• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Statins - good or bad - what does the research say?

Bearing in mind the the Volkswagen emissions scandal. I'm starting to think the numbers can be "fudged" on anything...
 
Jaylee said:
Bearing in mind the the Volkswagen emissions scandal. I'm starting to think the numbers can be "fudged" on anything...
Click to expand...
Not the same thing is it? in volkewagen emissions issue,certain people in the company knew about the problem, and then devised a software addon that physically tuned the engines temporarily while under test conditions. It could not be a permanent fix because it either reduced power or fuel consumption, neither of which were relevsnt during the emissions test but would be noticed under normal conditions. It was not a juggling of test results, it was juggling the car to meet the spec.
 
Osidge said:
This report may be of interest: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2988224/
Click to expand...
Ok I have started looking at this report, and find my first 'funny'. I am just getting the hang of Blobbograms so correct me if I am wrong, but Table 1 shows the correlation between statins and most CV events in the trial population. It first of all shows the 5 More vs less trial results and tabulates the number of CVE that occurred in each trial. The Blobbogram graph clearly shows that of the 5 trials being looked at , three were statistically non events, and only 2 were statistically significant. But all 5 results were used in the summary and given the label of significant. Same thing in the second part of the table, regarding the statin vs control trials. 21 are listed and used as significant but the graph shows that 12 are non events and not to be taken as significant. Now this is a meta study, so maybe it is acceptable to include these insignificant results into the total, but I am not so sure that they should be given the same weighting as the ones that show a definite correlation. But then this is statstics we are talking about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Enclave said:
So was wondering ... Is it not the statin but the artificial reducing of cholesterol that cause the muscle pain?
Click to expand...

The muscle pain caused when taking statins is because of the reduction of CoQ10. It is well documented and even mentioned in the Merck patent application of 1990. Baring in mind how important cholesterol is for the body, if you don't eat it your body makes it, that might also be implicated but I can't say.

The patent application I referred to is here http://www.functionalmedicineuniversity.com/statin-CoQ10.pdf, although I had problems getting it to load. This URL will have some information http://www.functionalmedicineuniversity.com/public/784.cfm.

As for whether statins are good or bad, I believe that you will find research that says both.
 
I asked my GP for help with the muscle pain. I requested CoQ10 and also Alpha Lipoic Acid supplement, both of which are prescribed elsewhere in the EU (primarily Germany), and was told that the NHS wil not provide either and indeed it seemed these supplements are contraindicated for diabetics. Now this latter view may be a peronal view held by my GP since I have not ssen it reported elsewhere. At the time, CoQ10 supplements were very expensive, and the ALA available in shops was not the effective variant , so I stopped both the analgesics and the statin.
 
I asked my GP about CoQ10 many moons ago and poor woman couldn't even suggest how much I should take, never mind prescribe it. As you say Oldvatr, prescribed elsewhere in the EU but from what I've read there is little to show that ingested CoQ10 helps That's sort of contradicted by the fact that it's a very popular supplement in Japan, especially for people with heart problems. It's sad really because we turn to out medical professionals for guidance and end up reading all sorts of books and articles to get a straight answer. Like you Oldvatr, I just stopped because from a personal point of view it was making my life a misery. I'm aware of several law suits and if I thought there was a class action that would apply to the problems I had, I'd be there like a shot.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My cholesterol has always been low, I'm 70 and my last test showed it was 4.8 all my other markers were good however my doctor said she was highly recommending,statins and wanted me to get below 4. I am a 5 ft 7 woman and my weight is usually about 10 stone. I was very reluctant to take the statins but she was very determined to make me and so I succumbed. I play a lot of sport and I've now developed terrible pain in my legs overnight, so bad I can't sleep with the toothache type of pain, I just don't know what to do I'm very confused and don't want to go against my doctor who is an excellent practitioners.


Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
 

Hi @ Redbegonia,

Stop taking them right now.

The pain you are experiencing is a side effect.

If you think you need a statin (and If you read previous posts you'll see that you don't meet the criteria) then go back to your GP and ask for an alternative.

To be honest, I would go back but see a different GP and say what's happened and then ask why you should be taking them anyway.

Best wishes,
Conrad
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you Conrad your answer certainly reflects my thinking. I just wonder if a GP practice gets extra resources if more of the diabetic patients are prescribed Statins!
 
Hi. What makes you think you are dealing with an excellent practitioner if he/she 'forces' you to have a drug which at a cholesterol level of 4.8 you only marginally need and that is only if you are a high risk patient and if you believe the research data which many don't? Make your own decision and if you are having bad side effects I think you know the answer as for you the drug is possibly doing harm?
 
