Lipitor, Muscle Pain, CoQ10 and after the muscle pain goes!!

by **peterpan** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:13 am

Hi,
I was on Atorvastatin 80mg and developed terrible muscle pain. I was sent to a UK NHS Cholesterol Clinic where the Consultant advised CoQ10.
The Lipitor was lowered to 40mg and I took large doses CoQ10 (1,200mg daily)
The muscle pain has subsided and due to recent surgery I have not been able to take CoQ10 for 5 weeks.
So far there are NO obvious signs of muscle pain even though I am not taking CoQ10 but taking Lipitor 40mg.

Bearing in mind what has been written about Statin destroying CoQ10, on this website, does anybody take a 'management' dose of CoQ10 to help with the damage that Lipitor may be doing? What Doses do you take of CoQ10?

Thanks
peterpan
UK

by **Allen1** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:50 am

Hi there peterpan,

I believe 200mg per day was advised by someone a while back, as everyone is different and you have previously had pain problems I would probably expect somewhere in the region of 300mg as a safer bet (it also depends on the quality and type of the Q10).

There is no hard and fast answer to this question due to individual circumstances etc. I do hope you can get off this crap (statins) soon, as someone who also has heart problems, I can only tell you that my poison which was Zocor (Simvastatin), made my condition considerably worse and no-one mentioned Q10 etc.

All the best,
Allen.

by **peterpan** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:02 am

Hi Allen,
Thanks for your reply. Thats helpful to know. I get 300mg CoQ10 in Olive Oil so they would be useful.
Im not sure there is much chance of coming off Statins at the moment. Ive had 7 stents and my coronary arteries are not good. Without statins my triglycerides and ratio etc are all bad news!

Regards
peterpan
UK

by **David Staup** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:59 am

peterpan,

read the following carefully

This section includes excerpts from the book Malignant Medical Myths by Joel M. Kauffman

When the data of Forette are graphed, the age-adjusted data show a minimal risk of dying out to total cholesterol = 320 mg/dL for elderly women. The minimum death rate occurred with a total cholesterol level of 272 mg/dL, far higher than the current National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) recommendations of approximately 200 mg/dL for everyone.

The death rate was 5.2 times higher for women who had very low cholesterol, specifically, 155 mg/dL.ã€€ The death rate was 1.8 times higher for women who had very high cholesterol, specifically, 348 mg/dL, and also 1.8 times higher at 200 mg/dL.

What possible basis could there be for the NCEP recommendations for <200? In their report, the French doctors warned against lowering cholesterol in elderly women.

Serum total cholesterol rises naturally with age from a mean level of 178 mg/dL in 18-24 year-olds to a maximum mean level of 230 mg/dL in 55-64 year-olds. Men over 55 and women of all ages who have the highest cholesterol levels live the longest, since high total cholesterol protects against cardiovascular disease (CVD) and infections (Ravnskov U. High cholesterol may protect against infections and atherosclerosis. Quarterly Journal of Medicine, 2003;96:927-934).

For people of a narrow age range, even in a 13-year span, say ages 50-62 years, a graph of total cholesterol levels of men who did and did not have CVD has been published in 2001.

There is so much overlap between the men with or without CVD that there is no likelihood that the slightly greater chance for CVD at the higher total cholesterol levels could be used for prediction in any one individual, even in this group spanning 13 years in age.

This is the reason that drug advertising claims that higher total cholesterol means quicker death from CVD are false - in large groups of people of mixed ages, the older ones will have higher total cholesterol and LDL-C, and older people die sooner than younger ones, not necessarily from CVD.

Joel M. Kauffman, Ph.D.
Former Professor of Chemistry of the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, now Emeritus.
Author of Malignant Medical Myths: Why Medical Treatment Causes 200,000 Deaths per Year

David

by **Biologist** » Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:41 pm

In your case, peterpan, runaway inflamation must surely be the problem. It is not clear to me that higher dosages of statins are significantly better at lowering inflamation than lower dosages. Your cholesterol is not the problem, based on the science, with the exception of Lp(a) which statins do not help. Vitamin C does, and so does CoQ10. You are taking the statins to lower inflamation, not to lower cholesterol whether your doctor realizes it or not.

You should be talking about your C Reactive Protein level. What is it currently? How has it changed through the years?

You write:

"The muscle pain has subsided and due to recent
surgery I have not been able to take CoQ10 for 5
weeks."

Whose idea was it to take you off CoQ10 when you needed it most? What was the rationale for that?

Next heart procedure, you should probably be taking D-Ribose prior to it. Read "The Sinatra Solution" by Steven Sinatra, MD.

The "terrible pain" you mentioned means that damage is occurring by the drug. That is likely not a good sign; you want to avoid that, it would seem to me. Push for lower dosages for the statins.

The information provided by David regards people without significant heart disease, I believe. You are in a slightly different boat. If you are eating a lot of refined carbohydrates (e.g., sugar, baked potatoes, etc.) you better cut that crap out.

Keep doing your research.

Biologist

by **Biologist** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 9:34 am

Hi, peterpan,

I think you would also want to make sure you are taking B Vitamins everyday to fight homocystine as per Dr. McCully's work. You will find his articles linked to the homepage. His book is excellent:

*http://www.amazon.com/Heart-Revolution-Extraordinary-Discovery-Cholesterol/dp/0060929731/ref=sr_1_1/183-1011263-2151015?ie=UTF8&qid=1248358710&sr=8-1

A multi B would probably be OK, or do it individually with B6, B12 and folate supplementation. B12 as sublingual may be a good idea as it can get hard to absorb as we age or as stomach conditions may dictate. I take TMG too (also known as Betaine) as a further preventative. (I do not have any heart disease risk factors aside from 6 years of statin usage -- which I now consider to be a risk factor for heart disease in the form of heart failure.) I found some research on this compound recently and will post it in a new thread before long.

I do not feel very comfortable talking about statins for someone who has proven heart disease. The picture is very clear to me regarding primary care where I believe they should not be prescribed. For secondary care, it is less clear to me.

Keep us posted.

Biologist

by **peterpan** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 9:57 am

Hi Biologist,

Many thanks for your contributions.
I stopped taking all Supplements before and after surgery at the recommendation of my Supplement Supplier because he felt there was a significant risk in bleeding after the surgery.
I normally take at least 300mg CoQ10, 1000mg Vit C, l-carnitine and Magnesium.
I shall read through your replies again and see what a good supplement regime would be.
Kindest,
peterpan BSc.
UK