• All new members please introduce your self here and welcome to the board:
    http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
intex
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
PM-Ace-Labs
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
sunrise2
PHARMAHGH1
kinglab
ganabol2
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
boslabs1
granabolic1
napsgear-210x65
monster210x65
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
DeFiant
UGFREAK-banner-PM
STADAPM
yms-GIF-210x65-SB
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
wuhan2
dpharma
marathon
zzsttmy
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
azteca
crewguru
advertise1x
advertise1x
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Get off the Statins

Tom

Featured Member / Kilo Klub
Featured Member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Messages
3,574
NewsCholesterol Drugs Linked to Liver, Kidney Diseases and Cataracts


By Mallory Creveling May 21st 2010 12:54PM

Categories: News

Individuals taking drugs to lower their cholesterol may have a higher risk for developing liver dysfunction, kidney failure, muscle weakness and cataracts, Reuters reports.

In a study published in the "British Medical Journal," researchers from Nottingham University studied data from more than 2 million people from 368 British general medicine practices, according to Reuters. The patients, ages 30 to 84, were new users of a range of different statins -- drugs prescribed to people with high cholesterol levels to lower their heart disease risk.

Heart disease is the No. 1 killer of both men and women in the United States and statins are considered some of the most successful drugs at preventing heart attacks and strokes.

The most commonly used statins include Pfizer's Lipitor and AstraZeneca's Crestor.

In the study, researchers found that for every 10,000 high-risk women taking these medications, there were about 271 fewer cases of heart disease and eight fewer cases of esophageal cancer. But there were also 74 more cases of liver dysfunction, 23 more patients with acute renal or kidney failure, 307 with cataracts and 39 with muscle weakness or myopathy.

Researchers found similar rates for men, though the number of myopathy cases was higher. They also found that the side effects of cholesterol-lowering statins were worst in the first year, although the increased risk remained throughout treatment.

The study's authors, Julia Hippisley-Cox and Carol Coupland, said that some of the effects of these drugs might be noted because patients taking statins are more likely to consult their doctors regularly. They also mentioned that doctors of patients taking these medications should closely monitor the drugs' effects.

Hippisley-Cox and Coupland believe these findings may help to create guidelines when it comes to prescribing statin types and dosages.

"Our study is likely to be useful for policy and planning purposes," they said in a statement.

Though statins, like any medical treatment, have adverse side effects, their benefits outweigh their risks when taken correctly, Alawi Alsheikh-Al, of the Sheikh Khalifa Medical City in the United Arab Emirates, and Richard Karas of the Tufts University School of Medicine, said in a commentary on the study.
 
Not sure I would throw statins in the trash from reading the article but it is something to keep in mind.If you have heart disease in your family "get off the statins" is not real good advice.
 
i still wouldn't take them even if i did have heart disease. why compromise liver and kidneys as well. there are better natural ways to fix cholesterol problems niacin being one of them off the top of my head.
 
high cholesterol not the culprit

We have all been led to believe that cholesterol is bad and that lowering it is good. Because of extensive pharmaceutical marketing to both doctors and patients we think that using statin drugs is proven to work to lower the risk of heart attacks and death.

But on what scientific evidence is this based, what does that evidence really show?

Roger Williams once said something that is very applicable to how we commonly view the benefits of statins. "There are liars, damn liars, and statisticians."

We see prominent ads on television and in medical journals -- things like 36% reduction in risk of having a heart attack. But we don't look at the fine print. What does that REALLY mean and how does it affect decisions about who should really be using these drugs.

Before I explain that, here are some thought provoking findings to ponder.

• If you lower bad cholesterol (LDL) but have a low HDL (good cholesterol) there is no benefit to statins. (i)

• If you lower bad cholesterol (LDL) but don't reduce inflammation (marked by a test called C-reactive protein), there is no benefit to statins. (ii)

• If you are a healthy woman with high cholesterol, there is no proof that taking statins reduces your risk of heart attack or death. (iii)

• If you are a man or a woman over 69 years old with high cholesterol, there is no proof that taking statins reduces your risk of heart attack or death. (iv)

• Aggressive cholesterol treatment with two medications (Zocor and Zetia) lowered cholesterol much more than one drug alone, but led to more plaque build up in the arties and no fewer heart attacks. (v)

• 75% of people who have heart attacks have normal cholesterol

• Older patients with lower cholesterol have higher risks of death than those with higher cholesterol. (vi)

• Countries with higher average cholesterol than Americans such as the Swiss or Spanish have less heart disease.

