# Statins work.....



## Fab Foodie (14 Nov 2019)

Beware self-experimenting Anecdata within....

So after years of taking a high dose of Statins and barely ever getting below a Cholesterol reading of 6, I had a fit of pique in August and decided to come of all my medication for a couple of months (Fluoxetine, aspirin, beta-blockers and 80mg Atorvostatin) to see what happened and how I felt.
My Cholesterol has gone up to 9.4! (It has been just over 11 in my 20s when a heavy smoker).

So the Statins are doing something fab at least. I'm not expecting to make old bones but my 14 y/o stent is doing well and generally my ticker is in good shape following a recent Angiogram. I start taking them again tonight confident they are doing something valuable for me.

Other info:
Feel much better without Beta-blockers - even at lowest dose. Need Fluoxetine. Will take the aspirins....
BP low. Resting HR about low/average


----------



## The Crofted Crest (14 Nov 2019)

Have a chat with your cardiologist. He took me off artorvastatin when the cholesterol stalled and put me on rosuvastatin. LDL Now under 2. HDL not far behind.


----------



## vickster (14 Nov 2019)

The Crofted Crest said:


> Have a chat with your cardiologist. He took me off artorvastatin when the cholesterol stalled and put me on rosuvastatin. LDL Now under 2. HDL not far behind.


Ah good old (Crofted) Crestor


----------



## The Crofted Crest (14 Nov 2019)

vickster said:


> Ah good old (Crofted) Crestor



LOL. That is funnier than the entire Good Jokes thread!


----------



## Drago (14 Nov 2019)

Could the rise in cholesterol be anything to do with your sudden craving for lard sandwiches once the fluoxetine wore off?


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

Fab Foodie said:


> Beware self-experimenting Anecdata within....
> 
> So after years of taking a high dose of Statins and barely ever getting below a Cholesterol reading of 6, I had a fit of pique in August and decided to come of all my medication for a couple of months (Fluoxetine, aspirin, beta-blockers and 80mg Atorvostatin) to see what happened and how I felt.
> My Cholesterol has gone up to 9.4! (It has been just over 11 in my 20s when a heavy smoker).
> ...


Good Luck!


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

Like the OP I've put my money where my mouth is. The following email was sent a few minutes ago in response to an invitation to take part in a clinical trial for inclisiran, which is a drug designed to reduce levels of LDL cholesterol. I copied in my GP.

_Dear sir,

With reference to the above clinical trial I would like to make the following observations. Reducing my cholesterol levels is to be avoided as it will only reduce the length of my life. The statistics show that the higher the LDL the longer I will live. Don’t believe me ? Then please look at the references below.

The introduction into my system of inclisiran would lower my survival rate and I would think very carefully before you inject this stuff, what is in effect poison, into some poor unfortunate who doesn’t know any better.

I.e. Take this as a No from me.

Yours sincerely_





View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQWZbfkpNhY



https://sherifsultan.ie/about/


----------



## fossyant (15 Nov 2019)

They do work. Been on Atorvastatin for 3 months. Looks like my high cholesterol is genetic as both my parents are on statins. No side effects at all, just a 20mg dose, dropped from 7.5 to 5 in that short time. Doc happy.

Worth the old 'mature person's check up'. Especially having had a cycling mate drop dead a few months back. 

Doc more worried about another blood reading - it had dropped very low. Explained that was because the practice pharmacist had said my reading was high last time as I'd had the blood test just after my meds. So this time I didn't take my meds before the test, so it was low. Explained that the pharmacist didn't realise that my particular medication was daily, if I stop, my blood levels drop. Measuring bloods shortly after taking the meds will give a high.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

Just for the record I am 70 years old. My weight is 13 stone 3lbs *****. I had a heart attack in April 2004 caused by stress (my four businesses went under and the heart attack was 3 days later). I had a 2nd heart attack in June 2007 when I stood up to make my father of the bride speech in front of 200 or so guests. As I stood up I was acutely aware of a surge of cortisol in my body.

My blood pressure is that of a much younger man and yet every year without fail my GP (different ones in different places) has pushed Statins at me. One even said that I'd be dead within 2 years if I didn't take them. Well I take no meds** whatsoever. I am on a low carb diet and I exercise at least twice a week. In terms of strengths I can lift more in weight than I could when I was racing my bike. I believe that if I had continued to take statins I wouldn't be here now.

**Edit apart from aspirin 75 mg a day. ***** height 6 ft 0 ins


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

fossyant said:


> They do work. Been on Atorvastatin for 3 months. Looks like my high cholesterol is genetic as both my parents are on statins. No side effects at all, just a 20mg dose, dropped from 7.5 to 5 in that short time. Doc happy.
> 
> Worth the old 'mature person's check up'. Especially having had a cycling mate drop dead a few months back.
> 
> Doc more worried about another blood reading - it had dropped very low. Explained that was because the practice pharmacist had said my reading was high last time as I'd had the blood test just after my meds. So this time I didn't take my meds before the test, so it was low. Explained that the pharmacist didn't realise that my particular medication was daily, if I stop, my blood levels drop. Measuring bloods shortly after taking the meds will give a high.


Statins reduce cholesterol without a doubt. Please look at the bigger picture.


----------



## fossyant (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Statins reduce cholesterol without a doubt. Please look at the bigger picture.



I don't particularly like taking statins, but they work. If there were side effects then I wouldn't bother. My folks are mid 70's and still here, both in fairly good health. MIL was knackered by the time she was 70.

Two sides to every story and lots of scaremongering going on. I take two meds, a statin and one to maintain hormone levels following botched surgery. Everything else checks out fine ! 

Rather take the statins as a preventative.


