In previous posts I told of my condition post lovastatin (one month). Now I'd like to state my opinion on how statins should be prescribed, as opposed to how they are prescribed.
I believe statins should only be prescribed in people who have a condition that requires them, IE: they've had a heart attack, or they have demonstrable atherosclerosis. In all other cases I believe statins should be avoided and other means should be implemented. Doctors should be telling their patients that to avoid heart disease and stroke they should follow the DASH diet (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) or other diets that reduce or eliminate the risk of heart disease, such as that proposed by Dr. Dean Ornish, _and_ they should get on a regular moderate exercise program which they commit to doing for life.
Under no circumstance, in my opine, should a healthy person who is exercising and eating right and maintaining his or her weight be prescribed a statin as a so called preventative, because to do so puts the patient at risk, and the Hippocratic Oath states that a doctor should at the least do no harm. And I have found through an impromptu investigation into friends of mine who take or have taken statins, that a full 45-50% of them have had to quit because of serious side effects.
Those side effects included muscle weakness and pain, and also cardiac symptoms, because statins can and do attack the heart muscle.
Personally, one month of lovastatin felt like I had been mauled by a grizzly. It was by far the worst thing I've ever put into my body in my life, and I'm still not healed from it as of this date. I stopped taking lovastatin on April 13 and today is May 22.
Hopefully someone with the authority to change prescribing criteria is paying attention.
Thanks for putting up with my diatribe.
Have a nice day.
pops