Lowering cholesterol without statins-1-year update: good results, but...

That quote of;
It took more than 80,000 hours of training for me to become a cardiologist. How much of that time was spent on nutrition? Zero.
seems a bit over estimated. A 40 hour work week adds up to 2080 hours a year. Round down to 2000 hours and divide that by the 80,000 hours of training, the author claims he took 40 YEARS training to become a cardiologist?

Doctors scare the crap out of me when simple arithmetic seems to stretch their craniums.
 
No doc here , but those numbers look very good. high hdl, and hdl/ ldl ratio excellent. My doctor tells me low hdl is a bigger risk. My hdl had been deficient ( in the 20's) for decades and rose to the bottom of normal range after retirement.
 
Last edited:
I read Undoctored by Dr. William Davis, a cardiologist, also. Got it at the library so did not buy it (waiting for the "I hate drs who write books" poster to weigh in...he is a hoot!).

Glad I could give you a good laugh! Hoot! Hoot!
 
That quote of;

seems a bit over estimated. A 40 hour work week adds up to 2080 hours a year. Round down to 2000 hours and divide that by the 80,000 hours of training, the author claims he took 40 YEARS training to become a cardiologist?

Doctors scare the crap out of me when simple arithmetic seems to stretch their craniums.

Lol, indeed.

I appreciate doctors discussing food approaches to disease prevention and management, but it seems so often doctors like this just want to sell something.
Yup, her link is onestepfoods.
 
Lol, indeed.

I appreciate doctors discussing food approaches to disease prevention and management, but it seems so often doctors like this just want to sell something.
Yup, her link is onestepfoods.

I don't mind a doctor writing and selling a book or two or three. But, when they start selling stuff like supplement pills, breakfast bars, nutrition shakes, powders to blend with kale juice, pudding purges to lower LDL levels, etc. I get suspicious.
 
That's what I do for my father. He has alzheimers, 87 years old, and has enough pain without these things causing muscle ache. Besides, at his age, is a statin really going to make a difference now? When I asked his doc, he told me to just quit giving them to him but that he was still keeping them on his active prescription records. My guess is he gets a kick back from the manufacturer for every prescription he has associated with his practice.


It is really sad that this kind of stuff is what passes for good medical practice in this country. Big Pharma and their $$ seem to be firmly in control of how most doctors practice medicine these days. It's no wonder people (like me) don't trust doctors to give good medical advice anymore, at least for chronic health issues. Prescribing statins for an 87-year old man with alzheimers borders on medical malpractice, in my mind. My wife used to work at the local medical clinic, and saw the same thing all the time.......nursing home patients in their mid-80s and even 90s being prescribed statins, and also ordering all sorts of lab tests done (lipid panels, etc). The sons/daughters would often go along with all this nonsense, because "the doctor must know what he is doing". Makes me angry!
 
Prescribing statins for an 87-year old man with alzheimers borders on medical malpractice, in my mind.

My doctor told me that to not prescribe statins was considered malpractice.
 
........My wife used to work at the local medical clinic, and saw the same thing all the time.......nursing home patients in their mid-80s and even 90s being prescribed statins, and also ordering all sorts of lab tests done (lipid panels, etc). The sons/daughters would often go along with all this nonsense, because "the doctor must know what he is doing". Makes me angry!
My ex used to be a nurse in an oncology ward. Docs would withhold pain meds because the terminal patients "might get addicted". :rolleyes:
 
My doctor told me that to not prescribe statins was considered malpractice.


Yeah, that's the problem. Big Pharma (and the insurance companies) dictate what is/isn't an approved medical practice, not the doctor. I personally don't want Big Pharma or an insurance company telling my doctor how he or she should be treating me for my health issue, but that's the way it seems to work these days. Money/profit controls everything, not necessarily what is best for the patient.
 
I don't mind a doctor writing and selling a book or two or three. But, when they start selling stuff like supplement pills, breakfast bars, nutrition shakes, powders to blend with kale juice, pudding purges to lower LDL levels, etc. I get suspicious.

I think some of them start off with an earnest desire to spread what they know. Then they realize that their web site, podcast, etc. costs money. So then, what do you do? I still like Dr. Peter Attia and he discussed this on one of his podcasts. There are several more like him going way back to Gary Taubes who introduced me to ideas that helped.

As I age I have gotten more skeptical about the content. The people in their 30's and 40's with their n-of-1 experiments. If one of the experiments turns out to be harmful, well they have some time to recover. Not so at 60.
 
My statin is great. Love what it's done for my numbers.
 
Doctors scare the crap out of me when simple arithmetic seems to stretch their craniums.
My favorite quote of this thread.

When I graduated from high school, my best buddy was headed for engineering with me. When we got back in the fall, he was in pre-meds. I asked what happened and he said that his math skills were not good enough!

He went on to become dean of the local medical school.
 
My wife is a medical technologist, and blood and urine used to be her life. She said your blood numbers, while up slightly, are okay. Congratulations on being able to eat healthy and have the ability to lose weight.

