Dr. Suggested a Statin - I Said No Thanks

[sengsational]

.. a vast difference between the depth of expertise required to be a medical doctor—especially something like a cardiologist—and a car repair person.

But I expect if I take myself to two or three doctors, I might get two or three opinions on what to do, but if I take my car to two or three mechanics, they'd find three different ways to rip me off

 

[Pellice]

I was/am a sceptic about the importance of cholesterol numbers. And my mother literally begged me to never take statins, which she said "ruined" her. However, my cholesterol numbers slowly crept up, as did my blood pressure. And my family usually succumbs to cardio issues. I finally yielded to my doctor's pleas, and began to take 5mg Rosuvastatin daily. It DID get my numbers to "normal," and it DID NOT cause me any symptoms even after a few years of use. I am now glad I took my doctor's advice, and I do feel better than ever and plan to continue.

But the only conclusion I could (hesitantly) draw from my experience is to try it for a while. Statins can be discontinued if warranted.

 

[Dash man]

Interesting that no one in this thread has mentioned how statins reduce inflammation in the cardiovascular system. The body's reaction to inflammation in our arteries results in a higher risk of heart attack. When I was 48, I had my calcium score measured at zero. At 73 y.o., my calcium score is 119 measured a few months ago. I take 20 mg of atorvastatin a day along with a low dose aspirin. I get exercise and maintain an acceptable weight. I've not had any side effects that I can see from the statin. My doctor says I'm doing the right things.

I’m on 80mg of Atorvastatin daily, not to control my cholesterol, but to reduce inflammation. My calcium score was over 1,000 back in 2016 but cholesterol levels were good. Cardiologist put me on 40mg Atorvastatin back then. He doubled it this summer when I was hospitalized for chest pains and had two stents put in. I did not have a heart attack.
If a doctor wants to put you on a statin, ask him why. If it’s for cholesterol, you may want to get a calcium score before you start taking the medication. If he has reason to believe you need to control inflammation, then ask why he thinks so. For inflammation you probably should try it.

 

[qwerty3656]

I take low dose Rosuvastatin and low dose Ezetimibe, primarily for for anti-inflammatory purposes

 

[JBTX]

My most recent "physical" my cholesterol was a 245 which is considered "high".

HDL = 60
LDL = 149
Trig= 128

My weight is right where it needs to be. I exercise regularly.

I like many others try to avoid taking medication if possible. My Dr suggested a low dose of statins OR take Red Rice Yeast twice a day. I am going to try the RRY with CoQ10 and see if that helps, along with a few changes in my diet.. If that doesn't help then I am not opposed to taking a low dose. I will recheck my numbers in a few months and if they have not changed I will bite the bullet and take the low dose statins.

To each his own but I’d prefer a low dose statin to a supplement. The ingredients in RYR is basically the same as a statin, but probably much lower doses. Supplements are unregulated so you have no idea how much you may actually be getting or the quality of the overall ingredients. Regulations and quality control on prescriptions are very high.

 

[Lateboomer]

My doctor said I needed a statin matter of factly and did not offer discussion. As OP said, it was kind of the default path for them. Didn’t bother me but I pushed back since numbers were only high normal. I was a little overweight and knew I could clean up my diet. Tried it for like 4 months. New labs, no change whatsoever. Started normal 10mg starting dose rosuvastatin/Crestor. It blasted my LDL to rock bottom levels but caused a slight uptick in liver function labs. Cut dose to 5mg. No side effects, 57 LDL, zero calcium score 10 years into it. Glad I satisfied myself that couldn’t do it on my own and ultimately glad I went with the statin.

 

[Teacher Terry]

Many of the original statin studies were just done on men so really not applicable to women. I haven’t bothered to look to see if that’s changed.

There’s a lot of gray areas with statins with often a very small benefit for all but a select group with side effects of cognitive decline, liver problems and muscle pain/weakness. If I was in the select group of the studies then I might consider it.

