Are Statins safe ?

[rbmrtn]

This is an area where it seems like you may as well do the research and decide for yourself. Doctors are all over the field and it seems impossible to tell who or what is right.

Certainly seems to be the case. It's difficult for the individual to know what is correct.

This MD is a complete opposite, paleo supporter

5 reasons not to worry about your cholesterol numbers

 

[RetiringAt55]

My DH has a history of heart problems and the doctor has been pushing him to take statins for years. Everytime he has tried them over the last 15 years, he ends up with muscle pain, weakness, and other flu-like symptoms within days of starting them. I finally convinced him to stand up to his doctor and say no since the medical research is so debatable.

 

[Ally]

They may be safe for most, but all that I've tried tear my stomach up. They have given me terrible GERD even after taking them for a week. I've refused to take them anymore and just really watch my diet.

 

[zinger1457]

My doctor had me spend 6 months trying everything I could with diet and exercise. I really hit it hard, lost weight and was convinced I would have made a real impact... my total cholesterol went up 50 pts during that time, hdl and ldl got worse too. I've been on 10 mg simvastatin for 3 years now, all the numbers are in line and I'm feeling great.

Just curious, what kind of diet were you on that caused you to lose weight and have your cholesterol go up?

 

[Steven]

This thread is a reminder for me to make an appointment with my doctor again. For the last couple of years I have been getting weaker and weaker. It's hard for me to walk and I have associated it with my arthritis. Two knee replacements complicated matters. I have taken statins of some kind since my cardiac bypass 9 years ago. I'm taking simvastatin, 40mg/day; however, I was taking 80mg/day for years. Might have already done too much damage.

Sorry to hear that johnnie.
But what makes you think the statins are connected to your arthritis ?

 

[Stanley]

Here is what bothers me about statins. A friend of mine who is a family physician
told me of a very long study that shows that men aged 65 and over with normal to higher levels of cholesterol live longer than men with low levels of cholesterol. I believe it was called the Framingville study, but I may be wrong. There is a suspicion that while statins lower cholesterol as promised, the overall effect does not result in a longer life span.

 

[Mmm Rrr]

Just curious, what kind of diet were you on that caused you to lose weight and have your cholesterol go up?

I did everything I could find that was supposed to lower total and bad cholesterol, and raise good: increased fiber (oatmeal every day, more beans and legumes, more fruits and vegetables), walnuts, cinnamon, more fish, etc. And I was exercising more frequently and harder.

After the 6 months I felt great (my diet was much better during the campaign), had lost nearly 10% of my body weight, everything good except the measured lipid levels. I've kept the weight off and maintained some of the exercise and dietary improvement .

My mother has had very high cholesterol since before she was my age, and she has considerable blockage in her arteries and a pacemaker (she started a statin at 75)... I think it's just genetic with me and the minimal level of the generic statin ($35 a year) gets my numbers down and I still feel really good. So unless I feel a negative side effect, I'm going to stick with it.

As others have said, everyone needs to just do what they feel comfortable with.

 

[braumeister]

oatmeal every day, more beans and legumes, more fruits and vegetables

Sounds like a high carb diet, which I would consider counterproductive (and that seems to be what you experienced).
You might get the results you want, in terms of blood lipids, with a low carb, high fat diet. I know I did.

 

[ERhoosier]

Interesting point-counterpoint on OP's questions here-

Johns Hopkins Cardiologists Advocate Statin Use for Primary Prevention of Heart Disease in JAMA's First Viewpoint Feature - 04/10/2012

A typical doc (or cardiologist) prescribing a statin (or niacin or whatever) makes no profit from prescribing that specific drug, and most primary care docs are so busy these days they have no desire to create extra clinic visits dealing with a rash of statin-induced muscle pains (or whatever). No doubt like many drugs, statins can be very beneficial for most but certain patients can have serious side-effects.

 

[Mmm Rrr]

Yup, I've done that too, in the past. It works for weight loss (really well, that's my easiest way to take off 10 lbs) but it has never lowered my cholesterol levels.

 

[ERhoosier]

Here is what bothers me about statins. A friend of mine who is a family physician
told me of a very long study that shows that men aged 65 and over with normal to higher levels of cholesterol live longer than men with low levels of cholesterol. I believe it was called the Framingville study, but I may be wrong. There is a suspicion that while statins lower cholesterol as promised, the overall effect does not result in a longer life span.

Best evidence is that high cholesterol is indeed associated with an increase in coronary disease, inc. death. The confounding factor in unselected population studies is that several cancers are known to LOWER cholesterol levels, so those with low cholesterol at initial testing who do NOT have cancer do indeed tend to live longer with less heart issues.

