Have you lowered cholesterol without statins?

[msieweke]

I lowered my cholesterol from 299 to 168 by taking thyroid hormone. Right now I'm concerned that it has gone too low. I would like it to be over 200. I'm trying to wean myself off thyroid hormone, but it's the only thing that consistently stops the leg cramps. I'm still working on it.

It's fairly easy to manipulate your cholesterol with diet, too. Eating saturated fat will raise your HDL. Lowering carb intake will lower your triglycerides. Most people find that their total cholesterol will go down on a low-carb diet; a few people find their cholesterol going up.

Do a Google search on "biohacking cholesterol" or "feldman protocol". These guys are finding they can lower cholesterol by over-feeding on fat while eating a low-carb diet. This might be something to try if you need your cholesterol lowered for an insurance exam.

 

[harley]

Harley, I was with you until I looked at the foods reccomened by the AHA. Man, you lost me. I am going over to the over side!

P.S. No more veggies for me.

Lol! I can't blame you. But make sure you only put whole milk (or beer) on those delicious parts of a nutritious breakfast.

Edit: I blew up the picture you posted, just out of curiosity. What it actually says is that the cereal meets AHA criteria for saturated fat and cholesterol. That's like saying arsenic is healthy because it's gluten free. No, there's no money at stake in all this stuff.

 

[RAE]

I would be happy to stop my statins as soon as there is convincing evidence coming from a reputable organization. Who knows maybe these studies show convincing evidence and the AHA and mainstream doctors are just too stupid to figure it out. I suppose it's possible.

So you think the AHA is a "reputable organization"? You may want to do a little research on AHA and their ties to the pharmaceutical industry. Personally, I gave up on AHA as a reputable organization years ago - their advice is worthless (and even worse, often dangerous to your health), as far as I am concerned. Here is one link to the ties between AHA and industry, but you can find many more with a simple search:
http://unitehere.org/wp-content/uploads/AHA-Industry-Contribs_FINAL.pdf

 

[Chuckanut]

Harley, I was with you until I looked at the foods reccomened by the AHA. Man, you lost me. I am going over to the over side!

P.S. No more veggies for me.

Yup. For years I ate sugary cereals and used high Trans Fat margarine because these experts said they were better than eggs cooked in butter.

 

[Lsbcal]

I am sure doctors vary in their "dependence" on pharma perks and incentives. Our internist seems very reluctant to prescribe anything without lots of evidence of need. My cholesterol is high (211,
233) and there is family history of heart disease, yet she points to high HDL and good lifestyle/weight as factors that outweigh the risks of statins.

I had better cholesterol numbers and had no other risk factors. Doc suggested the CT Heart Scan as a precautionary extra test since I'm 69 and a runner. It costs a bit and gives one a radiation dose. But that really changed the picture for me ... and it was not a pretty picture.

I and others have mentioned this in this thread but it seems that nobody really takes this information seriously. Or perhaps some have and just not commented? Anyway this is my reason for the extra font size and color above.

It's painless and you just go through a shallow donut shaped machine:

 

[Amethyst]

Did insurance cover? Tests where you go in a tube tend to be pricey.

I had better cholesterol numbers and had no other risk factors. Doc suggested the CT Heart Scan as a precautionary extra test since I'm 69 and a runner. It costs a bit and gives one a radiation dose. But that really changed the picture for me ... and it was not a pretty picture.

I and others have mentioned this in this thread but it seems that nobody really takes this information seriously. Or perhaps some have and just not commented? Anyway this is my reason for the extra font size and color above.

It's painless and you just go through a shallow donut shaped machine:

 

[razztazz]

Did insurance cover? Tests where you go in a tube tend to be pricey.

I had one done some years ago about a year or 2 after they came out. Or at least a year or 2 after I heard about it. I forget what the cost was, I want to say 250 or probably more like 450 bucks. No insurance at the time covered it. But I said this is exactly the kind of diagnostic that everyone would want. (Requisite grain-of-salt required but not included)

I just paid for it on the barrel-head. If I were to decide to take a trip to see someone or just do a weekend at the lake it would cost at least that much. This is the kind of thing one would not want to be stingy about.

 

[Lsbcal]

Did insurance cover? Tests where you go in a tube tend to be pricey.

They said it would cost me $125. For me it was easily worth it.

 

[mamadogmamacat]

Lsbcal, sorry if this is a stupid question, but what does being a runner have to do with your risk?

I have not run much in about ten yrs, and certainly can't go back to it now after statins ruined my knees. But, I did run cross country in HS and some in college.

 

[Lsbcal]

Lsbcal, sorry if this is a stupid question, but what does being a runner have to do with your risk?

