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

Trigs and Cholesterol and STATINS

mountaintom said:
Thanks for the info. I find the current controversy around statins frustrating. Why would the medical profession get it so wrong? Are you suggesting that there is a conspiracy?
My mother died at 65 from cvd and her father died at a similar age (I never met him). So I am perhaps genetically disposed to higher levels if diet and exercise is not a primary focus in life and if alcohol and smoking are.
What do you suggest I do? Ignore medical advice? Take advice from the internet?
I already have diabetes and my blood glucose control is good.
I will probably try my next quarterly without the statins and see if it IS just quitting the beer that has lowered them.
Click to expand...

I would read more about statins and think about it - it is all about weighing the views of people with opposing views.

A number of us here (myself included) have come off statins because of the side effects. I tried two separate stains and both screwed me up.

You will find a lot of conspiracy theories. The pharmaceutical companies which sell statins refuse to release all the clinical studies, for example. Always remember that the drug companies are there primarily to sell drugs.

The dangers of high cholesterol are now being seriously questioned (as shown in the link above), and there is a growing belief that high cholesterol might be more beneficial than lower cholesterol.

So become your own expert (over time) and be prepared to against the advice of your surgery if you consider that they might in fact know less than you after your research.

You say "What do you suggest I do? Ignore medical advice? Take advice from the internet?". Well, yes, but not in all things and only if you are really convinced that they are behind the times or plain wrong. Loads of people posting here have disagreed with some advice they have been given. This includes the advice to eat "loads of healthy carbohydrates".

Remember that doctors and nurses are only human and they also usually get very little training about diabetes and also have to learn about loads of other things as well. They often rely on information from NICE which can take decades to evolve and rarely keeps up the latest research. They are not infallible and as I said above the drug companies are there to sell drugs. People managing their diabetes with diet and exercise must be very frustrating for them.

As a T1 I guess the diabetes side effect is less of an issue with statins, but for T2s we do have to wonder why we are being given a drug which can impact on BG control. As an allegedly degenerative disease it doesn't need any help to degenerate!

Any way, I shall now take a deep breath and exhale!

The big message is that it is sensible to question everything - both what you are told by Health Care Professionals and also by all the anonymous faces on the Internet.
 
There’s no mention of the form of the cereals that are eaten, the whole diet, or of the ways genetics, epigenetics and lifestyle may be contributory factors in CVD.
Interesting article but I find it hard to assess the value of food intake without more context.
 
Fairygodmother said:
There’s no mention of the form of the cereals that are eaten, the whole diet, or of the ways genetics, epigenetics and lifestyle may be contributory factors in CVD.
Interesting article but I find it hard to assess the value of food intake without more context.
Click to expand...

I imagine that is beyond the scope of the study.
They are working back from the food that is sold, so they aren't talking to individuals to see how they prepare the food, and how much they eat and how much they throw away.
I assume that because there are so many people involved that genetic variation (assuming a genetically diverse population) will level out across the population.

If they find that a country as a whole consumes large amounts of wheat and has a high rate of CVD this is an indicator that there MAY be a link. As is often said, correlation does not prove causation. However it can give a very strong hint at times.

I find the cholesterol level findings particularly interesting.
 
LittleGreyCat said:
I would read more about statins and think about it - it is all about weighing the views of people with opposing views.

A number of us here (myself included) have come off statins because of the side effects. I tried two separate stains and both screwed me up.

You will find a lot of conspiracy theories. The pharmaceutical companies which sell statins refuse to release all the clinical studies, for example. Always remember that the drug companies are there primarily to sell drugs.

The dangers of high cholesterol are now being seriously questioned (as shown in the link above), and there is a growing belief that high cholesterol might be more beneficial than lower cholesterol.

So become your own expert (over time) and be prepared to against the advice of your surgery if you consider that they might in fact know less than you after your research.

You say "What do you suggest I do? Ignore medical advice? Take advice from the internet?". Well, yes, but not in all things and only if you are really convinced that they are behind the times or plain wrong. Loads of people posting here have disagreed with some advice they have been given. This includes the advice to eat "loads of healthy carbohydrates".

