My hubby is 62 and a type 2 diabetic 5.6 (on medication) His blood pressure is normal. His weight is perfect for his height. His total cholesterol is 3.2 (he doesn't know the broken down figures). He's never had any heart problems and is in decent health otherwise. The doctor prescribed 20mg of Atorvastatin a day because the computer told him to - based on his risk calculations. His age and the diabetes are the main factors that have caused his risk to be high. The doctor acknowledges this and can offer no other reason why he should take this drug. Maybe someone out there can?
My hubby knows I'm extremely anti- statins after both of my parents suffered severe health problems whilst on them. On the other hand he thinks that doctors know best - even when they blame their computers for recommending a cholesterol lowering drug to someone with total cholesterol of 3.2 and who prescribe it anyway. We'd appreciate your thoughts on this. Thank you.
Written by
zorro1
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Please do not go for medication at the moment. Ask for all the lipid parameters to check the risk yourself on the internet calculators.
There may be a valid reason for GP to offer statin as he has the medical records. Before going on statin look at life style change, food intake control and regular exercise if you are not doing this at the moment.
You can have a free blood glucose check at the local chemist but may have to pay for cholesterol check.
Take a look at jbs3, NHS calculator and qrisk calculator on the Internet to find out what are the input requirement. Very simple to use.
Human body makes 2/3 cholesterol and 1/3 from food intake, questions to GP is if the cholesterol is 3.2, "Why do I need statin?"
I agree, Traci......this is a disgrace and says to me that this GP is simply following NHS guidelines without even thinking about his patient or all the research into the side effects of statins.....I would be sacking this GP too.
Much as I appreciate the valuable assistance computers can give - common sense must prevail. I totally agree with Traci - register with another GP if at all possible.
Yup, seems too much reliance on the machine. Look what happened when we started taking anti biotics like sweets. I'd be challenging the GP at the very least.
I agree diabetics are at risk but the numbers just don't add up. . .
Thank you everyone for your thoughts, comments and links. My hubby has already been doing some reading around the issues and is inclined not to take the statins at the moment. He is going to go back to the doctor and get a proper breakdown of his stats and also push to know more about the benefits/consequences for him taking/not taking the drugs.
Bala - we will also do the risk test once we have the figures.
My husband actually likes his doctor despite everything - so will probably persevere and not seek to switch. I've never met any of the doctors at our surgery so can't comment from personal experience.
Please ask your GP for a print out of the blood test results for your records.
I do listen to my GP but take my own decisions on medication!
Have an open mind and do your won calculation, once you have taken the first rick number then you can vary the parameters to see it for your self which number needs controlling. By the way I was involved in one of the Internet calculator development!
Many studies have shown that statins can increase the incidence of new-onset diabetes...as much as 47% in women, depending on dose of the statin, and type of statin used. It seems that they upset the regulation of insulin.
If this is the case it would seem that statins would/could cause difficulty in regulating insulin balance in those who already have diabetes.
A doctor will and can look at all the blood numbers, BP, blood cholesterol and blood glucose before looking at medication.
Some medication can induce other medical problems therefore we have to be very careful. Have read reports that discuss insulin resistance and offering medical advice. HUK looks at medication to lower cholesterol. Advantages or disadvantages lowering cholesterol or medication for cholesterol is another subject. Food intake control and regular exercise for life style change is a starting point.
Bala, Thanks for replying, but unless I misunderstood you didn't address the issue I raised and I didn't ask a clear question. I'll try again.
"Has anyone seen evidence that statins would/could cause difficulty in regulating insulin balance in those who already have diabetes?"
I'm not asking this in order to make a decision about statins but rather to research this particular question. I'm retired research RN and can generally interpret scientific papers so those references are also welcome.
I should get a second opinion before you take anything, and while you are at it ask what the side effects are of any drug prescribed. They never tell you about those.
Many of the Statins side effects are far worse than high Cholesterol. Been there.
I was give statins by the hospital,I was suffering with high blood pressure and was,over weight...Etc...I reduced my weight down to 73 kilo...which helped me reduce my blood pressure down to normal,I improved my diet and been regularly to the gym for over two years...but my doctor never did any assessment and just wanted pump out their pills....the surgeon who reset my heart beat finally told me that I did not need the statins now....doctors must be making profits by prescriptions etc....or are just very lazy in their care....Most will put men on statins after a certain age in their 40s as an easy option due to being over weight,heart problems,blood pressure issues etc...however do they really check out their patient's properly like they do in hospitals.... I think some are getting highly paid,treating people as numbers,not humans.....