I have not run much in about ten yrs, and certainly can't go back to it now after statins ruined my knees. But, I did run cross country in HS and some in college.

I run in a state park and often there is not anyone around. I have not found a way to get a CPR signup from the squirrels and deer. So I consider this a bit of a risk. Running is somewhat stressful on the body.

I also mentioned this in passing because it just is one indicator of a healthy lifestyle. But genetics can play a big part in your future health. Clearly my other healthy habits (good dietary ones I hope) did not eliminate the genetic component.

Having the CT Heart Scan information is important to me. I'll double down a bit on my dietary habits and not do any stupid extreme exercise to push limits. And I started a low dose of BP meds + low dose statins. No side effects so far.

I'm just sharing this information in the hopes it helps someone else a bit.
Big caveat: one size does not fit all.

 

[mamadogmamacat]

Ah, thanks for the reply

Regarding those park animals being unreliable in the CPR department, a few of the men in a retiree lunch group I attend are also runners, and we have lots of rural and semi-rural areas around here where there is little traffic, but are beautiful places to run, so they have gotten one of those medic alert buttons to wear while running. Obviously wont help if you are unable to press the button (I do think some can supposedly sense a fall, however). The guys seem to think it gives them considerable peace of mind. How pricey they are, i did not ask

 

[Lsbcal]

Ah, thanks for the reply

Regarding those park animals being unreliable in the CPR department, a few of the men in a retiree lunch group I attend are also runners, and we have lots of rural and semi-rural areas around here where there is little traffic, but are beautiful places to run, so they have gotten one of those medic alert buttons to wear while running. Obviously wont help if you are unable to press the button (I do think some can supposedly sense a fall, however). The guys seem to think it gives them considerable peace of mind. How pricey they are, i did not ask

Interesting thought. Recently I've come across the word "elderly" though not yet applied to me ... to my face anyway.

 

[frugal-one]

Really? You think my doctors gives me bad advice on purpose because he gets a free lunch or the big pharma rep drops by with a few free trinkets? I guess that could be possible. He "seems" to care about my health, but I'll admit that most of my appointments are right after lunch.

I would be happy to stop my statins as soon as there is convincing evidence coming from a reputable organization. Who knows maybe these studies show convincing evidence and the AHA and mainstream doctors are just too stupid to figure it out. I suppose it's possible.

I asked the doctor to give me the percentages of people who are helped by statins or how it improved their length of life. I suggest you do the same.

The doctor referred me to the pharmacy who gave me the stats. It is eye opening.

 

[Lsbcal]

Nobody is making big money on my meds. For a month's worth of low dose BP and low dose statin the bill was less then $5 to me. I think these are generics.

 

[Chuckanut]

I asked the doctor to give me the percentages of people who are helped by statins or how it improved their length of life. I suggest you do the same.

The doctor referred me to the pharmacy who gave me the stats. It is eye opening.

Here's a stat for people without diagnosed CVD:

Statins for Heart Disease Prevention (Without Prior Heart Disease) – TheNNTTheNNT

And here's one for people with with known heart disease:

Statins for Heart Disease Prevention (With Known Heart Disease) – TheNNTTheNNT

You can read it and draw you own conclusions.

 

[Lsbcal]

Chuckanut, I noticed that this study was for taking statins for 5 years. My Doc told me that he's targeting the 10 to 15 year out picture as I'm basically healthy right now at age 69.

Another thing, as mentioned above about my experiences, many of us might not know about what our arterial pathways conditions are. Many at best just have a set of cholesterol numbers. Even taking a CT Heart scan is not going to tell one about small areas of weakness in the body. That is just the state of technology today I guess.

 

[Chuckanut]

Chuckanut, I noticed that this study was for taking statins for 5 years. My Doc told me that he's targeting the 10 to 15 year out picture as I'm basically healthy right now at age 69.

Another thing, as mentioned above about my experiences, many of us might not know about what our arterial pathways conditions are. Many at best just have a set of cholesterol numbers. Even taking a CT Heart scan is not going to tell one about small areas of weakness in the body. That is just the state of technology today I guess.

You make good points.

It is not for me to judge yours or anybody's medical decisions. And I have to assume that most of us will do what is in our own best interests.

I will play Devil's Advocate here and say that if we argue that over a 10-15 year period of time the beneficial effects of a statin will multiply and be more significant, then it is only fair to argue that over a 10-15 year period the dangers of the statin might also multiply and be more significant.

It would be great to see some high quality longer studies for those 10-15 years. Granted they are very hard to do. If they can show me proof that a statin will give me a statistically significant improvement in my life-span and especially in my quality of life, and I will run you over on the way to the pharmacy.

FWIW, the only thing that seems to offer significant protection from CVD with no bad side effects is the Mediterranean diet. Now, just which Mediterranean culture they are looking at needs a bit more exploration.