• Recent evidence shows that it is likely statins' ability to lower inflammation it what accounts for the benefits of statins, not their ability to lower cholesterol.

So for whom do the statin drugs work for anyway? They work for people who have already had heart attacks to prevent more heart attacks or death. And they work slightly for middle-aged men who have many risk factors for heart disease like high blood pressure, obesity, or diabetes.

So why did the 2004 National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines expand the previous guidelines to recommend that more people take statins (from 13 million to 40 million) and that people who don't have heart disease should take them to prevent heart disease. Could it have been that 8 of the 9 experts on the panel who developed these guidelines had financial ties to the drug industry? Thirty-four other non-industry affiliated experts sent a petition to protest the recommendations to the National Institutes of Health saying the evidence was weak. It was like having a fox guard the chicken coop.

It's all in the spin. The spin of the statistics and numbers. And it's easy to get confused. Let me try to clear things up.

When you look under the hood of the research data you find that the touted "36% reduction" means a reduction of the number of people getting heart attacks or death from 3% to 2% (or about 30-40%).

And that data also shows that treatment only really works if you have heart disease already. In those who DON'T have documented heart disease, there is no benefit.

In those at high risk for heart disease about 50 people would need to be treated for 5 years to reduce one cardiovascular event. Just to put that in perspective: If a drug works, it has a very low NTT (number needed to treat). For example, if you have a urine infection and take an antibiotic, you will get near a 100% benefit. The number needed to treat is "1". So if you have an NTT of 50 like statins do for preventing heart disease in 75% of the people who take them, it is basically a crap shoot.

Yet at a cost of over $28 billion a year, 75% of all statin prescriptions are for exactly this type of unproven primary prevention. Simply applying the science over 10 years would save over $200 billion. This is just one example of reimbursed but unproven care. We need not only prevent disease but also prevent the wrong type of care.

If these medications were without side effects, then you may be able to justify the risk - but they cause muscle damage, sexual dysfunction, liver and nerve damag,e and other problems in 10-15% of patients who take them. Certainly not a free ride.

So if lowering cholesterol is not the great panacea that we thought, how do we treat heart disease, and how do we get the right kind of cholesterol - high HDL, low LDL and low triglycerides and have cholesterol particles that are large, light and fluffy rather than small, dense and hard, which is the type that actually causes heart disease and plaque build up.

We know what causes the damaging small cholesterol particles. And it isn't fat in the diet. It is sugar. Sugar in any form or refined carbohydrates (white food) drives the good cholesterol down, cause triglycerides to go up, creates small damaging cholesterol particles, and causes metabolic syndrome or pre-diabetes. That is the true cause of most heart attacks, NOT LDL cholesterol.

One of the reasons we don't hear about this is because there is no good drug to raise HDL. Statin drugs lower LDL -- and billions are spent advertising them, even though they are the wrong treatment.

If you're like most of the patients I see in my practice, you're convinced that cholesterol is the evil that causes heart disease. You may hope that if you monitor your cholesterol levels and avoid the foods that are purported to raise cholesterol, you'll be safe from America's number-one killer.

We are all terrified of cholesterol because for years well-meaning doctors, echoed by the media, have emphasized what they long believed is the intimate link between cholesterol and death by heart disease. If only it were so simple!

The truth is much more complex.

Cholesterol is only one factor of many -- and not even the most important -- that contribute to your risk of getting heart disease.

First of all, let's take a look at what cholesterol actually is. It's a fatty substance produced by the liver that is used to help perform thousands of bodily functions. The body uses it to help build your cell membranes, the covering of your nerve sheaths, and much of your brain. It's a key building block for our hormone production, and without it you would not be able to maintain adequate levels of testosterone, estrogen, progesterone and cortisol.

So if you think cholesterol is the enemy, think again. Without cholesterol, you would die.

In fact, people with the lowest cholesterol as they age are at highest risk of death. Under certain circumstances, higher cholesterol can actually help to increase life span.