I'm a type II diabetic. Many diabetics have vascular problems, and its been said 2/3 can look forward to bypass surgery sometime in their lives. My triglycerides are high, however they far lower than they used to be. I could virtually starve myself and the triglycerides would still be high because that's just the way it is for diabetics.

I remain under the close care of a endocrinologist and chose to go on insulin in order to be more stable. And I later went on the pump because it's easy to eat fairly normal and still have stable blood sugar levels. I just got a bill in on insulin, and it's up to $345 a tiny vial--expensive. I have to pay 20%, and go through about 2 bottles a month.

Best thing someone can do for themselves is eat lean meat and fish. Eat basically green items and minimize or get off the white items like potatoes and rice. And lay off the sweets and fried foods. In other words, go to a low carb. diet.
 
Here's an article worth reading from the World Journal of Cardiology (July 2015).
Some quotes:

"numerous studies of cholesterol lowering have failed to demonstrate a mortality benefit, and the benefits of statins may have been overstated."

"We conclude that the expectation that CHD could be prevented or eliminated by simply reducing cholesterol appears unfounded. On the contrary, we should acknowledge the inconsistencies of the cholesterol theory and recognize the proven benefits of a healthy lifestyle incorporating a Mediterranean diet to prevent CHD"

"Alternative theories of atherosclerosis are independent of cholesterol metabolism and may provide the key to future preventive strategies."
 
A friend of mine had Alzheimer’s and her doctor insisted she have colonoscopy and many other tests. It was hell for her. I asked her husband why he complied and he was worried that the doctor would report him to human services and he would lose custody. When he died and I became her guardian I put a end to all of that. Found her a new doctor and the only thing we treated was the Alzheimer’s even after her cancer came back.
 
I have taken a deep dive in statins in the last year. IMHO, they are neither the saving Angel or the Devil that people make them out to be. They are a tool in medicines kit to keep us healthy.

The problem is doctors can't, won't or are prevented from properly evaluating the patient to see if this tool is the right one. They simply look at total cholesterol and/or LDL and prescribe the statin. From what I can see they do not look at other factors like inflammation, various HDL ratios, family histories, stress and other things that are involved in CVD.

The so called Heart Risk Calculator of a few years ago is a classic example of how bad things got. If you were a male of 65+ years, it didn't matter how healthy you were, the darn calculator recommended statin treatment. No wonder people question the 'experts'.

I think this Dr presents a more rational view of the way things should be:

https://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2019/01/03/show-1147-how-do-you-control-your-cholesterol/

From this paper (emphasis added by me):

https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(18)30404-2/fulltext

Three decades of RCTs, however, have yielded inconsistent and contradictory results. We must acknowledge these anoma-
lies and either modify or reject the lipid hypothesis. Clearly,
some individuals do benefit from lipid-modifying therapy. I believe the real question is how to identify them.
Nothing about this is easy.
 
Last edited:
Statins have a negative impact on memory.
 
Statins have a negative impact on memory.

Very true. And they can bring on diabetes in some people.

The trick is to weigh the risks. Right now, I don't get the impression that the risks are being weighed when most doctors recommend a statin. That's the whole point behind the radio show and article I mentioned above. Balance the risk between CVD disease in an individual and the risks of the treatment .

The medical profession really needs to get its act together on this.
 
Balance the risk between CVD disease in an individual and the risks of the treatment .


Right there is a very massive part of the problem. Doctors (at least every doctor I've ever seen) isn't the least bit interested in "an individual patient."

It's always: "Studies show". Ergo, I am 80% likely to have this or that and should be treated because the treatment is 51% effective in 4 out of 5 studies. How can you lose? It used to be taught in medical school that it was actually unethical and medically unsound to use group data as a basis for diagnosing and treating individuals. Like the average family has 2.1 children and both parents are 32.45 years old. They don't even apply to the specimens in the study
 
I don't mind a doctor writing and selling a book or two or three. But, when they start selling stuff like supplement pills, breakfast bars, nutrition shakes, powders to blend with kale juice, pudding purges to lower LDL levels, etc. I get suspicious.

Yep - that pretty much makes me write them off.
 
My doctor told me that to not prescribe statins was considered malpractice.

I guess there is a difference then between appropriate medical practice (following the hippocratic oath) and when your malpractice insurance wants the doctor to do. Hint - the latter does not protect the patient!!!!
 
Statins have a negative impact on memory.
People who take statins have memory loss. People who don't take statins have memory loss.

"While statin users have reported memory loss to the FDA, studies haven’t found evidence to support these claims. Research has actually suggested the opposite — that statins may help prevent Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia."

https://www.healthline.com/health/high-cholesterol/link-between-statins-and-memory-loss
 
I have known people with great memories prior to treatment that developed issues. Of course no way to know for sure if the drug caused the problem. You couldn’t pay me enough money to ever take a statin.
 
Back
Top Bottom