Remember that doctors and nurses are only human and they also usually get very little training about diabetes and also have to learn about loads of other things as well. They often rely on information from NICE which can take decades to evolve and rarely keeps up the latest research. They are not infallible and as I said above the drug companies are there to sell drugs. People managing their diabetes with diet and exercise must be very frustrating for them.

As a T1 I guess the diabetes side effect is less of an issue with statins, but for T2s we do have to wonder why we are being given a drug which can impact on BG control. As an allegedly degenerative disease it doesn't need any help to degenerate!

Any way, I shall now take a deep breath and exhale!

The big message is that it is sensible to question everything - both what you are told by Health Care Professionals and also by all the anonymous faces on the Internet.
Click to expand...

Great response thanks. Food for thought. But I don’t buy any of the conspiracy stuff.
 
Well done @mountaintom. When questions about cvd come up I immediately think on Ivor Cummins and Zoe Harcombe. Ivor has used brilliant engineering assessments to assess risk which for me leaves nothing to chance; not to mention promoting the daddy of lipid testing which is the CAC score - other tests are best guesses, the CAC sees actual cvd disease.

I remember a presentation where a gentleman had total cholesterol of 9, but a CAC of zero. This meant no calcification, so a virtual 10 year almost guarantee of no heart disease.
 
bulkbiker said:
Not especially but if your total cholesterol was 9 then your trigs can't have been 12...unless you have a negative something.. have you discovered the cholesterol equivalent of anti-matter? At least I don't think they can have been.
Click to expand...
Perhaps they got the results mixed up with a post mortem test on a body found in a vat of margarine. :) ;)
 
mountaintom said:
Thanks for the info. I find the current controversy around statins frustrating. Why would the medical profession get it so wrong? Are you suggesting that there is a conspiracy?
My mother died at 65 from cvd and her father died at a similar age (I never met him). So I am perhaps genetically disposed to higher levels if diet and exercise is not a primary focus in life and if alcohol and smoking are.
What do you suggest I do? Ignore medical advice? Take advice from the internet?
I already have diabetes and my blood glucose control is good.
I will probably try my next quarterly without the statins and see if it IS just quitting the beer that has lowered them.
Click to expand...

Don't just take random advice from the internet, do your own research from a variety of sources (including doctor, dietitian, nurse) and make up your own mind about the best treatment FOR YOU. Your health, your choice. Good job quitting beer!! I'm sure you will do great.
 
Back in the 70s there was a comprehensive study of heart disease and CVD in Scandinavia (think it was Sweden, but it may have been Finland); it was suggested that fish oil was the common factor in the low incidence of both and thus a great protector. It caught on, hence the resulting sales of cod liver oil capsules, mackerel, salmon, herring and sardines and a concentration on the benefits of HDL.
I like kippers, sardines, mackerel and herring but cooking them doesn’t half make the house stink! Rollmops, Lidl’s herring in pepper sauce and tins of sardines, though, don’t deter visitors.
 
Fairygodmother said:
Back in the 70s there was a comprehensive study of heart disease and CVD in Scandinavia (think it was Sweden, but it may have been Finland); it was suggested that fish oil was the common factor in the low incidence of both and thus a great protector. It caught on, hence the resulting sales of cod liver oil capsules, mackerel, salmon, herring and sardines and a concentration on the benefits of HDL.
I like kippers, sardines, mackerel and herring but cooking them doesn’t half make the house stink! Rollmops, Lidl’s herring in pepper sauce and tins of sardines, though, don’t deter visitors.
Click to expand...

I’ve been on cod liver oil since getting out of the hospital. Perhaps this is adding to the good stuff.
 
mountaintom said:
This has been suggested. How would they test for or prove such a thing?
Click to expand...

That is not something I know much about, I am afraid.

I do know that familial hypercholesterolaemia is fairly rare, runs in families, and needs to be handled differently than for most people, so the normal ideas on diet, high chol and statins don't necessarily apply.

Here is a link to what the NHS says about FH
http://rbht.nhs.uk/patients/condition/hypercholesterolaemia/
 
Back
Top