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

Yet another statin report.

DavidGrahamJones

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,262
Location
Hazlemere
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Other
Dislikes
Newspapers
A quote from The Telgraph 8/8/2016 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ts-should-take-statins-new-research-suggests/)

Prof Rory Collins, of the clinical trial service unit at the University of Oxford, said the review of statins showed “the numbers of people who avoid heart attacks and strokes by taking statin therapy are very much larger than the numbers who have side-effects with it”.

A quote from The Telegraph 12/6/2016 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/...s-not-cause-heart-disease-new-research-finds/)

Cholesterol does not cause heart disease in the elderly and trying to reduce it with drugs like statins is a waste of time, an international group of experts has claimed.

Apart from Prof. RC's claim that the side effects affecting only 1% of patients and the fact that one of his colleagues stated that she didn't expect to find any problems in that area at the start of this "research".

One of them has to be WRONG. Certainly the 1% claim doesn't match our straw poll, not by a long shot. Although really you have to start with a number of people known to take or have taken statins, then ask the question, rather than ask for people to answer a straw poll, it misses anyone from either camp who doesn't want to answer the straw poll.

I'm appalled by what the Telegraph and obviously the Lancet have published today because it could easily mean that we'll all be encouraged by our medics to take them again. Personally, if I get grief from my GP, I'll be referring her to my lawyer, when I get one.
 
I agree that the 1% is complete nonsense. GPs rarely raise Yellow Cards for drug problems so there is no good database. Although I can tolerate them and take a low dose as my LDL is really bad, my wife's liver reacted very badly after only 2 days and had to stop; dangerous. They should only be taken at the minimum dose where the lipids ratios are bad and not just handed out when a diabetic's total cholesterol goes above 4. They should be stopped immediately there are any symptoms.
 
Totally agree with the yellow card and GP's not notifying.. Mine can't even be bothered to complete intolerances on my records let alone reporting them to MHRA.

I've been an advocate of reporting side effects on yellow card scheme for years. Its the only way for patients to really get true data back to the medical people. I do know they act upon all data received.. 100% from my experiences.
 
Also, many doctors don't even arrange fot folow up tests for checking for signs of rhabdymolis after patients put on statins....and that test does not show muscle aches and pains.
 
This is interesting as I have stopped taking my statin and have noticed a drop in my fasting BS.

Does anyone know how long it takes for the effect of a statin to leave the body if you do not take it? Am I seeing something else?

I am thinking of not taking the statin this week and making a note of the readings. Then start taking it again next week and see if the reading go up? Or is that not proper science?
 
My DN always says that it takes a month for a drug to work its way out of your body. The supporting evidence is that each time statins dismasted me I was in a chair for a month recovering. It's true that I retain a residual weakness in the legs but I think that is the damage and not due to statins being still in my body.
 
I saw this reported on one of our current affairs programs here last night.

I'm on statin now and was only put on it recently. I'm on a low dose though and my liver is coping with it. I don't seem to have any side effects either. But on saying that the other drugs I'm on already cause muscle and joint pain.

They did try to put me on statins years back but back then the total cholesterol had to be >6.5 for diabetics to be put on statins that were covered by the govt subsidy (so you pay less than you would if not covered by the subsidy). I said no thanks I'm not prepared to pay $100 per month for it.

When I was put on the statin recently the guidelines say diabetic with total cholesterol >5.5 should be put on statins. So they've dropped the limit. But of course my total cholesterol was 6.8 and my LDL was 4.8 which is the highest it's ever been. So I agreed to the statins this time. Also because my diet is a lot more restrictive than it ever has been and it's not easy to eat healthy when a lot of healthy foods have been eliminated from my diet (for another medical condition).
 
This report was financed by the pharmaceutical industry, so I'm not surprised at the outcome!
A heart specialist was interviewed and said if was an independent review, then, he would consider the data.
 
I have been on statins with,absolutely no side effects for 15 years and my GP carries out tests every year,so I will continue to take.
 
Hi @DumfriesDik statins are known to raise BS or even cause diabetes in some people; when I was on them my hba1c went up from 48 to 54 in 6 months. I came off them soon after and it is currently 36.
 
Mep said:
When I was put on the statin recently the guidelines say diabetic with total cholesterol >5.5 should be put on statins.
Click to expand...

Our lot like it to be < 4, but I've watched that limit come down from < 7 in 1997 when first prescribed to me. This is what had first alerted me to there being something not quite right. I've avoided the conspiracy theories in the past, but they seem to be better founded than I originally gave them credit for.

Our GPs are in a great position to get data on this as far as side effects are concerned. Apart from out little straw poll why do I seem to be surrounded by friends with similar problems while taking them.

I know there are people, especially those on lower doses, who have no problems at all, sorry, I should say no noticeable problems.
 
