Hello Everyone. I have P-Afib which is well managed with Verapamil 120mcg. I take Ramiprimil 5mg and Apixaban.
I'm lucky my Afib has remained mild once on this treatment for the last two /three years - hopefully will stay that way- providing I keep taking Verapamil. I get the odd flutter for a few seconds that I'm aware of maybe a couple times of week. I also had comprehensive successful bc cancer treatment 8yrs ago but unfortunately it caused cardiotoxicity, a now recognised side effect.....hence the P-Afib.
Those of you have read a previous post of mine will know my GP is super keen for me to take a statin but has failed to give me any logical evidential reasoning but uses emotional blackmail instead....telling me I will die if I don't take them.(She must be the 3rd GP to tell me in the last 3yrs that if I dont take this drug or I must carry on taking one that I want to stop or I will die! Am tired of the emotional blackmail approach & its really not an effective approach with a cancer survivor in any case!! Am not keen to take a statin without solid evidential research and proper advice. Am waiting for an appointment with my EP to discuss. Does anyone have any information on P. Afib & statins? The argument is that it reduces major cardiac events in AF but no mention of P. Afib. Be grateful for any pointers. I'd like to read up before my appointment.
Sorry to go on about this but it's praying on my mind. Knowledge is power and all that. I feel very ill informed and therefore it's difficult to make a logical informed decision. Thank you!
Written by
waveylines
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
There seems to be a move to get people on to statins, even if their HDL is higher than LDL (as my wife). I think the first point is to check whether there are interactions between your present medications, and possible statins. I vaguely remember a mention of increased risk of bleeding if you're on an anticoagulant, then take a statin. The NHS used to list this type of information. I now check WebMD and the Mayo Clinic.
Yes you are right. Verapamil does the same thing when used with statins increases effect of anti coagulants......to be honest I think its contra indicated for me.....if the GP had actually read my file she would've seen this......well I hope she would! I may have misread this next bit but does it interfere with thyroid meds?
It's a blanket treatment approach to adults in a certain age group. There's talk of millions being put on statins. Given its a life long medication big Pharma must be rubbing their hands with glee! My understanding is that the plan is to treat those who are overweight, have hypertension, any heart or stroke risks related conditions.
I checked, as the GP who prescribed statins for my wife asked whether I was prescribed statins, as my wife had mentioned that I had'd a stroke, and was on an anticoagulant. I found it hard to believe that if I knew about statins with anticoagulants, that the GP didn't. Then again, after I had pulmonary toxicity that caused my lungs to look as though I had serious COVID, and apparently I was close to death, the respiratory specialist suggested Rivaroxaban for my AF. I pointed out that the NHS web site (that was operating then) said that people with lung conditions should not be prescribed it. We looked at the site together, and he said, I've been prescribing Rivaroxaban for people with lung conditions. When I was in hospital with one lung hardly working, I said that I must not have dronedaone or amiodaone. When I'm not well, my AF becomes more noticeable. They put me on a saline drip, but didn't telll me that it contained amiodarone: it was marked on the drip bag. As a result, I now had two lungs that were barely working.
As part of taking responsibility for our health, we need to know the details of our condition(s). The downside of that is that some medical professionals get raty as they see it as another person using Dr Google.
Am sorry to gear what's happened John. As far as doctors getting ratty.....they can do so if they want but we are the ones who live with the cinsequences if their lack of awareness.....not them! So I dint care. Long ago when I extremely poorly treated for hypothyroidism, diagnosed as CFS/ME I decided I eill be polite but don't have any great expectations of them. All my major illnesses Uve self diagnosed and had to lead them by the nose, feeding them info until the penny drops! Lol....
That's why we need to share experiences online such as HealthUnlocked, and Zoom forums (should that be fora?) like the ones for stroke. Until COVID, I was in a face-to-face Patient Participation Group (PPG) with a Health Practice for 11,200 patients. That's starting again, but it's one PPG for four Health Practices. I've refused as I can't represent another three Practices; people and medical professionals that I don't know. I know that sounds odd when I'm in a small group of stroke survivors and medical professionals discussing regional stroke provision, and as a participant in studies for universities and other bodies. However, I have more of an emotional connection to my local Health Centre. Emotional connection? That's the effect of Finisteride
Yes I have noticed that there is more publicity again for statins again telling us that they are beneficial for other things. My wife whose Mum died with and of effects of high cholesterol eventually asked her surgery for a test - they wouldn't give her one so she had one done privately and took the result to her GP - it was over what it should have been but GP refused to do further tests or put her on a statin - we were amazed as so many people were being put on them. She has still never had a cholesterol test by GP - though I have had many. My GP put me on statins the first time they were hailing them as the new wonder drug but I became dizzy and fainted twice so they took me off them. My wife is fine - slightly over weight now but is still puzzled by this when everyone else in her age group is being offered them - not sure she would take them anyway but its just puzzling that in some cases they are being pushed and others were you would have thought they may at least be suggested due to family history and they are not.
