1. Get the Diabetes Forum App for your phone - available on iOS and Android.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the Diabetes Forum Survey 2020 »
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Diabetes Forum should not be used in an emergency and does not replace your healthcare professional relationship. Posts can be seen by the public.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Guest, stay home, stay safe, save the NHS. Stay up to date with information about keeping yourself and people around you safe here and GOV.UK: Coronavirus (COVID-19). Think you have symptoms? NHS 111 service is available here.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Join the community »

Statins

Discussion in 'Other Health Conditions and Diabetes' started by Montana, Apr 8, 2013.

  1. Montana

    Montana · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    68
    :) my gp has tried to get me taking statins but I have no desire to. Now my diabetic team are saying that all hospital doctors have put themselves on statins as a matter of course. Can this possibly be true? I'm not a great believer in putting chemicals in our body unless life-threatening. Does anyone else agree with me? :wave:
     
  2. Superchip

    Superchip · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Methinks that April Fools day has passed Montana !

    I refuse statins and anything else clinical or commercial that reduces cholesterol, we need all we can get.
    19 years after ticker transplant, I know what is good for me.

    Keep calm eat fat and carry on !
     
  3. Montana

    Montana · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    68
    :clap: hahaha Superchip. Yes I felt I was being made a fool of but this was told to our group on Xpert patient prog on two occasions in March. Thing is though that until Last September I bought and used 500g of butter per week just for myself. Since then I've changed to a low fat spread which I scrape on so imagine my disappointment to discover my cholesterol had gone up instead of greatly being reduced. I think you might have a point! Cant wait to go shopping and get my hands on big tub of butter. :clap: :wave:
     
  4. Geocacher

    Geocacher · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38
    People in general were a healthier lot when butter, dripping, and lard were all we had.

    I remember my Mom in the states buying three pound tins of 'crisco' -- pure hydrogenated vegetable oil. Colour it and flavour it and you have margarine. Both were claimed to be so much healthier than saturated fats and butter. 40 years later they discover eating hydrogenated fat is just like putting plastic directly into you arteries and it has done far worse damage than lard and butter ever could.

    Now the trend is everything advertising that it doesn't contain 'trans-fats' -- hydrogenated vegetable oil by another name. Even the infamous 'crisco' has been reformulated to exclude hydrogenated vegetable oil.

    I now avoid hydrogenated fats whenever I can, difficult to do because so many foods contain it here, but I don't knowingly eat it anymore. I use butter or olive oil almost exclusively, and if I've got a bit of dripping, I'll use that without feeling too guilty.

    I think it's right that the body needs fats, but natural fats that it can use as part of a sensible diet, not in excess.
     
  5. LesleyAnne2

    LesleyAnne2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Hi Montana

    My diabetes nurse wanted to put me on statins too... I refused them and will continue to do so. Cholesterol is so important to your body that it manufactures it.. so why on earth would we try and lower it?

    Lesley
     
  6. noblehead

    noblehead Type 1 · Guru
    Retired Moderator

    Messages:
    23,618
    Likes Received:
    19,616
    Trophy Points:
    278

    I don't agree I'm afraid, sometimes in life we have to put chemicals into our bodies to safeguard our health, I don't take statins as my cholesterol levels are below the recommended levels, however if they were well outside I would at least give them a go to lower the levels.

    I take a low-dose BP med and have done for several years after developing diabetic retinopathy, I also inject insulin for without which I would die, if you don't want to take drugs Montana then the choice is yours.....no one can force you after all :)
     
  7. LesleyAnne2

    LesleyAnne2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    28
  8. dawnmc

    dawnmc Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,427
    Likes Received:
    1,650
    Trophy Points:
    178
    Wouldn't take statins if you paid me, evil things. Apparently cholesterol rises as we age for good reason. The brain needs cholesterol, without it we would die.
     
  9. LesleyAnne2

    LesleyAnne2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I am totally with you there :)
     
  10. Superchip

    Superchip · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    More from Dr Briffa.......

    Drug company pays off shareholders to avoid court case
    By Dr John Briffa on 11 April 2013 in Food and Medical Politics

    Two weeks ago I wrote about a review of the evidence for the cholesterol-lowering drug ezetimibe [1]. The authors of the review brought, quite rightfully, our attention to the fact that ezetimibe has never been tested on its own and its health impact compared to placebo. They also admitted, that when ezetimibe is combined with a statin (usually simvastatin), the evidence shows that the outcomes are no better than when the statin is taken alone.

    In short, there is no evidence that ezetimibe benefits health.

    Despite this, the authors of the review recommend that doctors use ezetimibe to lower raised cholesterol, though two out of the three authors have taken money from the drug’s manufacturer (Merck) for ‘consulting’ and lecturing. You can read the relevant blog post here.

    To date, it appears that the use of ezetimibe has been a colossal waste of money. The drug was licensed on the basis of its ability to lower cholesterol. But in 2008 saw the publication of a trial, known as the ‘ENHANCE’ trial, in which the effect of ezetimibe in combination with the statin simvastatin was compared with simvastatin alone. The researchers tracked the thickness of the main artery supply blood to the brain (technically known as ‘carotid artery intima media thickness’) in the study participants. The effect of the drug duo was no better than that of simvastatin alone.