To help clear the confusion, I will review many of the cholesterol myths our culture labors under and explain what the real factors are that lead to cardiovascular disease.

Cholesterol Myths

One of the biggest cholesterol myths out there has to do with dietary fat. Although most of us have been taught that a high-fat diet causes cholesterol problems, this isn't entirely true. Here's why: The type of fat that you eat is more important than the amount of fat. Trans fats or hydrogenated fats and saturated fats promote abnormal cholesterol, whereas omega-3 fats and monounsaturated fats actually improve the type and quantity of the cholesterol your body produces.

In reality, the biggest source of abnormal cholesterol is not fat at all -- it's sugar. The sugar you consume converts to fat in your body. And the worst culprit of all is high fructose corn syrup.

Consumption of high fructose corn syrup, which is present in sodas, many juices, and most processed foods, is the primary nutritional cause of most of the cholesterol issues we doctors see in our patients.

So the real concern isn't the amount of cholesterol you have, but the type of fats and sugar and refined carbohydrates in your diet that lead to abnormal cholesterol production.

Of course, many health-conscious people today know that total cholesterol is not as critical as the following:

• Your levels of HDL "good" cholesterol vs. LDL "bad" cholesterol

• Your triglyceride levels

• Your ratio of triglycerides to HDL

• Your ratio of total cholesterol to HDL

Many are also aware that there are different sizes of cholesterol particles. There are small and large particles of LDL, HDL, and triglycerides. The most dangerous are the small, dense particles that act like BB pellets, easily penetrating your arteries. Large, fluffy cholesterol particles are practically harmless--even if your total cholesterol is high. They function like beach balls and bounce off the arteries, causing no harm.

Another concern is whether or not your cholesterol is rancid. If so, the risk of arterial plaque is real.

Rancid or oxidized cholesterol results from oxidative stress and free radicals, which trigger a vicious cycle of inflammation and fat or plaque deposition under the artery walls. That is the real danger: When small dense LDL particles are oxidized they become dangerous and start the build up of plaque or cholesterol deposits in your arteries.

Now that we've explored when and how cholesterol becomes more problematic, let's take a look at other factors that play a more significant role in cardiovascular disease.

Prime Contributors to Cardiovascular Disease

First of all, cardiovascular illness results when key bodily functions go awry, causing inflammation, (vii) imbalances in blood sugar and insulin and oxidative stress.

To control these key biological functions and keep them in balance, you need to look at your overall health as well as your genetic predispositions, as these underlie the types of diseases you're most likely to develop. It is the interaction of your genes, lifestyle, and environment that ultimately determines your risks -- and the outcome of your life.

This is the science of nutrigenomics, or how food acts as information to stall or totally prevent some predisposed disease risks by turning on the right gene messages with our diet and lifestyle choices. That means some of the factors that unbalance bodily health are under your control, or could be.

These include diet, nutritional status, stress levels, and activity levels. Key tests can reveal problems with a person's blood sugar and insulin, inflammation level, level of folic acid, clotting factors, hormones, and other bodily systems that affect your risk of cardiovascular disease.

Particularly important are the causes if inflammation, which are many, and need to be assessed. Inflammation can arise from poor diet (too much sugar and trans and saturated fats), a sedentary lifestyle, stress, autoimmune disease, food allergies, hidden infections such as gum disease, and even toxins such as mercury. All of these causal factors need to be considered anytime there is inflammation.

Combined together, all of these factors determine your risk of heart disease. And I recommend that people undergo a comprehensive medical evaluation to see what their risk really is.

Zeroing in on Key Factors for Heart Disease

There's no doubt about it, inflammation is key contributor to heart disease. A major study done at Harvard found that people with high levels of a marker called C-reactive protein (CRP) had higher risks of heart disease than people with high cholesterol. Normal cholesterol levels were NOT protective to those with high CRP. The risks were greatest for those with high levels of both CRP and cholesterol.

Another predisposing factor to heart disease is insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome, which leads to an imbalance in the blood sugar and high levels of insulin. This may affect as many as half of Americans over age 65. Many younger people also have this condition, which is sometimes called pre-diabetes.