----------



## classic33 (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Just for the record I am 70 years old. My weight is 13 stone 3lbs. I had a heart attack in April 2004 caused by stress (my four businesses went under and the heart attack was 3 days later). I had a 2nd heart attack in June 2007 when I stood up to make my father of the bride speech in front of 200 or so guests. As I stood up I was acutely aware of a surge of cortisol in my body.
> 
> My blood pressure is that of a much younger man and yet every year without fail my GP (different ones in different places) has pushed Statins at me. One even said that I'd be dead within 2 years if I didn't take them. Well I take no meds** whatsoever. I am on a low carb diet and I exercise at least twice a week. In terms of strengths I can lift more in weight than I could when I was racing my bike. I believe that if I had continued to take statins I wouldn't be here now.
> 
> ***Edit apart from aspirin 75 mg a day*


I can't take that unless I want a trip to A&E, looking at the "bigger picture" for myself. One man's meat, another man's poison.


----------



## Ian H (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Sherif Sultan


There are some voices saying that demonising cholesterol is wrong, but they are a minority. Shiny evangelical websites should start everyone's alarm-bells ringing. Read widely and critically.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

"_but they are a minority. " _
I think you'll find that those doctors who are proponents of statins are financially connected to the pharmaceutical companies as outlined here: 

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/

Lots of damning stuff on here including a copy of the letter sent to Sir Norman Lamb. Reprinted below

Sir Normal Lamb MP
Chairman, Science and Technology Select Committee
29/08/2019
Dear Norman,
*Re: The need for an independent reappraisal of the effects of statins*
Statins are the most widely prescribed class of drugs in the UK.[1] They were designed to lower the blood cholesterol (LDL) level and therefore prevent cardiovascular disease.
Publications based on clinical trials have reported reductions in cardiovascular disease in people at high and low risk, and also a very low rate of side effects (drug-related adverse events).
It has been widely claimed that statins have therefore been responsible for the considerable reduction in the cardiovascular disease seen over the past 30 years both in the UK and the rest of the Western World,[2] but there is evidence that refutes this claim. An ecological study using national databases of dispensed medicines and mortality rates, published in 2015, concluded: _‘Among the Western European countries studied, the large increase in statin utilisation between 2000 and 2012 was not associated with CHD mortality, nor with its rate of change over the years_.[3] In the UK, despite far greater statin prescribing, the rate of cardiovascular disease has been rising for the past four years.[4]
In the absence of an analysis of the clinical trial data carried out by an independent group with full access to the raw data in the form of “clinical study reports”, there is good reason to believe that the benefits of statins have been ‘overhyped’ especially in those at low risk of cardiovascular disease, and the potential harms downplayed, unpublished, or uncollected.
_Positive spin on the benefits of statins_
It is well recognised that ‘positive spin’ is used to ‘hype’ the results from clinical trials. This should not happen but is widespread. According to one review: ‘Clinical researchers are obligated to present results objectively and accurately to ensure readers are not misled. In studies in which primary end points are not statistically significant, placing a spin, defined as the manipulation of language to potentially mislead readers from the likely truth of the results, can distract the reader and lead to misinterpretation and misapplication of the findings.’[5]
The authors continued: ‘This study suggests that in reports of cardiovascular RCTs with statistically nonsignificant primary outcomes, investigators often manipulate the language of the report to detract from the neutral primary outcomes. To best apply evidence to patient care, consumers of cardiovascular research should be aware that peer review does not always preclude the use of misleading language in scientific articles.’ [5]
As one example of such positive spin in relation to statins, the lead author of the JUPITER trial, Paul Ridker, writing in a commentary in the journal _Circulation,_ summarised apparently statistically significant benefits between statin and placebo:
‘_The JUPITER trial was stopped early at the recommendation of its Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board after a median follow-up of 1.9 years (maximum follow-up 5 years) because of a 44% reduction in the trial primary end point of all vascular events (P<0.00001), a 54% reduction in myocardial infarction (P=0.0002), a 48% reduction in stroke (P=0.002), a 46% reduction in need for arterial revascularization (P<0.001), and a 20% reduction in all cause mortality (P=0.02).’ _[6]
Picking up on these figures, another well-known cardiologist wrote in equally positive terms:_ ‘Data from the 2008 JUPITER Trial suggest a 54 percent heart attack risk reduction and a 48 percent stroke risk reduction in people at risk for heart disease who used statins as preventive medicine. I don’t think anyone doubts statins save lives._’[7]
In fact in the JUPITER trial there was no statistically significant difference in deaths from cardiovascular disease among those taking rosuvastatin compared with placebo. There were 12 deaths from stroke and myocardial infarction in both groups among those receiving placebo, exactly the same number as in the rosuvastatin arm.[8] So the results of this clinical trial do not support claims that statins save lives from cardiovascular disease. This dissonance between the actual results of statin trials and the way they are reported is widespread.[9]
Other studies, looking at whether statins increase in life expectancy have found that, in high risk patients, they may extend life by approximately four days, after five years of treatment.[10] Doubts have also been raised about the claims of benefit in otherwise healthy people aged over 75, in whom statins are now being actively promoted.[11]
An overview of systematic reviews that examined the benefits of statins using only data from patients at low risk of cardiovascular disease found that those taking statins had fewer events than those not taking statins. However, when the results were stratified by the patients’ baseline risk, there was no statistically significant benefit for the majority of outcomes.[12] In conclusion, the absolute benefits in people at low risk are relatively small. If the 2016 guidelines are implemented in full, large numbers of otherwise healthy people will be offered statins, it has been estimated that 400 will need to take statins for five years to prevent one person from suffering a cardiovascular event.[13]
This information is not routinely given to patients, or indeed doctors who prescribe statins, and both doctors and patients therefore tend to have false expectations of the benefits of statins. Clinical guidelines call for shared decision making, including informing patients of the actual likelihood of benefits and risks, but this rarely occurs. There are also obvious questions in relation to value-for-money and the efficient use of finite healthcare budgets.
_Side effects/adverse effects underplayed_
There has been a heated debate about the adverse effects of statins. On one side, it is claimed that the rate of adverse effects is extremely low, affecting fewer than one in a thousand people.[14] Other studies have suggested adverse events are common, with up to 45% of people reporting problems.[15]
Attempts to resolve this important controversy have been hampered by the fact that the data on adverse effects reported in the clinical trials are not available for scrutiny by independent researchers. The data from the major trials of statins are held by the Cholesterol Treatment Triallists Collaboration (CTT) in Oxford and they have agreed amongst themselves not to allow access by anyone else.[16] Many groups, have called for access to these data, but so far, this has not been granted.[17]
It is not even clear whether the CTT themselves have all the adverse effect data, since the relevant Cochrane Review Group does not seem to have had access to them. According to Professor Harriet Rosenberg of the Health and Society Program at York University: “It’s not clear if the AE (adverse events) data was withheld from the Cochrane reviewers (by CTT) or were not collected in the original trials.”[18]
When asked the lead author of the Cochrane review, Dr Shah Ebrahim, the CTT did not have the data. “Full disclosure of all the adverse events by type and allocation from the RCTs is now really needed, as the CTT does not seem to have these data.”[18]
Release of the data would undoubtedly help answer the question on how and whether the trials collected data on the most common side effects of muscle pain, weakness or cramps.
_Summary_
Rather than mass prescription based on incomplete and selective information, patients and the public deserve an objective account so that individuals can make their own informed decisions.
We believe there is now an urgent need for a full independent parliamentary investigation into statins:

