Aa
Do Statin's really work?
I don't question whether or not they reduce cholesterol. I'm wonding if they really have the effect or the benefit that "they" have been telling us about. That is that it will reduce your chances of heart attacks etc.
That is I recently read an article and the basics of it are that there are decades of experience with Statin's. And what are the outcomes?
The outcome is that a VERY high percentage I think if I remember right like 70% to 80% of the people having heart attacks and hardening of the artieries had NORMAL cholesterol levels. Many as a result of Statins. So if it is cholesterol that is the problem, why if we've had decades of lowered and normalized cholesterol has not there been a corresponding decrease in heart attacks? ESPECIALLY in those folks who have normal cholesterol levels?
But this article was asking the very basic question that it seems no one is asking. And that is if all these decades of experience of lowering cholesterol has not resulted in the benefits, Is the cause something OTHER than cholesterol.
And in fact your body NEEDS cholesterol. In particular for proper brain function. Is this the reason for increase dementia and Alzhiemers? Are we starving our brain of the needed cholesterol due to statin use?
Also remember that the NUMBER 1 money maker for the Big Pharma companies are STATIN's. And "they" seem to continue to recommend lower and lower cholesterol levels as being "normal".
One has to ask. Are these things just a a scam to get people to buy more Statin drugs so they can make more money? The lower cholesterol mantra has been harping away for decades spending hundreds of Billions of dollars in the process. And it seemingly has had no effect what so ever. But no one seems to ask if we are barking up the wrong tree!
Einstein stated that one definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expect different results." Are we insane?
After all. If the entire population is on a statin, the pharmicudical companies make HUGE profits. Also the 95% average they use to determine "normal" cholesterol levels would increasingly go down as more and more people are on statins to artifically lower the average cholesterol level of the population. Which in turn would result in a recommendation for lower cholesterol levels to be quote unquote "normal". Thus the self fulfilling prophecy continues.
I'm starting to think that with the heart attacks and hardening of the artieries not being impacated by lower cholesterol of the victims of heart attacks etc. That in fact Cholesterol may NOT be the issue at all.
I'm seriously thinking of stopping my Statin. As my levels were not outrageously high anyhow. And I now excercise regularly and eat better etc.
That is I recently read an article and the basics of it are that there are decades of experience with Statin's. And what are the outcomes?
The outcome is that a VERY high percentage I think if I remember right like 70% to 80% of the people having heart attacks and hardening of the artieries had NORMAL cholesterol levels. Many as a result of Statins. So if it is cholesterol that is the problem, why if we've had decades of lowered and normalized cholesterol has not there been a corresponding decrease in heart attacks? ESPECIALLY in those folks who have normal cholesterol levels?
But this article was asking the very basic question that it seems no one is asking. And that is if all these decades of experience of lowering cholesterol has not resulted in the benefits, Is the cause something OTHER than cholesterol.
And in fact your body NEEDS cholesterol. In particular for proper brain function. Is this the reason for increase dementia and Alzhiemers? Are we starving our brain of the needed cholesterol due to statin use?
Also remember that the NUMBER 1 money maker for the Big Pharma companies are STATIN's. And "they" seem to continue to recommend lower and lower cholesterol levels as being "normal".
One has to ask. Are these things just a a scam to get people to buy more Statin drugs so they can make more money? The lower cholesterol mantra has been harping away for decades spending hundreds of Billions of dollars in the process. And it seemingly has had no effect what so ever. But no one seems to ask if we are barking up the wrong tree!
Einstein stated that one definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expect different results." Are we insane?
After all. If the entire population is on a statin, the pharmicudical companies make HUGE profits. Also the 95% average they use to determine "normal" cholesterol levels would increasingly go down as more and more people are on statins to artifically lower the average cholesterol level of the population. Which in turn would result in a recommendation for lower cholesterol levels to be quote unquote "normal". Thus the self fulfilling prophecy continues.
I'm starting to think that with the heart attacks and hardening of the artieries not being impacated by lower cholesterol of the victims of heart attacks etc. That in fact Cholesterol may NOT be the issue at all.
I'm seriously thinking of stopping my Statin. As my levels were not outrageously high anyhow. And I now excercise regularly and eat better etc.
My comments above were meant for the original poster. My apology to Flycaster305.
There is data compiled by the NIH showing the decline in heart disease over the decades since the decline began around 1968. The original poster has made an observation that most of the general public does not recognize. That being despite aggressive cholesterol lowering in our country, there has not been a corresponding drop in death from cardiovascular disease.
This would certainly raise eyebrows. But there are multiple things happening at once complicating the picture. Yet it is true, the decline rate 20 years prior, and 20 years after statins remained unchanged.
But at least death from heart disease has been declining since 1968 and that is good news. But statins didn't happen until 1987, so one has to ask why heart disease declined at the same rate for almost 20 years before statins came into the picture.
I do not have the answer and I'm not sure anybody does.