    This was not a good result for the makers of ezetimibe, but further controversy swirled around this study because it took two years after the completion of the study for its sponsors (Merck and Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals) to cough up its results. In fact, it took a US congressional hearing to seemingly force the results out of the manufacturers.

    This fact probably contributed to the fact that when the results of ENHANCE were (finally) announced, Merck and Schering-Plough share prices fell, which apparently lost a lot of people a significant amount of money. To recoup this, a class-action was taken against the drug companies, with the plaintiffs looking for financial compensation for losses connected with the drug companies delaying the release of ENHANCE’s negative findings.

    The case was due to be tried by jury, but less than three weeks before the trial was due to start a deal was struck. Under the agreement, Schering-Plough (which became part of Merck in 2009), will pay $473 million, and Merck will pay $215 million. Apparently, some of the cost of this settlement will be met by insurance, leaving a bill of $493 million, which it will charge against profits. You can read about more about the story in online in USA Today here.

    While it’s probably a good thing that shareholders are compensated, the real victory here is that a light has yet again been shone on a drug company’s shady practices. As part of the settlement, Merck actually admits no wrongdoing, but I should imagine many people will take a different view.

    I don’t imagine the half a billion dollars or so Merck must pay will hurt it too much. They can perhaps take it from the money they have made through people taking ezetimibe in the, to date, misguided belief that it is doing them some good.

    References:

    1. Binh An P Phan, et al. Ezetimibe therapy: mechanism of action and clinical update. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2012; 8: 415–427
     
  11. JJ13

    JJ13 · Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    I take statins and wish I had started them earlier as may of prevented my heart attacks.


    Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
     
  12. Superchip

    Superchip · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Very unlikely JJ, statins are known to affect muscles badly and the heart is a great big muscle. As our colonial cousins say
    ' Go Figure ! '
    There is also some emerging thoughts that statins are causing more damage than envisaged.
    They are just a gravy train for the pharma's.
     
  13. LittleGreyCat

    LittleGreyCat Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,351
    Likes Received:
    2,004
    Trophy Points:
    198
    ...ummm....there is the expression "Too much of a good thing".

    The body needs water.
    However if you drink too much you can kill yourself by destroying the osmotic balance within your body.
    Known to happen to people who use 'E' then party and drink loads of water.
    So to say "The body needs water, without it we die" does not mean that any quantity at all however large must be good for us.

    So your argument above is not logical.

    Are you absolutely sure that high cholesterol is not linked in any way with narrowing of the major blood vessels leading to cardiac problems?

    Cheers

    LGC
     
  14. LittleGreyCat

    LittleGreyCat Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,351
    Likes Received:
    2,004
    Trophy Points:
    198
    I think the current thinking (unless it has changed again) is that eating foods high in cholesterol is not what causes high cholesterol in the blood.

    The body manufactures its own cholesterol, it does not scavenge it from food.

    This is the reason that eggs (which are high in cholesterol) are back on the O.K. list again - for the moment.

    Any fans of low fat spreads might like to read the full list of chemicals and additives included, and compare that with butter.

    Cheers

    LGC
     
  15. Superchip

    Superchip · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    LGC good post, nothing wrong in eating sat fat and anything that contains cholesterol except that we may be depriving the vulture culture food police and pharma's out of their ill gotten gains !

    They want the evil gravy train to continue !

    Keep calm, eat sat fat, lots of meat, and carry on !
     
  16. Thundercat

    Thundercat · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,406
    Likes Received:
    287
    Trophy Points:
    103
    I find it really shocking thay doctors are so free in prescribing statins. Every drug has side effects both known and unknown and ot seems a bit cavalier to just jot off prescriptions on the basis that you are likely to have high cholesterol. Plenty of non diabetics have lifestyles that contribute to high cholesterol - should they all get statins regardless of current levels. ACE inhibitors can prevent kidney damage in diabetics and doctors don't prescribe them willy nilly (nor should they). The logic is baffling.

    Sent from the Diabetes Forum App
     
  17. m1dpq

    m1dpq Type 2 · Active Member

    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I use the statin "Simvastatin" but have recently readan article about Earl Grey Tea and Bergamot... If you have a couple of cups of Earl Grey Tea a day then you can drop the dosage of your statin as the Bergamot does the same job but in a more natural method..

    Ps my cholesterol level is :- Bad 1.9, Good 1.10 therefore total is negligible...
     
  18. douglas99

    douglas99 I reversed my Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,572
    Likes Received:
    3,763
    Trophy Points:
    178
    I take simvastatin, and intend to carry on doing so.

    I would be interested in any links that anyone can post, that show any clinical evidence that

    Eggs are good for you, and recommended now in quantity.
    The brain changes, and needs more cholesterol with age.
    Statins are proven to be bad for the heart muscles specifically.

    Until someone can actually post the info, I've afraid it's still an urban legend.
     
  • Meet the Community

    Find support, connect with others, ask questions and share your experiences with people with diabetes, their carers and family.

    Did you know: 7 out of 10 people improve their understanding of diabetes within 6 months of being a Diabetes Forum member. Get the Diabetes Forum App and stay connected on iOS and Android

    Grab the app!
  • Tweet with us

  • Like us on Facebook