Do you have hypothyroidism? Look on NHS websites re thyroid and you’ll see that statins ‘are likely to cause muscle damage in people with hypothyroidism’ and that they can ‘increase the risk of diabetes in thyroid patients’. I’ve recently been through this challenge with my doctors! Being hypothyroid can cause high cholesterol. Mine has now come down since I’ve been optimally medicated for thyroid. (The quotes are from NHS sites…easy to find if you search I think. )
Ooh thank you for that info. I didn't know that! I do have Hypothyroidism. Had it for 20yrs. Am optimally treated....though that was hard won battle!! I will have a look at the NHS website. And if that is the case I will be writing to my GP asking for an explanation, alongside commenting on the bullying tactics If you can find the link & post I'd be most grateful.
Also, you may wish to read a book called The Great Cholesterol Myth, by Johnny Boden and Stephen Sinatra. One of the authors is a cardiologist. An interesting read.
Sorry been out for lunch so late to the party. Here in UK GP's salaries are to some extent based on QOF. Quality Outcome Framework introduced by the Blair administation. This means that they have to discuss the subject of amongst other things statins with all patients in order the get the necessary points on their chart for full salary.
Note that I said discuss. When rejecting statins with my own GP some years ago I apologised if it affected her remuneration but that I felt strongly abut them. Her reply was that it mattered not since she'd had the discussion so points were awarded.
The fact is there is no reason why you should be forced into taking something that you do not wish so stand firm with your GP. Tell them you are not stopping them from claiming and not to be such a bully.
So I take Verapamil. Given GP hadn't read my file, who knows what wouldve been prescribed if Id agreed......there's a scary thought....
BHF website says you can't have a too low cholesterol level so it's good statins will lower the level further. Really? This reminds me of the argument that has been made for several decades that you only need T4 (Levothyroxine) and the other thyroid hormones dont matter in Hypothyroidism. Recent research is uncovering that the other thyroid hormones do have a function!! Surprise surprise...
So the idea that you can't have a too.low cholesterol level seems a nonsense to me. Surely our bodies make it for a reason?
I was put on an estrogen blocker....wanted me to take it for 10yrs post BC to lower reoccurance. I took it for 7yrs by then I couldn't think straight, memory shocking, my body was in a terrible state. 7 months ago research came out on those terrible effects on the body and long term effects of developing Altzeimer like conditions. For years women were frowned upon for stopping taking these tablets and were told it is was psychological. Now of course they've found out those changes are real.
Honestly.... the problem with research is that it does not look in the round....its telescopic.
My cholesterol went to about 6, so I was prescribed 10mg of atorvastatin daily , this took my cholesterol down to just over 2 which is too low, cholesterol is vital for the brain, so my GP told me to half the pills so that I take 5mg per day - this keeps my total cholesterol at around 4, with a healthy numbers for the 'good' cholesterol. Keeps me happy, no side effects, pleased to take it because years ago I had what could have been a TIA, so I was sent for a doppler of the carotid, which was fine but did show stable plaque, so obviously had been manufacturing the stuff.
Am glad your GP was better unformed & it's great it has helped. Interesting that your GP said cholesterol is vital for the brain. Will look that up. Thank you!
thanks for your information I take 20 mg of simvastatin but doctors have not really explained the dose.having a blood test in two weeks for check on digoxin and bisoprolol so I hope it shows cholesterol level
I was on Examastane. They all have the same effect....zero your estrogen! Tamxophan on the other hand allows estrogen in your body but the cancer can't utilise me. That's what my oncologist told me. I decided 7yrs was enough & I'd take my chances after that!!
Another reason why I find it hard to believe they haven't even discussed it with my Wife in the first place - though she sort of forced them to by asking for cholesterol test which they wouldn't give. Ah well that's good.
Thanks Bob. Thing is having looked a bit I've now discovered that statins are now used to lower the incident of cardiotoxicity in cancer treatment. Can't find anything much about treating cardiotoxicity and the use of statins post treatment. I feel the GPs aggressive approach prevented any discussion! She reckoned they dont get any money forbputting you on them.