Although modern medicine sometimes loses sight of the interconnectedness of all our bodily systems, blood sugar imbalances like these impact your cholesterol levels too. If you have any of these conditions, they will cause your good cholesterol to go down, while your triglycerides rise, which further increases inflammation and oxidative stress. All of these fluctuations contribute to blood thickening, clotting, and other malfunctions -- leading to cardiovascular disease.

What's more, elevated levels of a substance called homocysteine (which is related to your body's levels of folic acid and vitamins B6 and B12) appears to correlate to cardiovascular illness. Although this is still somewhat controversial, I often see this inter-relationship in my practice. While genes may play a part, tests done as part of a comprehensive evaluation of cardiac risk can easily ascertain this factor. Where problematic levels occur, they can be easily addressed by adequate folic acid intake, along with vitamins B6 and B12.

Testing for Cardiovascular Risk Factors

Heart disease is not only about cholesterol. It is important to look at many factors that contribute to your overall risk. And it seems that insulin and blood sugar imbalances, and inflammation are proving to be more of a risk that cholesterol.

If you want to test your overall risk, you can consider asking your doctor to perform the following tests:

1. Total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides. Your total cholesterol should be under 200. Your triglycerides should be under 100. Your HDL should be over 60. Your LDL should be ideally under 80. Your ratio of total cholesterol to HDL should be less than 3.0. Your ratio of triglycerides to HDL should be no greater than 4, which can indicate insulin resistance if elevated.

2. NMR Lipid Profile. This looks at your cholesterol under an MRI scan to assess the size of the particles, which can determine your cardiovascular risk. This is a very important test that can further differentiate the risk of your cholesterol and can be an important factor to track as your system improves and your cholesterol transforms from being small dense and dangerous to light and fluffy and innocuous. It is done by a company called Liposcience and is also available through LabCorp.

3. Glucose Insulin Tolerance Test. Measurements of fasting and 1 and 2 hour levels of glucose AND insulin helps identify pre-diabetes and excessively high levels of insulin, and even diabetes. Most doctors just check blood sugar and NOT insulin, which is the first thing to go up. By the time your blood sugar goes up, the train has left the station.

4. Hemaglobin A1c. This measures your average blood sugar level over the last 6 weeks. Anything over 5.5 is high.

5. Cardio C-reactive protein. This is a marker of inflammation in the body that is essential to understand in the context of overall risk. Your C-reactive protein level should be less than 1.

6. Homocysteine. Your homocysteine measures your folate status and should be between 6 and 8.

7. Lipid peroxides or TBARS test, which looks at the amount of oxidized or rancid fat. This should be within normal limits of the test and indicates whether or not you have oxidized cholesterol.

8. Fibrinogen, which is another test looking at clotting in the blood. It should be less than 300.

9. Lipoprotein (a), which is another factor that can promote the risk of heart disease, often in men. It should be less than 30.

10. Genes or SNPs may also be useful in terms of assessing your situation. A number of key genes regulate cholesterol and metabolism, including Apo E genes and the cholesterol ester transfer protein gene. The MTHFR gene, which regulates homocysteine is also important and may be part of an overall workup.

11. Get a high-speed CT or (EBT) scan of the heart if you are concerned that you have cardiovascular disease. This may be helpful to assess overall plaque burden and calcium score. A score higher than 100 is a concern, and a score higher than 400 indicates severe risk of cardiovascular disease.

Next week I will review how to lower your risk of heart disease and fix your cholesterol. We'll do this not by lowering the LDL, but by getting more light and fluffy LDL particles, which are protective and more HDL cholesterol, which is THE most important cholesterol.

Now I'd like to hear from you...

Have you been told that you need to lower your cholesterol?

If so, what were your told to do and how does that compare to what you've read here?

Does any of what you've read here come as a surprise?

Please share your thoughts by adding a comment below.

To your good health,

Mark Hyman, M.D.

References

(i) Barter P, Gotto AM, LaRosa JC, Maroni J, Szarek M, Grundy SM, Kastelein JJ, Bittner V, Fruchart JC; Treating to New Targets Investigators. HDL cholesterol, very low levels of LDL cholesterol, and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2007 Sep 27;357(13):1301-10.