a class of drug prescribed to millions in the UK and tens of millions across the world.
which, based on the publications available, have had their benefits subjected to significant positive spin, especially among people at low risk of cardiovascular disease, and their potential adverse effects downplayed
where independence would mean review of the complete trial data by experts with no ties to industry and who have not previously undertaken or meta-analysed clinical trials of statins.
Among the signatories to this letter, there are a range of views: some of us are deeply sceptical of the benefits of statins, others are neutral or agnostic. But all are strongly of the view that such confusion, doubt and lack of transparency about the effects of a class of drug that is so widely prescribed is truly shocking and must be a matter of major public concern.
Yours Sincerely,
Dr Aseem Malhotra, NHS Consultant Cardiologist and Visiting Professor of Evidence Based Medicine, Bahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Salvador, Brazil.
Dr John Abramson, Lecturer, Department of Healthcare Policy, Harvard Medical School
Dr JS Bamrah CBE, Chairman, British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin.
Dr Kailash Chand OBE, Honorary Vice President of the British Medical Association (signing in a personal capacity)
Professor Luis Correia, Cardiologist, Director of the Centre of Evidence Based Medicine, Bahiana School of Medicine and Public Health, Salvador Brazil. Editor in Chief, The Journal of Evidence Based Healthcare
Dr Michel De-Lorgeril, Cardiologist, TIMC-IMAG, School of Medicine, University of Grenoble-Alpes, Grenoble, France.
Dr David Diamond, Cardiovascular Research Scientist, Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA
Dr Jason Fung, Nephrologist and Chief of the Department of Medicine, The Scarborough Hospital, Toronto, Canada and Editor in Chief of the Journal of Insulin Resistance.
Dr Fiona Godlee, Editor in Chief, The BMJ
Dr Malcolm Kendrick, General Practitioner
Dr Campbell Murdoch, General Practitioner, NHS England Sustainable Improvement Team, Clinical Adviser
Professor Rita Redberg, Cardiologist, University of California, San-Francisco.
Professor Sherif Sultan, President, International Vascular Society
Sir Richard Thompson, Past President, The Royal College of Physicians
Professor Shahriar Zehtabchi, Editor in Chief, TheNNT.com, and Professor and Vice Chairman for Scientific Affairs Research, SUNY Downstate Health Science University, Brooklyn, New York
1: https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/treatments/statins
2: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1933287415004493
3: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/3/e010500
4: https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/n...nder-75s-see-first-sustained-rise-in-50-years
5: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2732330
6: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.109.868299
7: https://utswmed.org/medblog/statins-debate/
8: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0807646
9:https://www.researchgate.net/public...econdary_prevention_of_cardiovascular_disease
10: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/9/e007118

Armitage J, Baigent C, Barnes E, Betteridge DJ, Blackwell L, Blazing M, et al. Efficacy and safety of statin therapy in older people: a meta-analysis of individual participant data from 28 randomised controlled trials. The Lancet. 2019;393(10170):407-15.
Byrne P, Cullinan J, Smith A, Smith SM. Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: an overview of systematic reviews. BMJ Open. 2019; 9(4):[e023085 p.]. Available from: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/9/4/e023085.full.pdf.
Byrne P, Cullinan J, Gillespie P, Perera R, Smith SM. Statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: modelling guidelines and patient preferences based on an Irish cohort. Br J Gen Pract. 2019. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp19X702701.
14: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)31357-5/fulltext
15: https://www.lipid.org/nla/usage-survey
16: https://www.ctsu.ox.ac.uk/research/ctt
17: https://www.bmj.com/campaign/statins-open-data
18: http://healthinsightuk.org/2015/02/19/keep-statin-supremo-away-from-the-missing-side-effect-data/

Will this have any impact, on anything. We must keep bashing away, until the nonsense about cholesterol – has gone.

Insignificant minority? Don't think so.

Sky news clip here

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxCO9iiJYDw


----------



## fossyant (15 Nov 2019)

A bit of googling can put up as many arguments for them too. 

I'd rather not go along with a 7.5 reading despite exercise and a good diet. I'm already in a very low risk category for heart problems, nor are there any on either side of my parents. I've no side effects from my low dose. My mate dropped dead and he was 'healthy'.

My dose is a quarter of what Fab Foodie is on, but it's lowered my cholesterol massively, and quickly. I've got a good ticker, I'd rather keep it that way.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

Still think that fat is bad for you then watch this


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzQAHITIUhg


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

fossyant said:


> A bit of googling can put up as many arguments for them too.
> 
> I'd rather not go along with a 7.5 reading despite exercise and a good diet. I'm already in a very low risk category for heart problems, nor are there any on either side of my parents. I've no side effects from my low dose. My mate dropped dead and he was 'healthy'.
> 
> My dose is a quarter of what Fab Foodie is on, but it's lowered my cholesterol massively, and quickly. I've got a good ticker, I'd rather keep it that way.