So I've rang the Bristish Heart Foundation and spoke to one of the nurses. Very nice. She said its all based on a computer programme that sounds very generic from what she said. Eg Afib....all Afib are treated at same level of risk irrespective ofcdegree or type. It doesn't look at many factors either.
So I don't know if statins would benefit my cardiotoxicity. She didnt know & reckoned my EP wouldn't know.
Honestly am trying to look at this in a balanced way but the lack of solid research evidence is rather astounding. She did say they benefit Afib patients because they lower stroke risk...thats been proven. I said but doesn't my anticoagulant do that....I was told 70% reduction. She said yes it does but this is a different process. It's to do with hardening of veins arteries. So I said but isn't that why you need to have a good cholesterol balance? Yes said she. I said but my cholesterol levels are fine! So she said but as you age your arteries veins harden....statins reduces this. I've never heard of that one before. Have you?
I have been advised to take statins, but between proof of lack of efficacy and both frequent minor and occasional major side effect I politely declined. Then when still being pushed I de lined and changed docs. etheral
Congratulations on being a cancer survivor. May you continue to be blessed.
You do not mention the type of statin or your cholesterol level. If your LDL cholesterol is high (over 110, if I recall correctly) statins like lipitor (atorvastatin) are recommended even though your overall cholesterol level may be satisfactory.
It is true that your veins harden with age. With your medical history, would encourage you to continue to do research to make the decision more comfortable. I have been on Lipitor for 12 years with no side effects though I have no other conditions that may result in side effects. Lipitor is well tolerated by many and frequently recommended in the US, especially for the elderly.
Thank you. I am very fortunate to be here still. And grateful to our NHS who saved my life. I think the ranges are different here to yours due to the blood tests they use. But both cholesterol levels are within range as is the overall level. My risk factors are that I take a blood pressure tablet plus verapamil fot P-Afib & tachycardia, my age. The heart issues r sadly a consequent of necessary treatment.
Am really glad you have done well on your statin. Good to hear from others on them doing well.
If you don’t have coronary artery disease you don’t really need a statin ?. For a GP to suggest you will die without taking a statin in the absence of CAD and cholesterol within range seem a little odd and wrong to me. Statins have a small anti inflammatory and anti clotting effect. Maybe this is what he had in mind ? If he says he feels you’re at high risk then insist on a Ct calcium score if you get a zero then you’re good to go.
I have A Fib, age 68, and the GP has never suggested statins. My other half has never had these suggested either. Perhaps it’s a practice that isn’t as keen on them, I’m not sure,
I think its something they're going to be pushing. It was on the news the other night about putting millions of us on them! Isn't the NHS hard up enough already? Cost of doing that will be huge because you take them for the rest of your life!!
You would think so. I did ask if I needed cholesterol and blood glucose checked, just last week - was told it was fine in 2021. I do think that some practices may be more resistant to offering them more widely.
It's not really about the cholesterol. The argument is that statins protects you as you age from heart attacks and strokes. The level of cholesterol is irrelevant.
Hmmmm but causes other problems instead! And what about the fact that you do need cholesterol for the brain. The dementia bit is only if you have high cholesterol I believe.
I fought off statins for several years but there is a large amount of information that they help reduce stroke and heart attack risk in laterlife. I am on Atorvastatin aged 74. Ask your EP for his opinion.
I would advise anyone with your opinion on 'large amount of information that they help reduce heart attacks and strokes..' to take a look at Dr Paul Mason and others under the heading 'Low Carb Down Under' on YouTube, exploding the myths, lies, manipulation of statistics and hiding of contradictory data on statins. Here's a link to one of Dr Mason's excellent lectures:
My stroke was caused by thyroid cancer. Plus had AF which caused it.
No anything in my carotid arteries.
I take no sugar but I drink milky cocoa organic and berry smoothies. I have dairy free almond magnum icecream! Make my own topping on turkish based pizza.
We need to live happy! The person who declined RAIodine and suppression of TSH.
Yes am going to. Due an appointment soon. I think the problem arises is that each specialists knows about their area and therefore may not be aware of the effects on other parts of the body. The body I'd finely tuned.....knock one bit about and it kicks off elsewhere.
If after homework you are still in doubt and its not an emergency don't take it!
I am afraid following the Covid vaccine debacle (serious levels of side effects now becoming known) I have low faith in medical research or the mainstream Press funded directly or indirectly by Big Pharma.
