*Not* taking statins

[RAE]

I agree with that attitude. My calcium score was 370 (11 years ago) and I've never regarded it as a problem. But I'm one of those dangerous heretics who believes that your blood cholesterol has nothing whatever to do with your heart attack risk. Most people will ignore my comments because of that.

There is a ton of research out there now that supports what you say about cholesterol. In fact, people above a certain age (70 or so, as I recall), actually live longer if their total cholesterol is on the high side. The things to pay attention to include triglycerides, HDL, hBA1C, fasting insulin. Sometimes I wonder how many more decades we will have to endure all of the misinformation that we keep getting from the drug companies (and quite a few doctors), despite a huge amount of published studies now that refute much of it.

 

[youbet]

Sometimes I wonder how many more decades we will have to endure all of the misinformation that we keep getting from the drug companies (and quite a few doctors), despite a huge amount of published studies now that refute much of it.

It’s up to you. If you haven’t selected a doc that thinks the way you want and that you like and respect, then you’re your own problem RAE. Your lifestyle and whatever medical interventions you wish are entirely your responsibility and choice.

 

[braumeister]

It’s up to you. If you haven’t selected a doc that thinks the way you want and that you like and respect, then you’re your own problem RAE. Your lifestyle and whatever medical interventions you wish are entirely your responsibility and choice.

Aye, there's the rub.
When I went looking for a new doc a couple of years ago I found it a real challenge. I had to interview more of them than I expected in order to find a compatible one. I can only imagine how difficult it must be for some folks who have a more limited assortment to choose from.

 

[youbet]

Aye, there's the rub.
When I went looking for a new doc a couple of years ago I found it a real challenge. I had to interview more of them than I expected in order to find a compatible one. I can only imagine how difficult it must be for some folks who have a more limited assortment to choose from.

I’m sure that’s the case. But it’s an area where diligence and perseverance will pay dividends in your peace of mind.

 

[RAE]

Aye, there's the rub.
When I went looking for a new doc a couple of years ago I found it a real challenge. I had to interview more of them than I expected in order to find a compatible one. I can only imagine how difficult it must be for some folks who have a more limited assortment to choose from.

I live in a rural area, so I have a very limited of doctors to choose from here. And believe me, it is not easy to find a good one, although the one I have now (young guy) is at least willing to listen and consider information that is new to him. In defense of all doctors, though, sometimes I think the problem is mostly the system, not the doctor. From what I understand, the system often dictates what meds should be prescribed for certain conditions (like statins for cholesterol above a certain level), and if the doc chooses to not follow those guidelines, he/she needs to explain why. That's the kind of stuff that drives me crazy.

 

[braumeister]

I live in a rural area, so I have a very limited of doctors to choose from here. And believe me, it is not easy to find a good one, although the one I have now (young guy) is at least willing to listen and consider information that is new to him.

That's the ticket. The doc I chose was primarily old school, but he convinced me that he at least kept an open mind. He listened to my arguments, and offered a deal. If I would get a few tests he wanted to see, and passed them, he would be willing to ignore things like my high cholesterol. Sounded fair to me, so I got the tests, passed them with flying colors, and he admitted that my way worked (for me). Since then we have had an excellent relationship.

 

[Amethyst]

I am not sure there is such a Spanish Inquisition of every decision. In fact I doubt anybody, including my insurance company, has ever questioned any of my prescriptions or lack thereof.

As my doctor explained it, the AMA has a fairly complex protocol for prescribing statins and the like. Not just blood tests, but age, lifestyle, physical activity, and familial risk are factored in.

My doctor even told me that having male relatives, including an older brother, with heart disease doesn't statistically increase my risk. His explanation of that was complicated - something to do with X and Y chromosomes, plus the age at which my sibling first presented (<50 years old) and other things I don't now recall.

At any rate, I am fairly confident that if this doctor ever does decide I need statins, I probably do. Even though I hate the idea with a purple passion.

and if the doc chooses to not follow those guidelines, he/she needs to explain why. That's the kind of stuff that drives me crazy.

 

[audreyh1]

It was good to read thread this through again.

Just updated my Adventures in Ketosis thread. Dr. didn’t hassle me this time. My numbers had improved somewhat.

 

[Bongleur]

Eating lard is probably perfectly healthy. Conventional dietary advice is often quite wrong and govt nutritional guidelines are definitely wrong for most people.

this message is too short

 

[sengsational]

Yes, finding the right doctor is a problem. There probably would be more "good doctors" if the megapractices hadn't bought them all up. There are almost no doctors that aren't in one of two "systems" in my geography. And I agree that if a doctor "thinks for herself", she's got more work to do to justify why the standard, top-down protocol was not followed, to the letter. Frankly, who needs a real person as a doctor if all they do is type symptoms into a computer and do exactly what it says to do. Take out the middle-man!

As to the topic at hand, I generally disagree with the prescribing protocol, but am not to the point of "never a statin". Calculated LDL > 100, automatic statin doesn't fly with me, but one could build a story using CIMT and calcium score and inflammation indicators and LP(a) and, importantly, apoB.