_A bit of googling can put up as many arguments for them too.  _

Good Luck!


----------



## fossyant (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> _A bit of googling can put up as many arguments for them too. _
> 
> Good Luck!



I can't be ar$ed. I'm not either for or against statins, nor am I bothered about fat in foods as I eat a good balanced diet (I like food too much).

Having a very high blood cholesterol isn't good for the arteries. Not being funny, but you are most likely on a stack of other medication for your two heart attacks, and adding in something else probably isn't going to help anyway. Beta blockers are a nasty medication with lots of side effects.

There are a few people on this thread that they have worked well for.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

Going back to April 2004. I had a heart attack. MY GP gave me a cocktail of drugs to take. A sort of tick box situation. I told him that I intended to return to riding my bike as exercise with a view to race again. OK so far. I rode my socks off in training and went out with the Kingston Wheelers and after a time could hold my own on club rides of 3/4 hours duration. I started racing in February 2005 and surprised lots of people with my performance. On track here we go. In April 2005 within 12 months of my heart attack I did a 25 mile TT and on a cold windy day with my disc rear wheel shuddering like mad as soon as I hit over 30 mph I did 1.00.04. As good as an hour. From then on things did not improve. By now I was on 80 mg Lipitor. I was suffering from massive muscle pains in my thighs. I was getting palpitations and suffered erectile dysfunction, fatigue like you wouldn't believe. On finishing my next and last race where I literally fell off the bike at the finish, ( I couldn't stand up) I googled statins and you know the rest

That is why I tell everyone I can about them. back in 2005 I was labelled a nutter and suffered loads of abuse online. I wish that there was a me in 2004 out there who could have warned me. You guys reading this have no excuse.


----------



## classic33 (15 Nov 2019)

@Bill Gates, when you were started on the asprin, we're you told that stopping it doubles your risk of another heart attack. The research is out there, easy find as it's listed under the known side effects.

And if we're allowed to tell others that we feel that the medication they are taking for long term conditions, based on our own experiences as evidence to back up what we are saying, then I'll say that all painkillers and local anaesthetics be banned.

I'm unable to be take/be given either. The last was given in the A&E, and it stopped the heart. The same as it did in 2011, in the same A&E and at a dentists some years before that. Thinking about it, I ended up in the same A&E. Outside of a hospital ward, I've not been able to take or be prescribed painkillers.

We are all different, and we all react to the same medications in our own ways. It's why the Yellow Card system is in place. To report any side effects not listed. For me, reporting it got the trusts computers "talking to one another". I just avoid taking them, without saying others are wrong for taking what works for them.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

classic33 said:


> @Bill Gates, when you were started on the asprin, we're you told that stopping it doubles your risk of another heart attack. The research is out there, easy find as it's listed under the known side effects.
> 
> And if we're allowed to tell others that we feel that the medication they are taking for long term conditions, based on our own experiences as evidence to back up what we are saying, then I'll say that all painkillers and local anaesthetics be banned.
> 
> ...


_when you were started on the asprin, we're you told that stopping it doubles your risk of another heart attack. The research is out there, easy find as it's listed under the known side effects. _

Genuinely interested. Please show me


----------



## PK99 (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Like the OP I've put my money where my mouth is. The following email was sent a few minutes ago in response to an invitation to take part in a clinical trial for inclisiran, which is a drug designed to reduce levels of LDL cholesterol. I copied in my GP.
> 
> _Dear sir,
> 
> ...




A contrary medical view of Sultan's work and recommendations:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/hse-gags-surgeon-after-cholesterol-drug-claims-29636095.html


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

PK99 said:


> A contrary medical view of Sultan's work and recommendations:
> 
> https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/hse-gags-surgeon-after-cholesterol-drug-claims-29636095.html


And that's from from Oct 2013. Professor Sultan has already referred to the fact he was getting gagging orders. All the stuff on here is very recent


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

PK99 said:


> A contrary medical view of Sultan's work and recommendations:
> 
> https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/hse-gags-surgeon-after-cholesterol-drug-claims-29636095.html


You're unconvinced. Fair enough. If you want to keep taking statins then no one is stopping you. Good Luck


----------



## winjim (15 Nov 2019)

IMHO any professional in any field who refers to themselves as 'the best' is probably one to avoid. Braggadocio is an admirable quality in sportspeople and rappers, not doctors and surgeons.


----------



## vickster (15 Nov 2019)

The


classic33 said:


> We are all different, and we all react to the same medications in our own ways. It's why the Yellow Card system is in place. To report any side effects not listed. For me, reporting it got the trusts computers "talking to one another". I just avoid taking them, without saying others are wrong for taking what works for them.


indeed. And why every pack of medication comes with a detailed PIL informing of potential side effects / contraindications/ interactions that have been documented to date, frequent and rare which is there for every patient to read and discuss with their HCP if they have concerns or a need for more info


----------



## Drago (15 Nov 2019)

winjim said:


> IMHO any professional in any field who refers to themselves as 'the best' is probably one to avoid. Braggadocio is an admirable quality in sportspeople and rappers, not doctors and surgeons.


But what if he really is the best? He might simply be brilliant an honest. 

We can't simply assume that all people who claim to excell are being chumps. Assumptions is what starts threads like this in the first place.


