Statins

In other words, 1.8% would avoid a major CVD event. That is a very small percentage. For that 982 would take drugs that could severely reduce the quality of their lives and possibly cause other equally damaging illnesses (see my email above)

Reading widely on the Internet does not always make one better informed. However reading Cochrane systematic reviews does:

Of 1000 people treated with a statin for five years, 18 would avoid a major CVD event which compares well with other treatments used for preventing cardiovascular disease. - See more at: summaries.cochrane.org/CD004816/statins-for-the-primary-prevention-of-cardiovascular-disease#sthash.LvCY6CdK.dpuf

Also the BBC's programme Case Notes on statins - here is the full transcript.

www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/casenotes_tr_20071016.shtml

Benecol is proven to lower cholesterol and is of the very few foods that is allowed to make any claim that it benefits health.

Excellent post, FlicketyB. I agree entirely.

So why not take some CoQ10 as a supplement if you think that helps- very cheap.

It pulls both ways. I have a friend who died quite recently of cancer of the liver. It took them 5 years to discover that the liver problems she had were caused by the statins she was taking. Was her primary liver cancer the result of the damage her liver had sustained from the statins? I do not know, but it is not unreasonable to link them. Statins may save some, they may equally probably contribute to other people's deaths.

Having said that I do think there is clear evidence for the efficacy of statins for those with pre-existing cardiac conditions. And it does strike me as reckless for someone with a severe heart problem not to take them. It is the lack of evidence of efficacy for those whose cholesterol may be raised but who have no signs of heart disease that is still unproven and many studies, have shown that women in particular gain no benefit from taking statins.

Search and read the evidence on the internet and you will find strong arguments for and against statins, by experts in the field, all with impeccable medical backgrounds. But that information has been available since before the internet. I first became wary about statins as the result of reading information about them in paper sources. The internet has enabled me to study a far wider range of literature and none of it has done anything to alleviate my initial concern.

We need to remember that medicine is an art not science, a drug that works for one person, doesn't for another, a drug that causes dangerous side effects for one person, cures another. I am allergic to penicillin. It could kill me. For the majority of people it is an effective antibiotic and has saved many lives

The problem is, Granjura, that you are the only person I have heard of who has not had side effects, particularly ones that affect the muscles.
If anyone asks me about statins, I tell them what happened to me and they say, the same happened to me or my husband or wife, etc.
My brother-in-law had the same, but I did not know until after it had happened to me. Four friends in the village have had muscle pains and had problems walking.
When statins were first invented, they were supposed to have CoQ10 in them, but the manufacturers changed the formulation. Heart disease patients on statins are consistently found to have low levels of CoQ10 which is needed for a healthy heart function. Catch 22.

durhamjen- I am so sorry to hear this. And in your case, with clear and debilitating side-effects, and no heart-disease and depending on your cholesterol readings, I can totally understand why you stopped. But the fact YOU have strong side-effects should not put off others who may well NOT have any side-effects, or minor ones- and with cholesterol problems and heart disease, from taking them and have their own quality of life improved and live to see their grand-children grow up.

Agreed- but it is often difficult to make choices when bombarded with scare-mongering not based on proper medical evidence. Same for MMR vaccination. It is hugely sad to lose friends in their 50s who could have very probably saved by taking statins. Yes, this friend had heart disease which required previous stents- so it was even more important for him to take statins he had been prescribed and strongly advised to take- but refused to.
We have another relative who refuses to take statins because he believes it is causing mild hair loss - at 64 he's already had one heart-attack- but his hair seems more important than another heart attack. Sad and tragic choice in my book.

OH is the person I trust most in the world, with the right experience and training- so as he has asked me to take statins, because I have diabetes and impaired thyroid function- I do take them, happily without side-effects, as far as I know.

granjura, last Easter I was in hospital having had an aortic dissection. When they realised what was wrong with me, I was sent to another hospital where they knew how to deal with it. Before I left, I was given a new tablet, so I asked what it was and was told statins. When I asked why I was told that everyone else was on statins. They affected my eyesight and my walking. I had pains in my calves and thigh muscles and after a few months could only just get out of bed.
I have stopped taking them, as quality of life is as important as life itself. Yesterday I walked for miles with my grandchildren. Last summer I would not have been able to walk at all. I have an aortic aneurysm, and could possibly have another attack any time now. I might have to have stents if the aneurysm grows any larger. However, my life is better now than it was when I was on statins. This is not scaremongering. It's the truth.