Low Serum Cholesterol and Mortality

FWIW- Here's link to the horse's mouth on Framingham-
Framingham Heart Study
And here's their calculator developed using Framingham data-
Heart Failure Framingham Heart Study
Plug in normal systolic BP (120) and normal BMI (23), then play with different cholesterol & HDL numbers. Framingham predicts a 65yr old with bad cholesterol profile (250 total/40 HDL) has almost double the 30 year risk of cardiac events (60 %) vs a good profile (170 total/ 65 HDL @ 33%).

 

[timo2]

. There is a suspicion that while statins lower cholesterol as promised, the overall effect does not result in a longer life span.

I've seen that statement before (and for other medical issues also), and apparently what makes it true is that no one lives forever. It's the quality of the remaining years that matter, and I'd rather not be crippled by heart disease my remaining years. I've already had one heart attack, mostly recovered, and don't need another one. Another one would definitely interfere with beer drinking, and that would be unacceptable.

 

[donheff]

I've seen that statement before (and for other medical issues also), and apparently what makes it true is that no one lives forever. It's the quality of the remaining years that matter, and I'd rather not be crippled by heart disease my remaining years. I've already had one heart attack, mostly recovered, and don't need another one. Another one would definitely interfere with beer drinking, and that would be unacceptable.

The studies show no decrease in mortality in patients with no prior heart disease but definite mortality benefits for patients like you who have heart disease. So you are clearly a good candidate if you don't have adverse reactions. The issue for most of us is not whether there are some possible benefits of statins but whether they are worth pursuing in light of the potential down side. Sorta like the PSA testing dilemma.

 

[timo2]

Now that I know just enough to be stupid about this subject, If I were to go back to my pre-heart attack self, my advice to myself would be low saturated fat diet (like a Mediterranean diet), fish oil, aspirin, and some exercise. Based upon what I know now, those few steps would have a very good chance mitigating any need for statins in people with no history of heart issues. My total cholesterol at the time of my heart attack was 207, not really terrible by the target numbers at the time.

 

[HFWR]

Best evidence is that high cholesterol is indeed associated with an increase in coronary disease, inc. death. The confounding factor in unselected population studies is that several cancers are known to LOWER cholesterol levels, so those with low cholesterol at initial testing who do NOT have cancer do indeed tend to live longer with less heart issues.

Low Serum Cholesterol and Mortality

FWIW- Here's link to the horse's mouth on Framingham-
Framingham Heart Study
And here's their calculator developed using Framingham data-
Heart Failure Framingham Heart Study
Plug in normal systolic BP (120) and normal BMI (23), then play with different cholesterol & HDL numbers. Framingham predicts a 65yr old with bad cholesterol profile (250 total/40 HDL) has almost double the 30 year risk of cardiac events (60 %) vs a good profile (170 total/ 65 HDL @ 33%).

The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.Framingham follies » The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.

The study conclusions:

With one exception there was no discernible association between reported diet intake and serum cholesterol level in the Framingham Diet Study Group. The one exception was a weak negative association between caloric intake and serum cholesterol level in men. [As to] coronary heart disease–was it related prospectively to diet. No relationship was found.
​

So, I would say that the results of this study were pretty clear. These guys tried as hard as they could to show a correlation between diet and serum cholesterol and between diet and the incidence of coronary heart disease, but failed. The data conclusively demonstrated no such correlations.

 

[RetiringAt55]

Sounds like a high carb diet, which I would consider counterproductive (and that seems to be what you experienced).
You might get the results you want, in terms of blood lipids, with a low carb, high fat diet. I know I did.

Worked for us too. My doctor said "whatever you are doing, keep doing it". My cholesterol levels are fantastic when on a low carb diet.

Statins may artificially lower cholesterol levels but they are not reducing inflammation, which is the real issue.

 

[Steven]

So, now I'm really confused.
Are we to go low carb or high fat. If we go low carb, are saturated fats ok ?

 

[braumeister]

So, now I'm really confused.
Are we to go low carb or high fat. If we go low carb, are saturated fats ok ?

Yes.
The confusion comes, I think, from the constant bombardment of "low fat" claims and advice.

But think about it:
You have carbs, protein and fat.
You don't want to increase your protein too much, because if you do, your body treats the excess as carbs (essentially converting protein to carb and dealing with it that way).

So if you decrease your carbs, the fat has to go up accordingly.
The amazing part is that you learn that saturated fat is not the demon it's made out to be.

Do some reading on it (RonBoyd has posted a number of sources) and it all becomes clear.