Or maybe I could just move to Acciaroli, Italy and start eating lots of rosemary:

THE VILLAGE OF 100-YEAR-OLDS… Herb secret to long life? – InvestmentWatch

Arrivaderci Amici!

 

[Winemaker]

I remember a story aout the Greek island Akaria, where there is a long lifespan as well. They attributed to the fact that they drank a lot of tea and ate a Mediterranean diet. The tea is a natural diuretic, and they felt that the constant urination situation, flushed their systems often of toxins.

 

[sengsational]

You can read it and draw you own conclusions.

Thanks for those links. That site helps people see through some of the BS that's out there.

If people would like to educate themselves, there's a multi-part, ongoing series (only 2 parts are done so far) on the topic of how to interpret the science surrounding health and longevity.

Relative risks get headlines, but absolute risks are what you're really looking for. This has been a big thing in measuring statin effectiveness because when the numbers are small, then there are beneficial factors that are beyond the drug itself and those factors get credited to the drug.

This post (8 minute read) talks about relative vs absolute risk. And this post (8 minute read) talks about how most epidemiological studies can't even infer causality. That first one points to a longer article (more than 10 minutes) in the NYT about flaws in many studies and make a harmful thing seem beneficial. None of these were behind a paywall for me. Don't click on them if you haven't got some time and plenty energy in your brain!

 

[harley]

Nobody is making big money on my meds. For a month's worth of low dose BP and low dose statin the bill was less then $5 to me. I think these are generics.

Are you kidding? You think just because you aren't paying that no one is making money off you? Obviously not as much as when they were under patent, but your insurance is still giving some Pharma CEO a nice island vacation every year.

 

[Lsbcal]

Are you kidding? You think just because you aren't paying that no one is making money off you? Obviously not as much as when they were under patent, but your insurance is still giving some Pharma CEO a nice island vacation every year.

We just should have an open mind about these costs. Not all medications are big money making scams. That's all I want to say on this subject. Not looking for an argument just solutions to health issues for myself.

 

[DEC-1982]

I hear taking statins is associated with increased memory loss.

"The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) updated its safety information for statins to include memory loss, forgetfulness, and confusion as possible risks."

 

[sengsational]

So it gets your numbers down, but doesn't actually stop heart attacks and stroke, why use it

Exactly.

Some people posting here seem to think cholesterol readings and statins are a scam or are perhaps over hyped. If you read this on WebMD about Aherosclerois then it might be helpful https://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/what-is-atherosclerosis#1.

Atherosclerosis begins with damage to the endothelium. It’s caused by high blood pressure, smoking, or high cholesterol. That damage leads to the formation of plaque.

This, from WebMD leaves out inflammation as a cause for atherosclerosis? WHAT?!? No wonder we can't make decent decisions about treatments!

Here is one link to a very readable article on a study that shows: Statins reduce deaths from coronary heart disease by 28% in men according to longest ever study.

See, that's the problem. "Readability". Studies like this are reported with relative values. The other big problem is that organizations that fund the studies are selective about who they allow into the studies. The "healthy user bias" typically benefits the intervention in RCT's. But let's look at something that we can understand, but wouldn't make headlines.

• Out of 1188 people on placebo, 15 died a cardiovascular death after 20 years.
• Out of 1209 (353+856) people on prevastatin, 13 (5+8) died a cardiovascular death after 20 years.

And this result was from a study where the patient population and break points were cherry-picked by the pharma company. I don't know about you, but I'm less than convinced that I should accept the side effects of taking some chemical every day when the benefit is either skimpy or non-existent.

This chart is from the paper that underlies the "readable" article:

 

[braumeister]

• Out of 1188 people on placebo, 15 died a cardiovascular death after 20 years.
• Out of 1209 (353+856) people on prevastatin, 13 (5+8) died a cardiovascular death after 20 years.

So the outcome was 15% worse for the poor folks who didn't get the real pills. That's HUGE!

 

[mamadogmamacat]

Thanks for the info on studies. Does it also indicate gender of participants? Back when I studied statins (after the fact of having my permanent joint damage unfortunately) (sorry way too sick right now to find those bookmarks) I either found all participants were male or gender was not reported. I only ask because the majority of family and friends who have had such side effects have been post menopausal women. Anecdotal only I know, but it may explain both doctors ignorance and resistance to accepting patient reluctance as well as explaining why so many presumably male forum members are so positive on statins if they are much less likely to have issues (and also much less likely to know any male family/friends with issues). It would be a quite understandable confirmation bias, however unhelpful to those of us more at risk of side effects.

At least I now know, and my Dr knows as well, that absolutely anything she suggests will be researched by me first, extensively.