Must be near 20 years ago now they looked at my cholesterol around 6 and leant on me to take statins, which I declined. Relief when 10 years ago heart & Carotid arteries were clear (different if you have a problem there). The latest I have read (sorry don't remember the source) was that after years of saying the LDL part off total cholesterol was bad, now its apparently good!
yet my cholesterol was at 6 and the doctor didn’t even advise me I took his word for that being fine. 7 years later I’m diagnosed with coronary disease at 47. Everyone’s different. Statins can’t fix a bad diet and they do have life affecting side effects in some people. If you have a good diet and a clear calcium score or CT angiogram then you likely don’t need a precautionary statin. If you’ve had a heart attack or have coronary plaques then alongside diet statins are effective in helping slow down or prevent further growth and help stabilise plaques. They also have a anti inflammatory effect and potential anti clotting, even harsh critics of statins admit this to be the case. They aren’t the silver bullet people think they are, diet is paramount. The NNT.com is a good resource if you want the stats summarised from the science.
Large scale epidemiological studies done in Scandinavia have shown that women hardly benefit at all from statins and elderly women the least. Worse from the statin pushers perspective they showed tbat elderly women with much higher cholesterol levels than the 5nmol/l cut off lived longest . They were less likely to die of anything including cardiovascular disease. We need our cholesterol and more so as we age. It protects us from infection and cancer. Our brains have a very high level of cholesterol. It is accepted that if statins have any benefit at all it is for the anti inflammatory effects not because of cholesterol lowering. This is why they push them if your cholesterol is normal Before statins there was a class of cholesterol lowering drugs called fibrates. They lowered cholesterol effectively but had zero effect on coronary artery disease. If your cholesterol is normal than lowering it will probably be harmful. This idea that it can't be too low is rubbish. There are plenty of things one can take that will lower inflammation and are less harmful than statins. There is some Japanese research which suggests that statins are implicated in CHF. I recently had blood tests which showed my cholesterol had gone up quite a lot - over 7 nmol/l . My LDL was over range but so was my HDL. But my TSH had soared to 6.3. I had several times in the few weeks before the tests forgotten my Levo. Doc said nothing whatsoever about the cholesterol. Said the only thing that bothered him about the tests was the rise in TSH . I mentioned forgetting to take it and he gave me a prescription for more blood tests before my next visit ( here you have to go see the doc every six months yo get your meds prescription renewed) . If still too high he will put up the Levo.
All very true. I think the most destructive thing for my heart health and coronary disease was my high Triglycerides. My Trig to HDL ratio was poor. There’s so many interwoven factors that aren’t studied fairly against the the prescriptions. Although diet and lifestyle is acknowledge by all as paramount in any treatments. A pill won’t save you from poor lifestyle. And a pill for no reason is obviously detrimental.
And under treatment or no treatment of hypothyroidism does lead to heart problems eventually...... The trouble is GPs are just blinded by blood tests and just look at those and what the labs say. And follow their computer screen. So much gets missed because of this. Blood tests are an aide not the main assessment tool!! One of the young GPs said to me......oh medicine is much more scientific these days - blood tests are the way we diagnose- much more effective than the old way. Sums it up! I personally think it's lazy doctoring and they miss loads of clues.....its also why most young doctors couldn't spot hypothyroidism when a patient walks through their door......no matter how extreme the signs present themselves. Instead they spend hours filling in referral forms to a hospital specialist. Then patients sit on a waiting list for months waiting to be seen. And after they have been seen are sent back to the GPs to manage their condition....but many GPs dont know how to. Modern way is not that efficient then thought I!!
Exactly. When my stepfather was in hospital for a bypass I got chatting to a woman in the hospital lobby . One look at her face screamed myxoedema - pale , puffy , expressionless virtually ,no brows and lashes. She told me she had recently been diagnosed with hypothyroidism. Well you don"t get that myxie look till you've been hypo for some time and indeed she said how she had felt unwell for years. I bet she was one of the poor sods who either never got any bloods done because the stupid doctor did not recognise her symptoms ( like my husband 's ex whose TSH was 100+ by the gime she was tested) or whose TSH took years to rise to a level where the doc would treat. I bet young doctors are not even taught to recognise the physical signs of myxoedema.
Shocking but sadly not surprising. They will probably under treat her too! Poor lady. Medicine took a downward turn when they stopped looking at the patient!!
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
statins/coq10/methotrexate
Paroxysmal Afib
AF and Statins 