(ii) Ridker PM, Danielson E, Fonseca FA, Genest J, Gotto AM Jr, Kastelein JJ, Koenig W, Libby P, Lorenzatti AJ, MacFadyen JG, Nordestgaard BG, Shepherd J, Willerson JT, Glynn RJ; JUPITER Study Group. Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in men and women with elevated C-reactive protein. N Engl J Med. 2008 Nov 20;359(21):2195-207.

(iii) Abramson J, Wright JM. Are lipid-lowering guidelines evidence-based? Lancet. 2007 Jan 20;369(9557):168-9

(iv) IBID

(v) Brown BG, Taylor AJ Does ENHANCE Diminish Confidence in Lowering LDL or in Ezetimibe? Engl J Med 358:1504, April 3, 2008 Editorial

(vi) Schatz IJ, Masaki K, Yano K, Chen R, Rodriguez BL, Curb JD. Cholesterol and all-cause mortality in elderly people from the Honolulu Heart Program: a cohort study. Lancet. 2001 Aug 4;358(9279):351-5.

(vii) Hansson GK Inflammation, Atherosclerosis, and Coronary Artery Disease N Engl J Med 352:1685, April 21, 2005

Mark Hyman, M.D. practicing physician and founder of The UltraWellness Center is a pioneer in functional medicine. Dr. Hyman is now sharing the 7 ways to tap into your body's natural ability to heal itself. You can follow him on Twitter, connect with him on LinkedIn, watch his videos on Youtube and become a fan on Facebook.
 
Been saying for years that they are garbage. I've seen way to many people have to come off them due to sides.
 
anyone taking statins should supplement with co-q10 (which is depleted by statins) -- reduces/eliminates the myopathy sides including cardiomyopathy

some reading to start on
Statins and CoQ10 Deficiency
 
Last edited:
Statins damn near kiled a client of mine. After getting off them and changing diet he is a world better.
 
Anyone taking Statin drugs should be having blood work done on a regular basis...But this does not mean you will avoid the side effects of the drugs. I recently had a patient that was on a Statin for 10 days and it put him into complete liver failure despite all the blood work and test done prior to starting treament.
 
Agree with post 100%, my friend was put on zocor because of his so called high cholesterol levels, a month after he started using this trash, he started experiencing, weakness in legs and arms, and finally collapsed coming out of a restaurant. He was rushed to the hospital with severe kidney failure, creatinine levels went up to 11.5, that's basically no kidney function, was in intensive care for 3 weeks , finally his levels started to normalize, and after 2 months in the hospital he went home, he has constant nausea and dizziness, it's ben about a year since this happened, he's trying to sue the doctor that prescribed this garbage , but all the lawyers are saying it's a very hard case to win. My advice, if you are on any of this drugs get off ASAP. God bless you guys.
 
Agree with post 100%, my friend was put on zocor because of his so called high cholesterol levels, a month after he started using this trash, he started experiencing, weakness in legs and arms, and finally collapsed coming out of a restaurant. He was rushed to the hospital with severe kidney failure, creatinine levels went up to 11.5, that's basically no kidney function, was in intensive care for 3 weeks , finally his levels started to normalize, and after 2 months in the hospital he went home, he has constant nausea and dizziness, it's ben about a year since this happened, he's trying to sue the doctor that prescribed this garbage , but all the lawyers are saying it's a very hard case to win. My advice, if you are on any of this drugs get off ASAP. God bless you guys.

My dad was Simvistatin (Zocor) for six months until the sides started to hit....Both of his hands swelled up, especially his left, and his wrist, elbow, and shoulder joints were causing him severe pain....The left shoulder is still extremely sore even though he came off of the statin about two months ago....He told his doctor about all of the side effects and the dipshit doctor told him he didn't think the symptoms were caused by the statin but by a pinched nerve in his neck and advised him to stay on the statin (He's not). His cholesterol was slightly elevated and he has a minor blockage, so now I'm putting him on CoQ derived from ubiquinone and niacin.
 
Excellent thread Tom. People get WAY too hung up on their cholesterol numbers when there are many other more important factors involved. You can have a 350 cholesterol count and zero plaque buildup. Im not advising to ignore high cholesterol numbers, it can serve as a big red flag, but take a more in depth look at other factors before pumping in more drugs into your system. Genetics, medical history, lifestyle, lipids, etc. Be safe.
 