What we have today to testify to the effectiveness of statins are industry sponsored studies, which are under criticism for coming from a biased source. The manufacturer doing a study on its own product doesn't sit well with everyone.
We have industry funded studies showing a difference between two groups, Statin and placebo, showing a 1 to 2% absolute benefit for the statin group, BUT nobody on planet earth knows who was destined to have a heart attack and who wasn't, so measuring absolute prevention is, well, impossible.
To know absolutely for certain a statin prevented a fatal heart attack, we would have to have proof an individual would have suffered a fatal event had they not been taking the statin....can't be done.
This would certainly raise eyebrows. But there are multiple things happening at once complicating the picture. Yet it is true, the decline rate 20 years prior, and 20 years after statins remained unchanged.
But at least death from heart disease has been declining since 1968 and that is good news. But statins didn't happen until 1987, so one has to ask why heart disease declined at the same rate for almost 20 years before statins came into the picture.
I do not have the answer and I'm not sure anybody does.
What we have today to testify to the effectiveness of statins are industry sponsored studies, which are under criticism for coming from a biased source. The manufacturer doing a study on its own product doesn't sit well with everyone.
We have industry funded studies showing a difference between two groups, Statin and placebo, showing a 1 to 2% absolute benefit for the statin group, BUT nobody on planet earth knows who was destined to have a heart attack and who wasn't, so measuring absolute prevention is, well, impossible.
To know absolutely for certain a statin prevented a fatal heart attack, we would have to have proof an individual would have suffered a fatal event had they not been taking the statin....can't be done.
Do you have research studies to share that indicate statins aren't effective?
What I meant with my original post is more the broad scope.
That is with the MASSIVE and widespread use of statins in our nation. We have NOT seen the corresponding decrease in heart disease and heart attacks and strokes etc. Even though more and more people as the population as a whole are in fact keeping their blood cholesterol levels under control.
if in fact blood level cholesterol was in fact the problem that we are told. Then we should see a significant decline in the heart attacks and strokes. Since we don't, it seems perfectly reasonable to ask the question whether or not cholesterol was/is the culprit.
Are we as a medical comunity and a nation chasing the wrong rabbit? Are we simply chasing our tail?
That is with the MASSIVE and widespread use of statins in our nation. We have NOT seen the corresponding decrease in heart disease and heart attacks and strokes etc. Even though more and more people as the population as a whole are in fact keeping their blood cholesterol levels under control.
if in fact blood level cholesterol was in fact the problem that we are told. Then we should see a significant decline in the heart attacks and strokes. Since we don't, it seems perfectly reasonable to ask the question whether or not cholesterol was/is the culprit.
Are we as a medical comunity and a nation chasing the wrong rabbit? Are we simply chasing our tail?
Hi,
I am on with atovastatin for the last 2 years and my lipid profile is slowly reducing but not a marked effect. Now-a-days the doctors are adding fenofibrate to statins to make it more effective. If the hypercholesterol is familial, it seems the statins are less effective. Please check with your doctor if you have familial hypercholesterol.
I am on with atovastatin for the last 2 years and my lipid profile is slowly reducing but not a marked effect. Now-a-days the doctors are adding fenofibrate to statins to make it more effective. If the hypercholesterol is familial, it seems the statins are less effective. Please check with your doctor if you have familial hypercholesterol.
Another interesting thing I noticed is that most people here have way higher triglycerides then me, while on the carnivore forum most people have them lower then me. That makes sense, as I still eat carbs, just not that much. So in fact it's like this: low fat diet = high blood fat, and high fat/protein diet = low blood fat.
Since we ate a diet closer to mine for the past couple of hundred thousand years, and we eat grains only the last 15000 years, I guess everyone's cholesterol was high and triglycerides low back in the day, and perhaps that's how it's supposed to be. Either that, or our cholesterol system has erroneously evolved.
I'll stick with the animal fat and meat and let the body regulate itself the way it sees fit. A heart attack could make me consider letting Pfizer regulate my body, but until then I'll be betting on mother nature.
Since we ate a diet closer to mine for the past couple of hundred thousand years, and we eat grains only the last 15000 years, I guess everyone's cholesterol was high and triglycerides low back in the day, and perhaps that's how it's supposed to be. Either that, or our cholesterol system has erroneously evolved.
I'll stick with the animal fat and meat and let the body regulate itself the way it sees fit. A heart attack could make me consider letting Pfizer regulate my body, but until then I'll be betting on mother nature.
You are reading content posted in the Cholesterol Community
Is a low-fat diet really that heart healthy after all? James D. Nicolantonio, PharmD, urges us to reconsider decades-long dietary guidelines.
Can depression and anxiety cause heart disease? Get the facts in this Missouri Medicine report.
Fish oil, folic acid, vitamin C. Find out if these supplements are heart-healthy or overhyped.
Learn what happens before, during and after a heart attack occurs.
What are the pros and cons of taking fish oil for heart health? Find out in this article from Missouri Medicine.
How to lower your heart attack risk.
