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

Statins more than double the risk of type 2 diabetes, US scientists reveal

DCUK NewsBot

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,059
Statin medication taken to lower cholesterol and blood pressure more than doubles the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, researchers at the Ohio State University (OSU) have said. This US study marks the latest in a long list of research papers which have reported on this association. Earlier this year, a Netherlands study reported a 38% increased type 2 diabetes risk associated with statins. The cholesterol-lowering drugs may help to reduce the risk of stroke or heart attack, and earlier this year statin experts called for increased prescription of the drugs to over-75s. However, the drugs are associated with short-term side effects such as headache, tiredness and muscle pains, and also longer-term side effects such as an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. In this new study, US researchers collected data from more than 4,600 men and women who did not have diabetes and were deemed suitable candidates for statins. A total of 755 people (16%) were given the medication over the course of the study, which ran between 2011 and 2014. Taking statins for any length of time more than doubled the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, compared to those who did not take a statin. Those who took the drugs were 6.5% more likely to have higher HbA1c levels. "The fact that increased duration of statin use was associated with an increased risk of diabetes - something we call a dose-dependent relationship - makes us think that this is likely a causal relationship," said Victoria Zigmont, who led the study as a graduate student in public health at OSU. "That said, statins are very effective in preventing heart attacks and strokes. I would never recommend that people stop taking the statin they've been prescribed based on this study, but it should open up further discussions about diabetes prevention and patient and provider awareness of the issue." Despite this, co-author Steven Clinton, a professor of medicine and member of OSU's Comprehensive Cancer Center, said: "Researchers conducting large prospective cohort studies should be considering how statins impact human health overall. They should consider both risks and benefits, not just the disease that is being treated by the specific drug." The findings have been published in the Diabetes Metabolism Research and Reviews journal.

Continue reading...
 
All this makes it hard to decide what to do about statins doesn't it?
When I had my first check-up, six months after being diagnosed, the nurse tried to pressure me to go onto statins even though my HBA1c had fallen from 53 to 40. She told me that once your are diagnosed as diabetic you must take statins for the rest of your life. I resisted and my notes are marked accordingly. If I die of a heart attack or a stroke I will be absolutely livid.
 
I knew exactly what I would do about statins. For historical reasons I would not argue an I would take them and let DN sort it out. The first statin put me in a chair for a month. I was allowed to recover and a different statin was tried. I was in a chair for another month. I was allowed to recover and a different statin was tried. My spine went rigid and I couldn't move my head so I was sent to a physio. Having stopped the tablets I recovered without the physio. I am now registered as Intolerant of Statins.

I wish good luck to all those who can take them but I can't.
 
bulkbiker said:
Errrr.... not really..
Click to expand...
The medical world is in two minds about statins and I suppose at the end of the day we all have to decide for ourselves. If you are lazy or weak willed you have to rely on medication, no matter how suspect. If you are strong willed and determined like us, then you can control your condition with diet and exercise. Though it doesn't stop the doctors and nurses trying to force their medication on us, does it?
Has anyone looked into the insurance industry's view on statins? Do they charge more for life insurance if you are T" and not on statins I wonder?
 
That should read D2 not T"
 
Dexterdobe said:
Has anyone looked into the insurance industry's view on statins? Do they charge more for life insurance if you are T" and not on statins I wonder?
Click to expand...

That's an interesting question.
 
My annual holiday insurance asks in relation to diabetes treatment “have you been told to take statins?” Not even “do you take statins” which covers any refusal to take them. Not sure what effect this has on premium or risk, Ive always assumed negative.

Very dependant on how your dr has documented any discussions. Was it a discussion? An offer? An instruction/guidance? Could stopping taking them be documented as refusing or being unable due to side effects etc? Where do people told to take them purely because they are a diabetic fall regardless of their numbers or perceived need? A lack of clarity and official consistent practice may easily give insurances wiggle room.
 
Interesting. Also, does it make a difference if your BG has fallen to non-diabetic levels. My nurse implied that even if it has, people who had high BG levels are still at risk of strokes and heart attacks once their levels have fallen. Has there been any research into this?
 
My GP said the same thing. I did challenge her opinion as my A1C has been in normal range for two years.
She said that she didn’t know if there where benefits for those have managed to get normal A1C because it was unusual.
I have chosen not to take statins
 
I have been back to prediabetic levels for 2 years now due to low carb eating. My diabetes nurse says I will always be at risk of all the diabetes complications as I am now officially a ‘diabetic’ even if I stay permanently in remission.
Sounds crazy to me and makes me feel like all my efforts to control my diabetes have been a total waste of time.
 
Well I recently asked my doctor whether I would live a day longer if I took a statin (female with type 1 and raised cholesterol though low trigs/high HDL) and she admitted that No I would not. I cannot even get affordable life insurance as a type 1 who has suffered a complication (sight) but I doubt popping this pill would make any difference to my premium so I am not going to add to the £55 mill UK statins' bill for now.
 
Dexterdobe said:
If you are lazy or weak willed you have to rely on medication, no matter how suspect. If you are strong willed and determined like us, then you can control your condition with diet and exercise.
Click to expand...
ermm, no. Not true and not fair on all those who have conditions requiring medication, or have diabetes which needs medication,including type 2's. Not everyoe can control their type 2 with just diet and exercise, or can even exercise. Let hear it for all out there doing their best, using what meds they need to to keep going.
 
I do not think long term studies have been done on those who've reversed their condition via lifestyle rather than drugs but I might be wrong. All the studies do seem to show at least short term improvements in risk markers including blood sugar but also blood pressure, fatty liver, lipids... However your nurses may be aware of the Accord studies (and others done about 10 years ago I think) which noted that despite patients' taking drugs to reduce their high bg levels to normal, they still suffered from heart attacks and strokes as much as the control group who had higher HBA1cs.
This shows that the drugs just treat your symptoms oly and that having high levels of insulin is just as toxic as having high levels of glucose.
So if you are reducing your insulin levels via low carb, your bgs and insulin will be low so there should be much less risk of CV problems down the line.
 
It isn't a question of your moral fortitude/will power etc. but it is legitimate to question the efficacy of diabetic medications including statins especially if they give anyone a possibly false sense of security. Most type 2s die of heart disease still after all....Oh well we do all have to die of something..insert cliche here.
 
bulkbiker said:
Errrr.... not really..
Click to expand...
I've just had my cholesterol results back with a note from my doctor that my cholesterol level is high and I should be on statins.
The result is : total cholestrol 5.2, ratio 3.5. Now I thought a ratio of 3.5 is healthy. Is my doctor talking the same nonesence as my DN or am I missing something?
 
Well I would be delighted with those figures and a total cholesterol of 5.2 is not high! They want you to be on statins because they get incentives to prescribe them. Yep I am cynical.
 

Depends completely on what ratio that is..
Did you get full lipid panel with Total , HDL, LDL and triglycerides?
If so you want to look at the triglyceride/HDL ratio that is supposed to be the important one.
Total of 5.2 is fine by the way in as much as the total "means" anything..
 
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.…