So let me get this right.No need to take into consideration family history,risk vs. benfits,how one tolerates the medication etc etc ect.... just a blanket statement "get off statins" with a study conducted on WOMEN.

No consideration that a well respected cardiologist or very sharp internist etc... might have looked at the big picture and for each patient on a case by case basis made the decision if statin therapy was a good choice for the patient???

Then lets take it into a tyrade about big Pharm propaganda??

Is everyone a candidate?? no!! are they overprescribed?? yes

Do some benefit ??yes

To go on a message board and tell everyone to quit statins is pretty wreckless advice in my opinion.People that do indeed qaulify and benefit from this therapy might be persuaded by your tainted , jaded and bitter view of medicine and actually listen and stop treatment against their doctors advice.
Because some guy on a message board said so?!?!?!:rolleyes:
 
So let me get this right.No need to take into consideration family history,risk vs. benfits,how one tolerates the medication etc etc ect.... just a blanket statement "get off statins" with a study conducted on WOMEN.

No consideration that a well respected cardiologist or very sharp internist etc... might have looked at the big picture and for each patient on a case by case basis made the decision if statin therapy was a good choice for the patient???

Then lets take it into a tyrade about big Pharm propaganda??

Is everyone a candidate?? no!! are they overprescribed?? yes

Do some benefit ??yes

To go on a message board and tell everyone to quit statins is pretty wreckless advice in my opinion.People that do indeed qaulify and benefit from this therapy might be persuaded by your tainted , jaded and bitter view of medicine and actually listen and stop treatment against their doctors advice.
Because some guy on a message board said so?!?!?!:rolleyes:

the majority of doctors be they respected cardiologists or whatever do not have the time to look at each and every patient on a case by case basis. they prescribe statins on the advice of the drug reps who have "educated" the doctor over a rushed lunch provided by the rep in the short time the office is closed for the lunch break between the 40 or so patients seen that day. there is no time for research between rounding at the hospital in the early morning hours then seeing patients during office hours. this is reality, not a jaded or bitter view of medicine. the majority of medications prescribed by your doctor are of questionable credibility and they must beleive what they are told by the drug reps. i stand by what i say and it is my opinion that statins should be pulled from the market.
 
No correlation between CHD and cholesterol

There is no link between Cholesterol and heart disease at all

The Cholesterol Myth: Introduction - Second Opinions, UK

Part 2: Dietary Fats and Heart Disease
For what a man would like to be true, that he more readily believes.
Francis Bacon
That diet might play a part as a cause of CHD was hypothesised by another American doctor, Ancel Keys, in 1953. Using data from seven countries in his 'Seven Countries Study', Keys compared the death rates from CHD and the amounts of fats eaten in those countries to demonstrate that heart disease mortality was higher in the countries that consumed more fat than it was in those countries that consumed less. (At that time, data from many more countries were available. It seems that Keys ignored the data from those that did not support his hypothesis.) And so the 'diet/heart' hypothesis was born.

But how do we know it is true? It is all very well having a theory, what you have to do then is prove it. In medicine, the usual way is to select two groups of people, as identical for sex, age, and lifestyle as possible. One group called the control group , carries on as normal while the other, called the intervention group , tries the new diet, drug or whatever. After a suitable time, the two groups are compared and differences noted.

Keys' fat-diet/heart disease hypothesis was persuasive so, to test it, several large-scale, long-term, human intervention studies were set up in many parts of the world. These involved hundreds of thousands of subjects and hundreds of doctors and scientists and cost billions of dollars in an attempt to prove that a fatty diet caused heart disease.

Framingham Heart Study
The most influential and respected investigation of the causes of heart disease is the Framingham Heart Study. This study was set up in the town of Framingham, Massachusetts, by Harvard University Medical School in 1948 and is still going on today. It was this study that gave rise to the dietary 'risk factors' with which we all are so familiar today. The Framingham researchers thought that they knew exactly why some people had more cholesterol than others - they ate more in their diet. To prove the link, they measured cholesterol intake and compared it with blood cholesterol. As Table I shows, although subjects consumed cholesterol over a wide range, there was little or no difference in the levels of cholesterol in their blood and, thus, no relationship between the amount of cholesterol eaten and levels of blood cholesterol was found. (Although it is interesting that women who had the highest levels of cholesterol in their blood were ones who had eaten the least cholesterol.)