----------



## Ian H (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> "_but they are a minority. " _
> I think you'll find that those doctors who are proponents of statins are financially connected to the pharmaceutical companies as outlined here:
> 
> https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/


Ah! Conspiracy theories. Fair enough if that's your thing.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Malcolm_Kendrick


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

Ian H said:


> Ah! Conspiracy theories. Fair enough if that's your thing.
> https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Malcolm_Kendrick


Definitely is. Guilty and extremely healthy with bags of energy at the age of 70, as charged.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

vickster said:


> The
> 
> indeed. And why every pack of medication comes with a detailed PIL informing of potential side effects / contraindications/ interactions that have been documented to date, frequent and rare which is there for every patient to read and discuss with their HCP if they have concerns or a need for more info


Not my quote WTF

If you suffer side effects its too late. The damage is done. In my case, according Professor Sultan, to recover would take 12 months. Like I said in a separate thread The guidelines do not tell you what causes the side effects. Exercise !!! One of the things that you should do is the very thing that gives you the problems. What they should say writ bold is *If you exercise you will get side effects*


----------



## vickster (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Not my quote WTF


I managed to pick up @classic33 tag, I was responding to him. Edited


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

classic33 said:


> @Bill Gates, whe_n you were started on the asprin, we're you told that stopping it doubles your risk of another heart attack. The research is out there, easy find as it's listed under the known side effects._
> 
> And if we're allowed to tell others that we feel that the medication they are taking for long term conditions, based on our own experiences as evidence to back up what we are saying, then I'll say that all painkillers and local anaesthetics be banned.
> 
> ...


Already asked for info on this from you but looked it up myself. If I stop taking aspirin abruptly then I'm at more risk of a heart attack. I concur with this. I wasn't taking my aspirin for a few days prior to my second heart attack as I left them behind and I was staying in a hotel. Never missed a day since


----------



## winjim (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> "_but they are a minority. " _
> I think you'll find that those doctors who are proponents of statins are financially connected to the pharmaceutical companies as outlined here:
> 
> https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/
> ...



Just skimming that first link which seems predicated on the assumption that lipoproteins cannot penetrate the endothelium. That may be true for a healthy endothelium, but current thinking is that the initial step in the formation of an atherosclerotic plaque requires some sort of endothelial cell dysfunction, so that assumption does not necessarily hold.

As for that letter, I think everybody would argue that there should be greater transparency in clinical trials, and more evidence relating to the use of statins would indeed be a good thing, but big pharma having its problems does not mean we shouldn't approach some of the more iconoclastic claims about healthcare without a good deal of skepticism.


----------



## nickyboy (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Going back to April 2004. I had a heart attack. MY GP gave me a cocktail of drugs to take. A sort of tick box situation. I told him that I intended to return to riding my bike as exercise with a view to race again. OK so far. I rode my socks off in training and went out with the Kingston Wheelers and after a time could hold my own on club rides of 3/4 hours duration. I started racing in February 2005 and surprised lots of people with my performance. On track here we go. In April 2005 within 12 months of my heart attack I did a 25 mile TT and on a cold windy day with my disc rear wheel shuddering like mad as soon as I hit over 30 mph I did 1.00.04. As good as an hour. From then on things did not improve. By now I was on 80 mg Lipitor. I was suffering from massive muscle pains in my thighs. I was getting palpitations and suffered erectile dysfunction, fatigue like you wouldn't believe. On finishing my nest and last race where I literally fell off the bike at the finish, ( I couldn't stand up) I googled statins and you know the rest
> 
> That is why I tell everyone I can about them. back in 2005 I was labelled a nutter and suffered loads of abuse online. I wish that there was a me in 2004 out there who could have warned me. You guys reading this have no excuse.


Everyone who takes statins, or any long term medication for that matter, reacts differently. Clearly your reaction was significantly adverse. But that doesn't mean that everyone's reaction will be similarly adverse and, as such, everyone's decision regarding statins or any long term medication is personal to them

FWIW, I started taking 20mg Artarvostatins about 5 years ago as I have familial hypercholersterolemia; my high cholesterol (about 6.5 LDL) wasn't lifestyle related and I couldn't reduce it much myself. Within a few months it was 2.5 and has been ever since. No side effects whatsoever. So my downside of taking them is it costs me the prescription charge. The upside is it reduces my LDL to low levels. Whether that actually reduces my risk is another matter. But evidence suggests it certainly does no harm and plenty of studies conclude it does me some good.


----------



## winjim (15 Nov 2019)

Drago said:


> But what if he really is the best? He might simply be brilliant an honest.
> 
> We can't simply assume that all people who claim to excell are being chumps. Assumptions is what starts threads like this in the first place.


Because it's the kind of claim that makes me suspicious that he might not be too keen on admitting his own faults, or asking for help, or consenting his patients properly, or consulting the evidence, or following guidelines. It smacks of hubris.

One of the qualities of a good doctor or surgeon (or in fact a good person generally) is, IMO humility, so anybody claiming to be the best can't possibly be.

Except maybe LL Cool J


View: https://youtu.be/lLte2Bz-E-E


----------



## PK99 (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> You're unconvinced. Fair enough. If you want to keep taking statins then no one is stopping you. Good Luck



I actually had an adverse reaction after being on Lipitor for several years - an induced Lupus like rash, linked to Sjogren's Syndrome a longstanding autoimmune condition.

I was switched to Ezitimibe, a much more expensive way of controlling cholesterol. (Blocks gut transfer rather that production)

But I don't generalise from my specifics and don't choose to spread scare stories.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

Just looking for a bit of support and found this from this forum : - Anyone on Statins 25Oct 2017 Page 2 Johnsop99

Quote:
I_ have high cholesterol readings, when living in France on I was put onto Statins but I didn't like taking them and so I opted to take myself off them, an action which was much to my French doctors dismay!
Some months after doing this and whilst still having monthly blood tests, I had a replacement hip opp at the Clinique du Sport at Merignac Bordeaux which is the top clinic of its' type in the whole of France. To say the Clinique was thorough is a profound understatement because prior to my opp I had to undergo numerous tests and checks one of which, because of my cholesterol levels, was an ultra sound as well as a CT scan of my heart, the results of which quite frankly amazed the consultant undertaking the tests, the reason being that I have absolutely zero furring up of any of my arteries.

