGFR (39) and (related) creatinine (108) of a blood test I’d had done for the hospital. The fact that I wasn’t told these results at the time’s another story - grrrrrrrr. They came through to me eight weeks after the appointment. I think there’s been an admin problem when people started leaving because of wage cuts. More grrrrrrrrr.
Back to those frightening results and the submarine size statin pills.
Cheerfully the Slippery Slope results were contradicted by a set of results in a test undertaken later for the DSN - eGFR 77. Whoop!
Another test, six weeks after the cheerful one, confirmed that kidney function was fine.
Relief!
However, I’d been downing the horse-pill statins for some weeks; I then halved them when I received the happy result.
I’m still getting the occasional night time cramps and daily joint and muscle aches that began when I was taking a high dose. I take care to maintain hydration.
Who’s taken statins that are kind to them?
I know there’s a big discussion about the need for statins but as I’ve had T1 for 48 years now I’m keen to keep my kidneys working as well as my eyes, my cardio vascular system, my peripheral nerves, etc etc. I want to eliminate all possible threats to a decent, active life. If some bombproof scientific evidence arrives that statins make no difference then I’ll stop taking them but I’ve not yet seen any.
So what I’m eager to find out is whether anyone else has had bad side effects from statins.
And has anyone discovered a statin that hasn’t evinced side effects?
I have been taking Rosuvastatin (Crestor) for the last four and a bit years.So what I’m eager to find out is whether anyone else has had bad side effects from statins.
And has anyone discovered a statin that hasn’t evinced side effects?
You can say that againmust be a real good earner for drug companies
I would second this but not from taking it personally. A friend of mine was recommended rosuvastatin by a mutual cardiologist friend. She is slim healthy active but has familial hypercholesterolaemia with a total cholesterol of 9. She took simvaststin with bad side effects, stopped that, spoke to our friend who said that rosuvastatin is his preferred choice as it is much less likely to cause side effects. I'm still weighing up whether to take them or not, but if I do, that's the one I will ask for.I have been taking Rosuvastatin (Crestor) for the last four and a bit years.
It was prescribed by the cardiologist while I was in hospital, and have been taking it ever since. with no problems at all.
@Fairygodmother
In your shoes I would be asking my consultant why they think that statins may help your kidney problems. If they can;t come up with a decent answer for that one (which I imagine will be the case) then you have your answer. If they do have a reasonable case than maybe go away and do some checking or ask us to have a look for you.
If some bombproof scientific evidence arrives that statins make no difference then I’ll stop taking them but I’ve not yet seen any.
I find this comment really intriguing. I have been through two prolonged periods of chronic kidney failure. (Polycystic kidney disease) I had a kidney transplant in 1999 and a 2nd in 2013. I would think that bad kidney function would not change because of the amount of hydration one had taken just before a test. I have the eGFR test every three months as part of my ongoing monitoring but have never considered good hydration as something to consider beforehand. Mine has always been below the normal (60) and is running at around 50. I will try hydration before my next set of tests to see if the results change. It is interesting what tips you pick up on this forum. In relation to statins giving protection to the kidneys none of the various transplant teams at the hospitals I have been under over the last 28 years have ever used this reason with me so I’m not convinced that it is a valid reason to take statins.Yes, I will, especially as subsequent tests indicate that I don’t have kidney problems.
I’m not sure, however, whether it was medication or hydration that influenced the tests. The Consultant prescribed amdropline as the one and only blood pressure reading taken at the consultation was high. One the day I drove the 16 miles to the hospital where the diabetes clinic’s based there had been crashes and road closures. Moreover he only took one blood pressure reading even though it’s been demonstrated by the practice at the surgery that it’s best to take three readings and use the best of the three. I don’t know about anyone else but my blood pressure’s always lower by the third test.
I suspect that the eGFR may also be influenced by hydration. I walked about three and a half miles to the local hospital phlebotomy dept for the test for the Consultant and had forgotten to take my water bottle with me. The result showed moderate to severe kidney disease. The second test was taken at the surgery: I’d driven there and was well hydrated beforehand. I walked to the hospital again for the third test and even though I had a water bottle with me I waited until I was in the queue before I drank from it: this test showed good kidney function but not as good as was indicated by the second test.
However, I also have to factor in the amdropline that may have lowered my blood pressure and affected the second test. It certainly lowered it to a point when I was frequently faint and dizzy!
By the third test I’d been advised that I no longer needed the amdropline or the higher dose of atorvastatin. The sample for the third test was taken after I’d reduced the atorvastatin and stopped taking the amdropline. The eGFR was not as good as at the second test.
If I were to do a proper analysis of the effect of each of these factors I think I’d need to have nine more tests, three for each of them. Argh.
I find this comment really intriguing. I have been through two prolonged periods of chronic kidney failure. (Polycystic kidney disease) I had a kidney transplant in 1999 and a 2nd in 2013. I would think that bad kidney function would not change because of the amount of hydration one had taken just before a test. I have the eGFR test every three months as part of my ongoing monitoring but have never considered good hydration as something to consider beforehand. Mine has always been below the normal (60) and is running at around 50. I will try hydration before my next set of tests to see if the results change. It is interesting what tips you pick up on this forum. In relation to statins giving protection to the kidneys none of the various transplant teams at the hospitals I have been under over the last 28 years have ever used this reason with me so I’m not convinced that it is a valid reason to take statins.
And that's what you have to bear in mind, all those quack videos are ok (well, I'd guess they are if I could be bothered to watch them, but I prefer Donald Duck) ly sold, I mean there's never been any clinical trials done or anything.
I'm lucky my cholesterol is at 4, with the correct hdl/ldl readings, my consultant mentioned statins when I rose to 4.8 but cutting out processed meats such as bacon soon lowered it.
I see there's a few links with the keto diet and high cholesterol readings.
Good luck with it anyway.
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?