Reactions: Mep
Mep said:
I'm on statin now and was only put on it recently. I'm on a low dose though and my liver is coping with it. I don't seem to have any side effects either. But on saying that the other drugs I'm on already cause muscle and joint pain.
Click to expand...
The other side effects recognised by the NHS are poor quality of sleep and "brain fog". As I said in previous post, it doesn't affact everyone the same way although there is no question that it will reduce total cholesterol and also prevent the uptake of CoQ10, which is where the muscle pain comes from; Merck Pharmaceutical knew that in 1990.
 
nosher8355 said:
This report was financed by the pharmaceutical industry, so I'm not surprised at the outcome!
A heart specialist was interviewed and said if was an independent review, then, he would consider the data.
Click to expand...
Very difficult to have an independent review when pharmaceutical companies refuse to share or make public the vast amount of data they have but wish to keep to them selves.
 
I'm going to stick with none. My partner having weakness and aches in his upper joints. He changed from one to Atorvastatin but just started to have problems after long term use. Maybe too strong for him but its been over a year since a blood test. He at drs on wednesday for them to be changed again. His family are prone to heart attacks so he is a high risk.
Mine with no statin hoovers over 4.2 mark so not alarmed.
 
yingtong said:
I have been on statins with,absolutely no side effects for 15 years and my GP carries out tests every year,so I will continue to take.
Click to expand...
Me to over 10 years now and never have had any side effects. Yes I have T2 maybe the statins caused that I will never know it is not important now as I can't change it. I have a blood test annually and my kidneys and liver are fine only diagnosed T2 last year at the age of 76 apart from that I am in very good health
 

ha... yeh I already had brain fog prior to this med too. But for me the risk is greater not taking that statin than taking it. My family all have high cholesterol and surprisingly a lot of heart problems. My dad died of a heart attack as well. My grandfather had 2 heart attacks. My grandmother had heart problems. I want to do all I can to reduce the risk. I already have all the risk factors and as I already mentioned my diet isn't as good as it used to be. It's a bit hard to eat healthy when you can't eat acidic foods which pretty much rules out a lot. I can't even eat some foods on the safe list for the disease. It seems the only food that doesn't cause me pain is carbs... but then carbs raises my blood sugar so I can't really win.
 
I'd be the very first person to see that this particular drug is tolerated by people and indeed very good at lowering cholesterol. You are between a rock and a hard place if carbs are your best food source because the only thing that lowered my cholesterol was avoiding carbs, I'd been following a low fat diet for years. I understand your predicament.

My main whinge is that this particular person once gave an interview on a program called "Trust me, I'm a doctor" and said that side effects were only experienced by 1 in 100,00 which really was a load of tosh, I suppose he has progressed, it's now 1 in a 100. He was followed, literally the very next minute by a GP who said 10 % of his patients experienced side effects (those that mentioned it anyway). So my real beef is with the inaccuracies of the information being presented by this person. Even Merck Pharmaceutical recognised the issues, just from their clinical trials because they have a patent for a statin with added CoQ10.

Furthermore, this joker's colleague, working for the same unit at Oxford was tasked with looking into the side effect issue and her very first statement before she did anything was make a statement to the media indicating that she didn't expect to find any issues at all or very little. Scandalous!

So, just to reiterate, I'm happy and delighted that there are those that benefit from using statins, I'm unhappy and p1$$ed that this guy is calling me a liar and pretending that there are no problems.

BTW, he's suggesting that people are avoiding this drug because of what they hear, surely people would give it a go at least, or have I got it wrong?
 
DavidGrahamJones said:
BTW, he's suggesting that people are avoiding this drug because of what they hear, surely people would give it a go at least, or have I got it wrong?
Click to expand...

No, you've not got it wrong. I for one already knew about the side effects the drug can cause and have heard stories about it over the years, yet I was willing to give it a go simply because I didn't see I had much option. If I had a more varied diet I would've said I'm giving my diet a go first like I did last time when I didn't have so many diseases to contend with. That's exactly what I did when I was on the LCHF diet and got a high cholesterol reading... I said that's ok I will readjust my diet and I got my level down again. This time I'm not so fortunate.

Yes, you're right that his figure does sound ridiculous... I'd say it would be a lot more that have side effects than he's saying.
 
It's worth mentioning that I only have a bee in my bonnet because I feel that Prof. R.C. is almost calling me a liar, like I'm imagining it. I hear one of his colleagues suggested that most people taking it are over 60 and have arthritis and that's the pain they feel. I was 45 and my arthritis didn't start until I was 50, so here's a great conspiracy theory. Did taking statins bring on my arthritis. Recent research has shown that CoQ10 reduces inflammation in patients with arthritis.
 
Reactions: Mep
When diabetes GP first diagnosed me 12 years ago and NICE had just reduced the level at which to prescribe statins to 4 mmol he said before long we wouldn't have any fat left in our bodies!
 
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.…