On my return to living once more in the UK, when in conversation with my local GP in Wales, I told him about my cholesterol levels and the tests that had been carried out and his reaction was a real eye opener as he started banging his desk whilst saying "YES, YES, YES" etc.!
It turned out that prior to becoming a GP he had worked for a long time with a study group at Cambridge University, he said their research had revealed a sizeable majority of people who are on Statins do not need to be, he also told me of a remote tribal group somewhere in Africa they had found all of whom had exceptionally high cholesterol and yet they were existing on a nigh on perfect diet with virtually no fats or sugars, very high levels of exercise and on checking this entire remote group, they didn't find a single person with any signs of furred up arteries.

So if you are on Statins, do you really have to be on them? _

Unquote

I changing my avatar to the lone voice in the wilderness apart from Johnsop99. Where the hell are you?


----------



## fossyant (15 Nov 2019)

Thing is, that particular drug didn't work for you, and was worse than the 'benefit'. I am keeping an eye on side effects, I've had none, and if anything, actually feel better than ever and am improving on the bike (despite not riding as much as I'd like) backed up by strava records for 'controlled situations' (i.e. riding on Zwift, doing the same course on the same equipment is showing steady gains).

One of the statins my mum had made her ill, she changed drug. I will not take amitryptyline, pregablin, gabapentin or duloxetine. These have an off label function of helping with chronic pain (broken spine 4 years ago), but despite them working to help pain, I had a whole lot of side effects which actually were worse than being in pain (loss of appetite, brain zaps, numb muscles, ED, poor sleep, nausea and I could go on) - they were also horrendous to come off them - ended up off sick as I was so dizzy on a number of occasions. 

I could go onto google and bring up all sorts of good or bad studies against them, but what's the point - plenty of folk get on with these drugs and they help them. 

Hence as others have said, what suits one, doesn't suit another. If I have side effects then I will re-consider, but at the moment, they are lowering my cholesterol from an overly high level which could lead to heart attack or stroke. I don't particularly want one, I'm genetically inclined to have a 'bad level' which could cause a heart attack in time. 

No point demonising particular drugs. Beta blockers are certainly no help if you want to exercise - they will slow you down.


----------



## fossyant (15 Nov 2019)

Well, as a completely uncontrolled group from Cycle Chat, most of us who are on the various forms of the drug are fine with it.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

fossyant said:


> Well, as a completely uncontrolled group from Cycle Chat, most of us who are on the various forms of the drug are fine with it.


That's alright then.


----------



## derrick (15 Nov 2019)

Been on statins for 10 years, no problems, was prescibed Statins , Beater blockers, and Asprin. stopped taking Beater blockers 6 months after having two stents fitted. so now it's Statins and Asprin. I am doing alright, have reguler checkups and blood test, Just had the yearly mot, Good for another year or so.
Did a 50 mile ride two weeks after having had the stents fitted. Mrs had a right go at me. but spoke to the Doc a bit later he said thats fine,


----------



## classic33 (15 Nov 2019)

I've had side effects from medication taken, there is research done by the manufacturers, but I'd never tell anyone else that due to what happened to me they should stop taking them.

You will have "Yellow Carded" the side effects. That way it gets fed back to the manufacturer, and gets included in the list of known side effects.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

classic33 said:


> That last part applying to all, yourself included.
> 
> I've had side effects from medication taken, there is research done by the manufacturers, but I'd never tell anyone else that due to what happened to me they should stop taking them.
> 
> You will have "Yellow Carded" the side effects. That way it gets fed back to the manufacturer, and gets included in the list of known side effects.


Good reply. We are different animals. The manufacturers in this case are the drug companies making billions from statins. You can't honestly think they are going to listen to one patient or even a million patients or even 25 million patients complaining of side effects. The evidence put forward for statins is fatally flawed. They already know it. *This is a gigantic scandal.* I have given numerous examples of this on here. In the future they are going to give out pills that increases cholesterol because all the data shows that higher levels of cholesterol increase longevity.

You should be telling your family, friends, neighbours, work mates in fact anybody you meet who takes statins so thay make an informed choice on taking them. I'm on here telling you guys and you have made your choice. Fair enough. All I know is that I wish I knew then back in 2004 what I know some 15 years later and still I'm classed as a scaremongerer.

I think this should be my last word on the subject.


----------



## winjim (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Supplying a link which defines who thinks what and why does jack sh*t


There are undoutedly issues with statins. If you search on this forum you can read several anecdotal reports of side effects, although from what I see these are fairly well documented and accounted for. There are problems with the way big pharma conducts itself regarding clinical trial transparency, publication bias and cherry-picking, not to mention marketing. All that is true.

What the RationalWiki page (not Wikipedia) does is describe a profile of what they call a statin (or cholesterol) denialist, which appears to be someone engaging in pseudoscientific argument to make a range of points about statins and cholesterol including but not limited to the points above, and including what we might call some more unorthodox ideas promoted by some rather less than mainstream characters. And the more somebody fits that profile, and the more they use a scattergun approach to make many different points, or resort to irrational pr emotionsl arguments without proper evidence, the more it dilutes any legitimate concerns they have, and the less likely they are to be taken seriously.


----------



## slowmotion (15 Nov 2019)

I've been taking them for seven years and I don't seem to have any side effects. I have no idea if they do any good but I tend to trust people who have spent years as doctors slightly more than a bunch of Keyboard Kildares.


----------



## classic33 (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Good reply. We are different animals. The manufacturers in this case are the drug companies making billions from statins. You can't honestly think they are going to listen to one patient or even a million patients or even 25 million patients complaining of side effects. The evidence put forward for statins is fatally flawed. They already know it. *This is a gigantic scandal.* I have given numerous examples of this on here. In the future they are going to give out pills that increases cholesterol because all the data shows that higher levels of cholesterol increase longevity.
> 
> You should be telling your family, friends, neighbours, work mates in fact anybody you meet who takes statins so thay make an informed choice on taking them. I'm on here telling you guys and you have made your choice. Fair enough. All I know is that I wish I knew then back in 2004 what I know some 15 years later and still I'm classed as a scaremongerer.
> 
> I think this should be my last word on the subject.