Quality of life is more important to me and I have seen too many people in the older generations blindly following their doctor’s advice with negative consequences. Luckily we have the ability to research at our fingertips unlike the previous generations.

 

[euro]

Many of the original statin studies were just done on men so really not applicable to women. I haven’t bothered to look to see if that’s changed.

That is correct and it is by far THE biggest shortcoming in terms of clinical evidence for statin use. However, given that there is not much money to made from statins at this point (most are generic and cost pennies), there is really no hope that anyone will conduct additional trials in women now. That is unfortunate. However, that does NOT mean statins don't work in women, it just means there is no direct evidence. While it is possible that women have significantly different outcomes with statins, without more studies, we will never really know for sure. That said, there are MANY drugs that do work the same in men and women.

 

[Purslane]

Interesting interaction with the cardiologist re: my cholesterol. I recently went for a visit and the conclusion was that the chest pain was due to my high BP and now that my BP is in check, the pain is gone and he didn’t think I had symptoms consistent with a blockage. Also didn’t see the need for a stress test. He did run a cholesterol test though (results below) and to no surprise to me, he recommended a statin. Hard to understand given that my results came back all in range except for my non-HDL cholesterol.

The call was from a clinician and she said Dr. recommends a statin. She said, given my numbers, there’s a 14% chance of having a heart attack in the next ten years. Given what I understand about the side effects of statins and given that my numbers were basically in range, I said I’d pass.

Then, I looked into it more. Mayo Clinic has a cholesterol heart attack calculator. I put in my numbers and it basically agreed with the Dr. that my chances of a heart attack were about 10%. Then comes the fun part that is very irritating to me. The Mayo Clinic calculator has a tab for how your results will change if you take the statin. According to it, taking a statin I will still have an 8% chance of a heart attack. So, taking the statin only reduces my risk by about 2 to 3 percentage points. I feel it’s misleading the way it was presented to me from the Dr. office. There was no mention of the impact of taking the drug. Just the 14% number. There’s no way I’d subject myself to the side effects of a medication for so small of a potential impact. I wonder how many people just follow the advice and deal with the side effects of the statin. And, I wonder if they’d do the same if they understood the actual reduction they’d be looking at by taking it.


Cholesterol Results
Total 186
Triglycerides 118
HDL 42
Non-HDL Cholesterol 144 (High Normal is <130)
LDL 121
Chol/HDL Ratio 4.4

This sounds just like a good friend of mine. A few years ago the doc told him to take his statins. He said he was a scientist and had evaluated the data. Said his parents both lived to be old with no heart problems despite plenty of food, drink and smokes. Genetics was on his side.
Today my friend takes ALL of his prescribed medications, including his statins, which honestly are less worrisome to me than his blood thinners. The good folks in the cath lab inserted 3 stents before his heart attack had a chance to cause any lasting damage.
Today my friend is the poster child for clean eating, exercise and adhering to his doctor's advice. There is no angel like a reformed devil.
Only you can decide what you are willing to risk.
I am just offering an alternative viewpoint.
Your situation might be very different from my friend.
Or it might not.

 

[joesxm3]

I was a statins hater but having had the calcium score test and a CIMT that showed I had severe plaque I did a lot of research.

I concluded that while I think inflammation and insulin resistance are more likely to lead to soft plaque rupturing and causing a heart attack, it probably makes sense to take low dose rosuvastatin to reduce inflammation and help stabilize the plaque.

I think my lifestyle changes and losing 40 pounds are more help than the statin, but why not do both.

Watching too many lipidologists I started to get brainwashed by their argument about lipid particles causing plaque. So I figured "belt and suspenders".

But surprisingly the up to date lipidologists do not recommend high dose statins. " That is only looking for side effects".

I agreed to 10mg rosuvastatin despite preferring 5mg. That got my LDL from 170 to 109. When my cardiologist wanted to go to 20mg I talked him into doing combination therapy with 10mg Ezetimibe instead.