Granjura I am sorry about your friend too, but you cannot say he died because of 'misinformation' about statins.
There is conflicting evidence in the literature about the side-effects of statins.
You cannot select the parts of the evidence you personally dislike, and call it misinformation.
If your friend had stents in place, he must have already had a serious condition. It was his own choice to take the statins or not.

oops

Aka [busmile] & chocolate eggs on Sunday too?

I've just eaten huge bar of chocolate. Now I'm sitting here imagining my arteries all furring up due to the fats and sugars

Even if you had heart disease which required stents due to furring up and narrowing of arteries??? BTW this is what my friends said, due to fear-mongering on the internet.

It killed them. Which is of course better than having a massive and debilitating stroke, leaving you totally unable to live a normal life. Your choice, of course- but a bizarre and dangerous choice, if I may say. Bonne chance.

I would not go on Statins !!!

I think doctors in France might be more pro-statin than elsewhere.
I had 2 stents put in 7 years ago and my good/ bad cholesterol levels have been up and down since then - annual+ blood checks.
Last ?Oct the specialist prescribed a "stronger statin" because the "bad" count had gone up .2. Then 3 months later it had gone down, but "good" was down too, so GP still thought it warranted reinforcemement and now I'm taking 4 pills plus aspirin per day.
I nearly rebelled, but I'm still alive TG so will persevere. I sometimes think I'm a guineapig.

Of course, but the autopsy was quite clear on the cause and it makes sense that statins could have helped prevent the continuing furring up or blockage/narrowing of arteries due to cholesterol. Now anyone who refutes that really should do some studying of the issues here, really.

I am not saying we should all be on statins, at all- but for those who are diabetic, have a complicates medical history, with strokes and heart problems, etc- they are truly a life-saver.

My point is, that, just like for vaccinations, scare-mongering does kill too often- deaths that could have been 'easily' avoided. Scare-mongering kills (:

I'm very sorry to hear about your friend, granjura, but I don't see how it can be proved that his death would definitely have been prevented if he'd carried on taking the statins.

Sadly and tragically, just got news of another friend who died due to mis-information about statins. He had a couple of stents put in a few years ago and was prescribed statins- but stopped taking them due to negative info from friends and press. Aged 54, had massive heart attack recently.
Tragic beyond belief.

Oh dear, sorry GJ

No, died of cancer about 10 years ago, sadly.

Is your friend still around GJ?

The Diabetes specialists are dismayed that so many patients are refusing Statins, due to so much fearmongering on the internet, etc. Statins could save 1000s with diabetes of heart attacks and strokes - and the side-effects are comparatively rare and minor. Having a quick heart attack and gone does not scare me too much - but having seen friends suffering the terrible consequences of a stroke, for years or forever, really makes me wonder why so many refuse them.

It's a bit like my friend who smoked 30 a day and drank like a fish, but said I was mad to take the Pill and put dangerous chemicals in my body (:

Bags and Harrigran I'm afraid it's not quite so simple as this article makes clear.
[quote]The prescribing adviser wants me to prescribe statin A this year. This patient is happy on statin B, which we switched him to some years ago as it was more cost-effective then. The prescribing lead partner wants me to persuade him to switch, which will allow us to stay green on the prescribing incentive scheme and protect our income.[quote]

and
[quote]Prescribing incentive schemes, started with the laudable intention of getting maximum value for limited resources, are being used to direct and limit clinical behaviour on flimsy evidence enforced by financial penalties.[quote]

Doctors are supposed to act in their patients' best interests, and we trust them to do that, but at the same time their arms are being twisted further and further up their backs by the government and the PCTs.

That's good then.