I'll never talk bad about statins again

[pops]

Okay, you alll know I was hurt by lovastatin. Serious pain. In fact, I still have it.

I told a lot of people how I felt about these drugs. Some people probably didn't take statins, even though their doctors told them to, because of me. One of them was a friend of mine, who had himself experienced pain from statins and was already reluctant to get back on them.

That friend just had a heart attack, though he exercises every day.

No more slamming statins. Statins can and do cause side effects. Heart attacks ain't so great either. It's a crap shoot.

End of story.
Have a nice day.
Try to stay healthy however you do it.

pOps

[uncle2blade]

I agree with you. However people that take statins have heart attacks too.

[lars999]

At least once a year it is useful to know what day it is. Today is that day.

Lars

[Biologist]

Statins are to blame for many thousands of times more heart attack deaths than they prevent. Future heart attack patients are given "clean bills of heart health" every day after meaningless cholesterol testing results indicate they are fine -- only to drop dead of an unnecessary and predictable heart attack. They were told they had nothing to worry about. They were deceived.

Science has shown there are powerful ways to prevent heart attacks while improving general heath and quality of life at the very same time. But Pharma doesn't make a dime. Science shows that Statins must be completely off the list of consideration for the huge majority of the population and near the very bottom for all others. Pharma will not have it.

Statins damage and kill in unexpected ways: including those who never even take them. Think about it.

Biologist

[cjbrooksjc]

How often must it be said that cholesterol is NOT the culprit;
INFLAMMATION is the culprit. Statins cause muscular myopathy in a very many people, and the heart is entirely (almost) muscle. Get you CK levels checked and stay away from a high carb diet. STATINS KILL; the dice are loaded!

Brooks

[Biologist]

Hi, Brooks.

I hope things are going well for you. I agree with your post.

Many others and I consider the lowering of systemic cholesterol levels to be just another very serious adverse side effect of statins (along with the acknowledged adverse side effects of lowering other vital biochemicals including CoQ10, and dolichols, etc.). I think this has been well born out by science. There's little doubt the anti-inflammation characteristics of statins are impressive. If not for the unwanted effects, statins would be all they are touted to be rather than what they are. Actually, the trick -- the Holy Grail -- in science is be able to TO RAISE cholesterol levels! Almost impossible to do quickly and reliably. Burn centers have tried for years. Cholesterol is arguably the most important biochemical in the body -- and one that also fights inflammation.

A recent statin TV advertisement says the majority of heat attack victims have high cholesterol levels. I think they say something like 60 or 80% of them had high levels. What a laugh. With very normal and healthy levels long ago arbitrarily redefined as being "high", the large majority of the population is now considered to have "high cholesterol." These guys are shooting low if you ask me. Be brave! Simply redefine "high cholesterol" as anyone who registers any amount at all on a blood test and then you can say 100% of people who have heart attacks have high cholesterol levels. But I am sure the deception works for product sales just as it is...

Biologist

[cjbrooksjc]

H'lo B.

The statins are still causing me real physical difficulties, even after five years off the poison, but I continue to persevere.

I also saw the Ad that used the astounding HI Cholesterol claim, but I didn't make the connection between that claim and the FDA/BIG PHARMA slight of hand: lowering safe cholesterol levels. You are absolutely correct! I don't even know what the FDA-touted "Hi" level is now... from 230 in the 50's to something close to 100 today; a marketing strategy the equivalent of The Emperor's Clothes.

I'm reminded of a cel from an old POGO comic strip: "We have met the enemy, and he is us!"

Best,

Brooks

[pops]

This is one of those yin and yang things.

Yang: statins cause terrible side-effects. They did in my body.
Yin: statins sometimes save lives and/or allow people to live longer than they would have.

Discussion: statins suppress the production of dolichols and coenzyme q 10. Both of those substances are required for the health of many organs, including brain, heart, muscle and connective tissue. Cholesterol is also necessary for the health of those organs and body parts.

Well and good.

The crud that coats arteries as people age is composed mostly of oxidized LDL. So "conventional wisdom" dictates that if you lower LDL there will be less of it around to oxidize and coat arteries. That makes sense. Except it doesn't work. In studies where only a drug that lowers LDL was used, there was no effect on the rate of heart disease in those taking the active drug rather than placebo.

So science attempted to say it was because HDL also has to be raised; HDL is the alleged good cholesterol which sweeps out the malicious LDL from artery walls. But a recent double-blind seems to have refuted that, and HDL gets a black mark because raising it didn't work in the prevention of heart disease.

Okay, maybe it's CRP (No, not that other word that you say when you hit your thumb with a hammer, but C-reactive protein). That's an inflammatory molecule, and statins lower those. Maybe, if statins really do have an effect, it's because they lower CRP.

But so does exercise, vitamin C and vitamin E. And fiber.

So where are we?

I think we're nowhere. Statins seem to work in some, but they also have deleterious side-effects. Giving them to healthy people is extremely questionable, in my humble opinion, because if you cause so much pain that the patient can no longer exercise, you have increased, not decreased their risk of heart attack. After all, it is claimed that exercise is important for the prevention of heart disease.

The answers might be something like this:

- give statins to only those who have either already had a heart attack or those who are at extremely high risk of having a heart attack.
- do not give statins to healthy people with only a moderate or low risk of heart attack: the risk benefit ratio would be predictably bad. Most especially do not give statins to people who live an athletic lifestyle because their risk of muscle pain - sometimes long lasting muscle pain - is much higher than that of the general population.
- never, ever give statins to children. If you hate them, give them up for adoption.
- do not give statins to the aged. It not only does not decrease their risk of heart disease, but the risk of side-effects is substantially higher for them.
- do not give statins out like candy. These are drugs, not breath mints.
- enough with the statin commercials every ten minutes on TV. We know they want to make money. We know they want us to beg our doctors for their "stuff" to increase their bottom line and make their investors happy. No one is fooled about their true intentions. Get real.

Of course everything I said here will make no difference whatsoever. No one listens. No one important, that is. And the people who are important are probably taking wads of cash to look the other way.

'nuff said. Let the consumer beware. Have a nice day, if you want to.
To all those who are hurting: I sincerely hope you heal quickly.

pOps