When he wants to go lower in three months I plan to ask to add 180mg bempedoic acid.

I agree with the idea of lowering the particle count but not by jacking up the statin dose.

The lipidologists all say that the newer drugs are better with less side effects and the National Lipidology Association is pushing to get the standard of care updated.

 

[badatmath]

I don't mean to offend anyone here but some folks on these threads act like statins are a miracle cure. My slim friend had 2 heart attacks (last one fatal) in his 50s while taking statins. . .

His father died young of a heart attack so i suspect just genetics but of course IDK.

 

[rembrandt]

I don't mean to offend anyone here but some folks on these threads act like statins are a miracle cure. My slim friend had 2 heart attacks (last one fatal) in his 50s while taking statins. . .

His father died young of a heart attack so i suspect just genetics but of course IDK.

Correlation does not imply causation.

 

[badatmath]

Correlation does not imply causation.

Of course I don't think the statin caused the heart attack!

I just don't understand why some of you worship big pharma.

No one gets out of this alive and we can all make our own choices.

 

[youbet]

My slim friend had 2 heart attacks (last one fatal) in his 50s while taking statins. . .

My condolences regarding your friend. I guess being slim isn't the cure-all it is sometimes perceived as.

 

[rembrandt]

 

[youbet]

I just don't understand why some of you worship big pharma.

No one gets out of this alive and we can all make our own choices.

I'm not hearing anyone "worshiping" big pharma. Some have just made the decision to use statins while you made the decision not to. As you say "we can all make our own choices."

 

[Dawg52]

I just don't understand why some of you worship big pharma.

No one gets out of this alive and we can all make our own choices.

I don’t worship big pharma. But since I’m not a doctor I do tend to follow my doctor’s advice. I’ve been on 20mg of Lovastatin for almost 20 years with no side effects and my blood work has been great. I’m comfortable with taking statins but if others are not they certainly have the option to pass. No skin off my nose.

 

[f35phixer]

Many of the original statin studies were just done on men so really not applicable to women. I haven’t bothered to look to see if that’s changed.

There’s a lot of gray areas with statins with often a very small benefit for all but a select group with side effects of cognitive decline, liver problems and muscle pain/weakness. If I was in the select group of the studies then I might consider it.

Quality of life is more important to me and I have seen too many people in the older generations blindly following their doctor’s advice with negative consequences. Luckily we have the ability to research at our fingertips unlike the previous generations.

Cholesterol, Total 242
Triglycerides 92
HDL Cholesterol 61
VLDL Cholesterol Cal 16
LDL Chol Calc (NIH) 163 High

Here's my May numbers, DR not concerned.....

I was on Pravastatin and this slowly happened to me - side effects of cognitive decline. Got seriously stupid.

Changed to Ezetimibe and back to normal stupid self ;-)

 

[Sojourner]

I just don't understand why some of you worship big pharma.

No one gets out of this alive and we can all make our own choices.

Appreciating the effectiveness of modern pharmaceuticals is a far cry from "worshiping big pharma". To worship implies blind adulation, devotion, and faith regardless of evidence. No one is doing that in this thread, from what I can tell.

Statins in particular have been studied extensively and have been shown to be highly effective for most people. To pretend this is not to case is to ignore reality. Modern pharmaceuticals have saved literally millions upon millions of lives over the past hundred years, and improved the health and quality of life for hundreds of millions. Please feel free to point out any factually incorrect statements I've made here.

 

[Jeffman52]

To each his own but I’d prefer a low dose statin to a supplement. The ingredients in RYR is basically the same as a statin, but probably much lower doses. Supplements are unregulated so you have no idea how much you may actually be getting or the quality of the overall ingredients. Regulations and quality control on prescriptions are very high.

Something to think about for sure. I have a new full bottle of RRY to go through, but after that is gone I may call my Dr and have them send in the prescription. One thing is that at Statin would be 1X per day and today I am doing 2X per day of RRY. Plus I agree with you on the dosing being more accurate on Statins than the supplement.