 

[Dash man]

Yes, finding the right doctor is a problem. There probably would be more "good doctors" if the megapractices hadn't bought them all up. There are almost no doctors that aren't in one of two "systems" in my geography. And I agree that if a doctor "thinks for herself", she's got more work to do to justify why the standard, top-down protocol was not followed, to the letter. Frankly, who needs a real person as a doctor if all they do is type symptoms into a computer and do exactly what it says to do. Take out the middle-man!

As to the topic at hand, I generally disagree with the prescribing protocol, but am not to the point of "never a statin". Calculated LDL > 100, automatic statin doesn't fly with me, but one could build a story using CIMT and calcium score and inflammation indicators and LP(a) and, importantly, apoB.

My cardiologist didn’t put me on a statin until my calcium score came back as extremely high risk. My cholesterol had been a bit high before that and my HDL has always been low, usually 25-35. My LDL has dropped to <100. The 40mg atorvastatin has not given me any new problems. I take fish oil to keep my triglycerides down and magnesium every other night to prevent leg cramps that I had even before I started atorvastatin.
I also keep my estate plan up to date just in case...

 

[Chuckanut]

Frankly, who needs a real person as a doctor if all they do is type symptoms into a computer and do exactly what it says to do. Take out the middle-man!

.

Perhaps we are nearer to this than we think!

Emergency Medical Hologram Mark I

 

[googily]

Wandering into this thread as the holder of a statin rx after a "possible" TIA. Cholesterol has gotten high after I had gotten trigs way down and HDL up doing low carb (and had gotten on the Ignoring LDL bandwagon), but the pandemic laid waste to my eating habits. PCP had leaned on me big time a few months ago about a statin, and so I started 10mg Lipitor, but the muscle aches were ghastly and I stopped it.

Hard to argue over being given the new statin rx when I was laying on a gurney though.

Am asking for a CAC test, and with getting back on low carb, if I get a good CAC score I might have some ammunition for statin skepticism.

All tests in the hospital were clear of any issues--normal EKG, normal head MRI, normal head and neck CT angiogram, normal chest x-ray. BP next morning in the hospital was 117/73 (have been on just a diuretic for BP for at least 10 years). So I might be a bit skeptical as to whether I really had a TIA (about two hours of marked numbness/weakness in my hand and foot after I woke up suddenly from a nap). Only other news rx is low dose aspirin. But the statin concept just bugs me if the reasons aren't compelling.

 

[FloridaJim57]

At age 66, my cholesterol came in at 240. I was already on a low fat diet, very few eggs, very little beef, no bacon, no deserts, fat free milk, etc. My doctor suggested statins if the next test did not come in better. I started taking large doses of niacin, and four garlic tablets per day. I did not change my eating at all since it was very good to begin with. Within four months my cholesterol dropped fifty points and came in at 190. I cannot say if it was the niacin or garlic, but that is the only change I made.

 

[RAE]

Wandering into this thread as the holder of a statin rx after a "possible" TIA. Cholesterol has gotten high after I had gotten trigs way down and HDL up doing low carb (and had gotten on the Ignoring LDL bandwagon), but the pandemic laid waste to my eating habits. PCP had leaned on me big time a few months ago about a statin, and so I started 10mg Lipitor, but the muscle aches were ghastly and I stopped it.

So.......it sounds like you completely abandoned low-carb eating once the pandemic started? (or am I reading that wrong?). What kind of diet were your eating during the year or so leading up to the TIA, and did you put on some weight?

 

[googily]

So.......it sounds like you completely abandoned low-carb eating once the pandemic started? (or am I reading that wrong?). What kind of diet were your eating during the year or so leading up to the TIA, and did you put on some weight?

It wasn't right as the pandemic started, more from September through January. There was a tremendous amount of stress eating, with sugar being the main problem. I put on about 15 lbs--but I still weigh 65 lbs less than I did 15 years ago. (and now just "overweight" by the BMI tables).

Probably worse was that I wasn't getting much exercise--my job had me chained to my computer at home, and I didn't have the emotional fortitude at that time to get myself moving.

Had just started getting back on track, and now will be even more committed!

 

[RAE]

At age 66, my cholesterol came in at 240. I was already on a low fat diet, very few eggs, very little beef, no bacon, no deserts, fat free milk, etc. My doctor suggested statins if the next test did not come in better. I started taking large doses of niacin, and four garlic tablets per day. I did not change my eating at all since it was very good to begin with. Within four months my cholesterol dropped fifty points and came in at 190. I cannot say if it was the niacin or garlic, but that is the only change I made.

Cholesterol is a very poor indicator of heart disease risk, contrary to what you will hear from a lot of doctors. Lots of studies over the last decade or so bear this out. If you've had a lipid panel done, take a look at your Triglyceride/HDL ratio, for a much better indicator of heart disease risk. If you are below 2.0, you are doing pretty well. If you are closer to 1.0 or even below 1.0, your risk of heart disease is likely to be very low. Other blood tests that are very useful are HbA1C and fasting insulin, since insulin resistance is believed to be the real driver of many chronic diseases, including (in many cases) heart disease.