Redbegonia said:
Thank you Conrad your answer certainly reflects my thinking. I just wonder if a GP practice gets extra resources if more of the diabetic patients are prescribed Statins!
Click to expand...
That was certainly what I was told - that they get extra resources for every diabetic patient on their books (if I was being really cynical I'd say that's why they recommend the eat well plate to pre-diabetics - to ensure we become diabetic!) and they get incentives for prescribing statins. Could be why I was 'offered' them as a pre-diabetic and before doc even mentioned the idea of diet and exercise - in fact i think it was me that brought up the diet and exercise route - she just wanted me on metformin and statins.

I refused both and would never take a statin because I don't believer the case for them is proven for women as a whole or anyone who hasn't actually had a cardiac 'event' and that the benefits (whatever they may be) do not outweigh the risk of side effects. Do have a look at the many threads on statins here and follow the links so you can make an informed decision.
 
Everybody who has ever had an adverse reaction to to Statins should personally complete a drug adverse reaction form. I suspect that doctors do not even report 10% of adverse reactions, they don't have the time to do so and when the adverse reaction is well known, they feel that there is no need. But by not reporting every adverse reaction, the scale of them is hugely underestimated.
The research on Statins is very clear (or at least as clear as it can be, since drug companies are allowed to not release raw data for other experts to check / interrogate on the grounds of commercial sensitivity) the benefits are tiny (always reported as relative risks not absolute risks, to make, say a 2% improvement look like a 50% improvement) and up to 25% of people will suffer debilitating side effects, a small percentage, even having been on Statins for years with no apparent side effects, will suffer extreme side effects which are irreversible. Malcolm Kendrick has spent half a career fighting these dreadful drugs, read his book. Stephanie Seneff, an esteemed scientist from MIT, has written this concise and extremely interesting essay, it says it all. Google Sephanie Seneff How Statins really work explains why they don't really work. And women should be aware that there has never been a clinical trial showing any benefits for women whatsoever.
 
http://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/381654 Here is a link to a complete article that proves that for older people, high cholesterol is a good thing. Print it out and give it to your doctor.

You need to be politely assertive, with a smile! As it is clear that you feel you have a good relationship with your doctor and you respect her views on most things, you are an adult and you have a right to decide if a drug is suiting you or not!

This Statin is robbing you of your youth and your vitality, for no proven benefit, if as a result your level of fitness goes down, you will be infinitely worse off. Doctors are not Gods, unfortunately many of them were trained in an era before all there problems came to light, and all of their Continuous Professional Development is provided / financed by drug companies. Pharmaceutical Industries are now the most profitable in the world and a huge proportion of their expenses are marketing, which includes financing Doctors' training, funding to Medical Schools, financing so called Medical Charities and Patient Groups - it is all seen as legitimate. Don't allow your doctor to change your statin or reduce the dose, the problem is the way that all statins basically function. With a Total Cholesterol of 4.7 you definitely don't need them. At one point, 7 years ago, mine was 9.6! Thankfully there was a 2 week gap between my getting my results by telephone and seeing the doctor, I used that 2 weeks to read everything I could starting with Malcolm Kendrick's 'The Great Cholesterol Con'. Best 2 weeks work I ever did! I am still a 'Statin Refusor', don't know what my numbers are, I refuse the test, but I am fit, healthy, active and I, too, have not had a Heart Attack or stroke!
 
I took Statins for many years up to 2002 when a new doctor stopped them. (I can not remember why.) I had arthritus, and still do and suffer the resultant pain. I often have to massage my legs because of muscle cramp during the night and tak a stagger around the lounge before I get back to bed. But you get used to it. It's your age, I hear fairly frequently. (I'm only 82. That is family "Chicken Feed").
I am at present taking 1000mg Metformin being newly diag. No side effects that I am aware of.
Cheers to you all and have a great New Year.
 
I took statins for many years until 2002 when a new doctor took me off them. I had arthritis then and still do. I now suffer from night cramps which require a number of circuits around the lounge and massage to the legs before returning to bed.
I have just been diag. with t2 and take 1000mg Metformin.
What am I complaining about. I have passed my allotted three score years and ten and am still enjoying life.
I wish you all a Happy and painfree year.
 
Hi everyone I am new to the forum, although I have been T2 for over 10 years now I still have problems, I to suffered from debilitating arm & shoulder pains on statins in both arms, I spoke to the doctor about this, and an even worse concern that I have is that I have only 1 kidney plus it is leaking protein, but the doctor did not seem to concerned about this. Stopped taking the statins and my arm pains stopped. Glad that I joined the forum it has given me much food for thought.
 
 
Hopefully some other people will read these stories and adjust their thinking. Won't count on it though.
 
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.…