Two things:
I'm not taking statins.
The Yellow Card system, if you'd used to report the side effects, will get it listed. Case in point being TegratolTrobalt. No longer available, due to the number of people using the Yellow Card system.

Edited to correct the drug name.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

winjim said:


> There are undoutedly issues with statins. If you search on this forum you can read several anecdotal reports of side effects, although from what I see these are fairly well documented and accounted for. There are problems with the way big pharma conducts itself regarding clinical trial transparency, publication bias and cherry-picking, not to mention marketing. All that is true.
> 
> What the RationalWiki page (not Wikipedia) does is describe a profile of what they call a statin (or cholesterol) denialist, which appears to be someone engaging in pseudoscientific argument to make a range of points about statins and cholesterol including but not limited to the points above, and including what we might call some more unorthodox ideas promoted by some rather less than mainstream characters. And the more somebody fits that profile, and the more they use a scattergun approach to make many different points, or resort to irrational pr emotionsl arguments without proper evidence, the more it dilutes any legitimate concerns they have, and the less likely they are to be taken seriously.


Their definition. We haven't moved forward on this at all.


----------



## Bill Gates (15 Nov 2019)

slowmotion said:


> I've been taking them for seven years and I don't seem to have any side effects. I have no idea if they do any good but I tend to trust people who have spent years as doctors slightly more than a bunch of Keyboard Kildares.


Good Luck to you and all who think like you. Seriously.


----------



## slowmotion (15 Nov 2019)

Bill Gates said:


> Good Luck to you and all who think like you. Seriously.


So far, I don't seem to have needed it.
BTW, I won't be moving over to homeopathy either in the near future.


----------



## PK99 (15 Nov 2019)

winjim said:


> What the RationalWiki page (not Wikipedia) does is describe a profile of what they call a statin (or cholesterol) denialist, which appears to be someone engaging in pseudoscientific argument to make a range of points about statins and cholesterol including but not limited to the points above, and including what we might call some more unorthodox ideas promoted by some rather less than mainstream characters. And the more somebody fits that profile, and the more they use a scattergun approach to make many different points, or resort to irrational pr emotionsl arguments without proper evidence, the more it dilutes any legitimate concerns they have, and the less likely they are to be taken seriously.



Thanks for that reference. First time I have come across it. 
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Statin_denialism

It explains why some of the attitudes and arguments from BG echo and parallel attitudes and arguments I have seen elsewhere from AniVaxxers

EG _Statin denialists are known to exaggerate the side effects of statins and utilize scaremongering tactics._
and:
_Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology Rory Collins has compared statin denialism to flat earthism, he has noted "the claims that blood LDL cholesterol levels are not causally related to cardiovascular disease (which is really in the same realm as claiming that smoking does not cause cancer) are factually false."[1]_


----------



## Moderators (15 Nov 2019)

We have received several reports about this thread. It is now temporarily locked. The Moderators team may reopen it, when they have had time to review the complaints.


----------



## Moderators (15 Nov 2019)

Thread now reopened.
Please stay on topic, thanks.


----------



## Fab Foodie (15 Nov 2019)

Anyone like to rant evangelically on the subject? The floor’s all yours.....


----------



## Rocky (16 Nov 2019)

Fab Foodie said:


> Anyone like to rant evangelically on the subject? The floor’s all yours.....


I love statins......they give me weird dreams and give me the same level of muscle ache that I used to get after doing an Ironman. All the pain without the effort!! And all free on the NHS.

BTW, I’ve no idea what they are doing to my cholesterol.


----------



## Smudge (16 Nov 2019)

For me, the side effects i had on statins were bad enough that i'd rather take my chances with high cholesterol.
I tried them again recently, and they were just as bad as when i tried them many years back.


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 Nov 2019)

Viking said:


> I’ve been on statins for decades. Originally Simvastatin and then switched to Atorvastatin because it was more successful in reducing my cholesterol levels. I was initially on 40mg but that was reduced to 20mg to see if it had any impact. The levels went up a bit but were still acceptable, so I remained on 20mg. At no time with either statins and dosage level, did I get muscle pain or other noticed side effects
> 
> After my latest stenting, I was moved back up to 40mg of Atorvastatin and much to my surprise, and completely against my expectations, I got pretty severe muscle pains when exercising. As a trial, I switched back to 20mg and the pain disappeared. After talking this through with my GP, I remained on the 20mg for three months and then went back up to the 40mg dosage..... No muscle pain at all this time and that’s the way it has remained. I don’t understand it, neither does my GP but we are both happy now. Go figure.


‘The dose defines the poison‘ somebody smart once said....


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 Nov 2019)

Brompton Bruce said:


> I love statins......they give me weird dreams and give me the same level of muscle ache that I used to get after doing an Ironman. All the pain without the effort!! And all free on the NHS.
> 
> BTW, I’ve no idea what they are doing to my cholesterol.


Maybe check to see? If they’re not doing much, kick-em into touch. If you can see a Doctor, just ask!


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 Nov 2019)

Viking said:


> And that goes nowhere towards explain differing reactions to same dosage levels


Not completely, no. But the body and its metabolism is freaking complicated and multifactorial....


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 Nov 2019)

Viking said:


> On that, we agree, hence the “Go figure” I’m still surprised that with no other variables changed - apart from the time of the year- that a different reaction occurred and I emphasise that I was predisposed to expecting no difference at all


Were they they same brand/manufacturer? I used to react oddly to certain brands of beta-blocker. Dose the same, but maybe release-rates differ slightly?


----------



## fossyant (16 Nov 2019)

Viking said:


> And that goes nowhere towards explain differing reactions to same dosage levels



Brand difference ? I used to get a different brand of Duloxetine at each prescription - not great given the composition can vary, and the drug has a lot of side effects - was great for my back pain.


----------



## Drago (17 Nov 2019)

Just out of interest, at what age did you guys get put on to statins?