For a concise treatment, I would recommend two books, Why We Get Fat by Gary Taubes, and Diet 101 by Jenny Ruhl.

 

[timo2]

Saturated fats and trans fats are not OK. People are too focused on cholesterol. I don't worry about the cholesterol content or unsaturated fat content of any of my food. It is the type of fat you eat that is important. I mostly eat foods that have high unsaturated fats, which it turns out is not good for weight reduction, but is good for cardiovascular health. There is lots of information on this around, but here is a link. Choosing the right fats for your diet | GoodFats101 eliminating the bad fats is also the basis of the so called 'Mediterranean diet' Mediterranean diet for heart health - MayoClinic.com

My father was in several early cholesterol trials in the 1970's, and I remember at the time that they said all fats were bad, and he couldn't even eat eggs or any other food that contained cholesterol. It turns out that was using a sledgehammer to crack a peanut. There are different kinds of fats, and some, like unsaturated fat, are really good for cardiovascular health. The saturated fats and trans fats are what are bad for you, much much worse than than the cholesterol levels of food. And it depends upon the source of the saturated fat, apparently. Some research show that saturated fats from plants like coconuts are not bad like the saturated fats from animals. And animal saturated fat is worse than dairy saturated fat.

 

[gerrym51]

I am a pharmacist. although i am overweight all tests for various diseases
come in at normal ranges.bp/glucose/cholsterol/psa/etc.

I would NOT take a prescription drug unless a test showed I needed it. they do have side affects and i would not take one unless necessary.

unless a test showw you are out of normal range-do not take one.

 

[ls99]

Seems like the normal range is a moving target. Especially in the cholesterol racket.

 

[CoolChange]

So, now I'm really confused.
Are we to go low carb or high fat. If we go low carb, are saturated fats ok ?

Just to confuse things further for you since we are going off topic onto various dietary belief systems, I believe that all calories beyond what is necessary for adequate nutrition are detrimental regardless of the source (carbohydrate, fat or protein). This page has links to plenty of material if you want to see the research that has brought me to this conclusion: Calorie restriction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note: There are days when I decide that a big meal (which might include a nice steak with baked potato or a big bacon sandwich) now is worth giving up a few healthy hours/days at the end.

 

[NotMyFault]

Just to confuse things further for you since we are going off topic onto various dietary belief systems, I believe that all calories beyond what is necessary for adequate nutrition are detrimental regardless of the source (carbohydrate, fat or protein). This page has links to plenty of material if you want to see the research that has brought me to this conclusion: Calorie restriction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note: There are days when I decide that a big meal (which might include a nice steak with baked potato or a big bacon sandwich) now is worth giving up a few healthy hours/days at the end.

Dietary belief systems is right. It is more dangerous to talk about what is healthy than to discuss politics or religion.

Calorie restriction has shown a lot of promise for health and longevity in rats and, from what I have read, people too. I have also read that you should take a gradual approach to it. Jumping on the calorie restriction bandwagon too quickly can be counterproductive. I have not been able to try this myself because my two beers with dinner would become my two beers for dinner.

 

[JOHNNIE36]

Sorry to hear that johnnie.
But what makes you think the statins are connected to your arthritis ?

Steven, I did not mean to imply that statins were connected to my arthritis woes. I was confusing my weakness, sore ankles and difficulty in walking to my knee problems. Now that both knees have been replaced due to the arthritis, I was thinking that I would be back to normal and would be able to walk easily again. Wrong! Now I'm starting to believe that my problem maybe with me taking simvastatin for years. I'm making an appointment today to see my doctor for a discussion on this subject.

 

[donheff]

Steven, I did not mean to imply that statins were connected to my arthritis woes. I was confusing my weakness, sore ankles and difficulty in walking to my knee problems. Now that both knees have been replaced due to the arthritis, I was thinking that I would be back to normal and would be able to walk easily again. Wrong! Now I'm starting to believe that my problem maybe with me taking simvastatin for years. I'm making an appointment today to see my doctor for a discussion on this subject.

Opinions are cheap and all over the place. One doctor will say, dump the statins another doctor will say they are not the problem. The bottom line is that statins are well known for causing muscle pain. I have no idea whether what you are experiencing is the type of symptom that could be due to statins but it is easy enough to test. Drop the statins for several months and see how you feel. This isn't a life and death issue like some meds - you are not going to fall off a cliff the day you quit your statins. Seems like a perfect situation for a self experiment. If you get better, great - stay off the statins. Doesn't matter why it works, maybe its psychosomatic. But relief is relief. If there is no change, go back on the statins and rest assured that they are not causing your symptoms.