Table I: Cholesterol intake - The Framingham Heart Study
Blood Cholesterol in Those
Cholesterol
Intake Below Median
Intake Above Median
Intake
mg/day mmol/l mmol/l
Men 704 ± 220.9 6.16 6.16
Women 492 ± 170.0 6.37 6.26

Next, the scientists studied intakes of saturated fats but again they could find no relation. There was still no relation when they studied total calorie intake. They then considered the possibility that something was masking the effects of diet, but no other factor made the slightest difference.

After twenty-two years of research, the researchers concluded:

"There is, in short, no suggestion of any relation between diet and the subsequent development of CHD in the study group."
On Christmas Eve, 1997, after a further twenty-seven years, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) carried a follow-up report that showed that dietary saturated fat reduced strokes. As these tend to affect older men than CHD, they wondered if a fatty diet was causing those in the trial to die of CHD before they had a stroke. But the researchers discount this, saying:

"This hypothesis, however, depends on the presence of a strong direct association of fat intake with coronary heart disease. Since we found no such association, competing mortality from coronary heart disease is very unlikely to explain our results."
In other words, after forty-nine years of research, they are still saying that they can find no relation between a fatty diet and heart disease.
 
I was on 10mg lipitor for about 1 year. My total CHO dropped abotu 100pts, but began to steadily rise again. I also started encountering weird muscle aches. After talking to my doc I stopped using them.

A later GP I spoke to asked me about my CHO (which was 270 at the time), but he was more concerned with my parent's and grandparent's health. As no one died from heart disease he said not to worry, just eat right and keep exercising.

My current values on min. HRT dose test and 20mg a day of Nolvadex:
total: 217
LDL: 155
HDL: 57
Tri: 101

Note my values improved a lot after getting on TRT. My Triglycerides have been as low as 90...
 
Last edited:
Just my case

Ive got heart failure now due to my heart attack and Im on crestor, the smaller sized dose. I am also taking niaspan to help raise my HDL. Crestor has been shown to raise HDL some too, although its nothing really significant.

Ive have had zero side effects, and now for the first time my HDL is up in the mid 30s. My LDL was last measured at 70.
 
Last edited:
So let me get this right.No need to take into consideration family history,risk vs. benfits,how one tolerates the medication etc etc ect.... just a blanket statement "get off statins" with a study conducted on WOMEN.

No consideration that a well respected cardiologist or very sharp internist etc... might have looked at the big picture and for each patient on a case by case basis made the decision if statin therapy was a good choice for the patient???

Then lets take it into a tyrade about big Pharm propaganda??

Is everyone a candidate?? no!! are they overprescribed?? yes

Do some benefit ??yes

To go on a message board and tell everyone to quit statins is pretty wreckless advice in my opinion.People that do indeed qaulify and benefit from this therapy might be persuaded by your tainted , jaded and bitter view of medicine and actually listen and stop treatment against their doctors advice.
Because some guy on a message board said so?!?!?!:rolleyes:


off course you consider those things but no matter what those things are the answer should never be well here are some statins.
they are terrible drugs and are not a good option for anyone, they kill people period. the problem is exactly that they never do look at the big picture, that is the whole issue. the isolate certain things in your body to make a certain case for a drug but that is not how the body works.

you want something more in depth read this

http://www.westonaprice.org/Dangers...t-Popular-Cholesterol-Lowering-Medicines.html

anyone considering these drugs needs to read this article
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Total page views
575,970,642
Threads
138,431
Messages
2,856,474
Members
161,434
Latest member
SvegiNazim
NapsGear
HGH Power Store email banner
yourdailyvitamins
Prowrist straps store banner
yourrawmaterials
3
raws
Savage Labs Store email
Syntherol Site Enhancing Oil Synthol
aqpharma
yms-GIF-210x131-Banne-B
hulabs
ezgif-com-resize-2-1
MA Research Chem store banner
MA Supps Store Banner
volartek
Keytech banner
thc
Godbullraw-bottom-banner
Injection Instructions for beginners
YMS-210x131-V02
Back
Top