Also - saturated fat consumption does not cause heart disease, which (again), is contrary to what some doctors will tell you. Again, there are many, many recent studies that bear this out. Eating a diet high in refined carbs and other highly processed foods is much more likely to lead to heart disease (and other chronic diseases) over time.

Foods like beef and eggs are healthy, nutrient-dense foods, that should not increase heart disease risk at all (I eat plenty of both). It is the highly-processed foods you want to avoid, especially things made with refined grains, anything with added sugar, and highly processed seed oils.

 

[braumeister]

Cholesterol is a very poor indicator of heart disease risk, contrary to what you will hear from a lot of doctors. Lots of studies over the last decade or so bear this out. If you've had a lipid panel done, take a look at your Triglyceride/HDL ratio, for a much better indicator of heart disease risk. If you are below 2.0, you are doing pretty well. If you are closer to 1.0 or even below 1.0, your risk of heart disease is likely to be very low. Other blood tests that are very useful are HbA1C and fasting insulin, since insulin resistance is believed to be the real driver of many chronic diseases, including (in many cases) heart disease.

Also - saturated fat consumption does not cause heart disease, which (again), is contrary to what some doctors will tell you. Again, there are many, many recent studies that bear this out. Eating a diet high in refined carbs and other highly processed foods is much more likely to lead to heart disease (and other chronic diseases) over time.

Foods like beef and eggs are healthy, nutrient-dense foods, that should not increase heart disease risk at all (I eat plenty of both). It is the highly-processed foods you want to avoid, especially things made with refined grains, anything with added sugar, and highly processed seed oils.

I agree with all of this.
Statins have been shown to be somewhat helpful for men under 65 who have already had a heart attack, although not for anyone else.

 

[BoodaGazelle]

OP here.... I was just diagnosed with malignant (or "ill-tempered") melanoma, which BTW was successfully excised with no sign of metastasis. You can guess whether or not this makes me more or less likely to worry about my cholesterol.

 

[audreyh1]

OP here.... I was just diagnosed with malignant (or "ill-tempered") melanoma, which BTW was successfully excised with no sign of metastasis. You can guess whether or not this makes me more or less likely to worry about my cholesterol.

Oh wow! Glad the surgery appears to have taken care of it!

 

[googily]

OP here.... I was just diagnosed with malignant (or "ill-tempered") melanoma, which BTW was successfully excised with no sign of metastasis. You can guess whether or not this makes me more or less likely to worry about my cholesterol.

Yikes! So glad to hear that it sounds like it was caught early. And yes, I think you are justified in not caring too much about cholesterol! Best wishes as you heal....

 

[Amethyst]

That had to be awful. When I was working, and sometimes (depending on the assignment) chained to the computer, I took more and longer bathroom breaks just so I could scuttle up and down the hallways for exercise.

But in the house you don't really have that option, since you probably need to change clothes to go outside, which takes time.

Glad you are getting back on track!

Probably worse was that I wasn't getting much exercise--my job had me chained to my computer at home, and I didn't have the emotional fortitude at that time to get myself moving.

Had just started getting back on track, and now will be even more committed!

 

[googily]

That had to be awful. When I was working, and sometimes (depending on the assignment) chained to the computer, I took more and longer bathroom breaks just so I could scuttle up and down the hallways for exercise.



But in the house you don't really have that option, since you probably need to change clothes to go outside, which takes time.



Glad you are getting back on track!

Thanks, though in the interest of full disclosure, it's always been hard for me to be very interested in exercise. And I work for a Major Media Organization, so 2020 into early 2021 was an insane time. And I was/am deeply involved in the COVID coverage, so I worked seven days a week for most of that time and it was pretty hard to tear myself away to go anywhere other than the sofa to collapse.

 

[Amethyst]

I was in the Dept of Defense, so understand about round-the-clock crisis coverage Totally get it about collapsing as the only option. And it takes a while for the body to recover from such levels of use. Nature didn't design us for that.

Exercise isn't very interesting - but good health is. Good luck!

Thanks, though in the interest of full disclosure, it's always been hard for me to be very interested in exercise. And I work for a Major Media Organization, so 2020 into early 2021 was an insane time. And I was/am deeply involved in the COVID coverage, so I worked seven days a week for most of that time and it was pretty hard to tear myself away to go anywhere other than the sofa to collapse.

 

[googily]

I was in the Dept of Defense, so understand about round-the-clock crisis coverage Totally get it about collapsing as the only option. And it takes a while for the body to recover from such levels of use. Nature didn't design us for that.



Exercise isn't very interesting - but good health is. Good luck!

Ah yes, DoD, you are indeed well aware!

It's handy in a way that the suspected TIA is surprising enough to give me a kick in the pants but not because my body turned out to be full of danger signals. HBP and cholesterol are probably the easiest to deal with.