----------



## Bonefish Blues (17 Nov 2019)

56, couple of years ago when a narrowed fartery was discovered whilst they were poking around another heart issue, which was helpful.


----------



## derrick (17 Nov 2019)

57 for me.


----------



## PK99 (17 Nov 2019)

Drago said:


> Just out of interest, at what age did you guys get put on to statins?



Probably around 14 years ago. Age 50.

GP started a Well Man MOT clinic for over 50's. High cholesterol was detected and combined with a bilateral history of heart problems with age in the family, I was referred to a Haematologist who did full blood works and health assessment, then advised Statins.


----------



## dave r (17 Nov 2019)

I was about 57, and needed stenting for blocked arteries and angina.


----------



## slowmotion (17 Nov 2019)

Drago said:


> Just out of interest, at what age did you guys get put on to statins?


57


----------



## roadrash (17 Nov 2019)

52


----------



## fossyant (17 Nov 2019)

49, following a GP over 40's check up (only a few month's back). Then found out both my parents are on them (mid 70's now). I only went for my check up as a cycling mate dropped dead (similar age) having not bothered with a full blood test for a long time. I was 7.5, I suggested I try alternative methods, like plant sterols, and he just said it's too high for dietary changes.

As mentioned they have dropped my levels down to 5 which the GP is happy with, and I'm already in a low risk category for heart attack, but shoot can happen, like with my mate. They found he was a bit furred up, had one stent fitted after the heart attack, allowed home as he was fine, then had another heart attack a week after the first - gone.

I'm not for/against, but they are bringing my level into a 'safe' area that should avoid any issues. I have no side effects. I'm on another drug that I actually need more than statins and that can cause lots of issues long term, one of which can kill me in my sleep (thick blood).

I'd rather get checked out before it's too late. My family history is OK, but my MIL had stroke/heart issues from 60, and she has not had a 'well' old age at all, she's been knackered since her late 60's and needing care/lack of mobility. She never exercised, 2nd hand smoked from FIL (big smoker), was never into 'looking after yourself'.

Best catching it before it's an issue. If the drugs don't help you/make you ill, look at alternatives with guidance from a doc.


----------



## Drago (17 Nov 2019)

So I'm entering the danger zone age wise! My last test was earlier this year. My levels where slightly elevates, but the ratio of good to bad cholesterol was excellent, so the doc wasn't unduly concerned.


----------



## Bonefish Blues (17 Nov 2019)

Drago said:


> So I'm entering the danger zone age wise! My last test was earlier this year. My levels where slightly elevates, but the ratio of good to bad cholesterol was excellent, so the doc wasn't unduly concerned.


56-57-58 seems to be when the arteries need a rebore doesn't it?
Personally, I was bloody annoyed because I was doing all the right things. Then I found out that one of my grandparents had a massive coronary in a doctor's surgery of all places! Gucking fenetics...


----------



## The Jogger (20 Nov 2019)

I once took statins but after a lot of research decided they were of no benefit to me, cholesterol is essential for the human body that's why it makes it. Statins are chemicals that strips the body of essential nutrients, they're not for me and my doctor is in total agreement but then he is a younger GP who hasn't been brainwashed or bought over.


----------



## winjim (10 Dec 2019)

The Jogger said:


> I once took statins but after a lot of research decided they were of no benefit to me, cholesterol is essential for the human body that's why it makes it. Statins are chemicals that strips the body of essential nutrients, they're not for me and my doctor is in total agreement but then he is a younger GP who hasn't been brainwashed or bought over.


To be pedantic, the ability to synthesise cholesterol is precisely what makes it non-essential, but I know what you mean. I'm not sure I'd agree that statins 'strip' the body of cholesterol though. They inhibit the synthesis of it so your liver instead pulls in what it needs from the excess which is circulating in the bloodstream.


----------



## Drago (11 Dec 2019)

My Dads was a bit high, and being a pilot the CAA doctor got a bit uppity when it came to his annual medical. A change of diet and it dropped radically. For most, but not all, diet and/or lifestyle changes are equally effective and don't run the risk, of side effects. Too many people are on medication for co editions that could be self treated without them.


----------



## winjim (11 Dec 2019)

Drago said:


> My Dads was a bit high, and being a pilot the CAA doctor got a bit uppity when it came to his annual medical. A change of diet and it dropped radically. For most, but not all, diet and/or lifestyle changes are equally effective and don't run the risk, of side effects. Too many people are on medication for co editions that could be self treated without them.


Current guidance is to offer lifestyle advice as a first option in cases of hypercholesterolaemia. However, some people don't take kindly to having their diet and lifestyle analysed so it can be difficult. Some lipid clinics have taken to having the dietician in the waiting room chatting informally to patients as they wait to see the doctor, as they would be reluctant to attend a specific dietary appointment.


----------



## PK99 (11 Dec 2019)

Drago said:


> My Dads was a bit high, and being a pilot the CAA doctor got a bit uppity when it came to his annual medical. A change of diet and it dropped radically. For most, but not all, diet and/or lifestyle changes are equally effective and don't run the risk, of side effects. Too many people are on medication for co editions that could be self treated without them.



Mine was high despite an exemplary diet


----------



## PaulSB (11 Dec 2019)

PK99 said:


> Mine was high despite an exemplary diet


As I understand it around 15% of the population have a genetic disposition to high cholesterol. I'm one. No amount of good diet has an impact.


----------



## Gunk (11 Dec 2019)

PaulSB said:


> As I understand it around 15% of the population have a genetic disposition to high cholesterol. I'm one. No amount of good diet has an impact.



I’ve inherited the problem my Father, I eat reasonably healthily, my BMI is in the normal range, but I still have high Cholesterol. I’ve taken Statins now for the last 10 years.


----------



## PaulSB (11 Dec 2019)

Gunk said:


> I’ve inherited the problem my Father, I eat reasonably healthily, my BMI is in the normal range, but I still have high Cholesterol. I’ve taken Statins now for the last 10 years.


Snap!


----------