Ive never taken statins...but it did wake me up to improve my health in a more positive way....drugs should be the last resort to to an age issue.... Tell your husband to do his research first and find another doctor and hopefully he will find his answers....my docter should not be in practice but thats another issue.... Read other posts here and hopefully you will find helpful points to think about....
Zorro1 and others who are questioning use of statins...I would like to suggest you read "Growing Doubt on Statin Drugs — the problem of drug-lifestyle interaction" at the link below.
I'm cautious about the websites I view and especially those I recommend...I believe this one is credible and the author's approach thoughtful and practical. In addition he is not trying to sell anything! I read all of the Comments (scroll down) as I found most helpful and interesting, with some being really funny.
There is a lot of misinformation in these replies. The cholesterol level is not the issue as the studies show benefit at all levels of cholesterol; atherosclerosis is not just due to cholesterol but a combination of risks: Age, gender & family history are not modifiable. Lipids, Blood pressure, smoking, exercise and diet are. The calculators on GP and other's computers take most of these into account. Also it's not "just a computer calculator". These reflect studies by many expert doctors & scientists use thousands of patients over cumulatively 100K+ years of observations. In general statins reduce vascular events by ~20-30% compared to placebo. Bottom line for me advising my male diabetic patients in their 60s is that the benefits outweigh the risks & of course keep things reviewed in terms of manageable side effects. Keep speaking to your GP is the other advice. They usually have well balanced views and experience in this area.
Would it be possible to list all the " There is a lot of misinformation in these replies".
Risk calculators are man made with data available at that time!
What is your understanding on this "Bottom line for me advising my male diabetic patients in their 60s is that the benefits outweigh the risks & of course keep things reviewed in terms of manageable side effects."
At the end of the day NHS, GP manage a person on their register therefore one has to go to GP for help with medication or advice!!!
I was put on my GP practice diabetic register at the age of 66, refused medication and went on a life style change and am benefitting from it, it is a slow process.
Sorry hard to list all comments as time tight (working a talk for a patient group tomorrow); but my comments obviously direct at the important issues as i see it using my experience in this area.
Data which is not acquired cannot be evaluated...unasked questions will have no answers. Physicians, including GPs who regularly treat patients with elevated cholesterol, often do not have balanced opinions...they simply have opinions, and do not or cannot take time to listen carefully to their patients who are trying to tell them how medications, e.g. statins, negatively affect the quality of their lives. [Bracketed comments below are mine].
The excerpt below was taken from Diabetes Care August 2013 vol. 36 no. Supplement 2 S325-S330
Rafael Bitzur, MD⇑, Hofit Cohen, MD, Yehuda Kamari, MD and Dror Harats, MD
"In randomized controlled trials, the incidence of statin myopathy [muscle disease, including weakness, pain] is ~1.5–5.0%. However, this low incidence may be misleading for several reasons. First, in most studies patients with a history of statin intolerance were excluded. Other studies had a single-blinded statin run-in phase, and patients experiencing muscle-related symptoms or CK [creatine kinase, which reflects muscle inflammation] elevations during this phase were excluded. Patients who tend to be at risk for developing muscle-related symptoms, such as women, elderly patients, and patients with significant comorbidity [co-existing illnesses or conditions] who comprise a large proportion of statin-treated patients in real-life settings, are underrepresented in randomized controlled trials. Some studies have defined muscle-related effects by elevated CK levels only, disregarding myalgia [muscle pain]. Last but not least, patients enrolled in studies might be motivated and so minimize reporting of mild myalgias, thus leading to underestimation of the magnitude of the problem."
And this does not even mention the other common statin adverse effects such as cognitive dysfunction and painful gastrointestinal symptoms.
Thank you so much to everyone who has responded to my original query.
Since my original post I have been doing some further reading around statins and there is indeed a great deal of conflicting information out there.
One of the scariest things I have discovered though is the summary of an article published in 'Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology' in March 2015.
The article is entitled - Statins stimulate atherosclerosis and heart failure: pharmacological mechanisms
It costs £89 to read the full article but the summary is as follows...
In contrast to the current belief that cholesterol reduction with statins decreases atherosclerosis, we present a perspective that statins may be causative in coronary artery calcification and can function as mitochondrial toxins that impair muscle function in the heart and blood vessels through the depletion of coenzyme Q10 and ‘heme A’, and thereby ATP generation. Statins inhibit the synthesis of vitamin K2, the cofactor for matrix Gla-protein activation, which in turn protects arteries from calcification. Statins inhibit the biosynthesis of selenium containing proteins, one of which is glutathione peroxidase serving to suppress peroxidative stress. An impairment of selenoprotein biosynthesis may be a factor in congestive heart failure, reminiscent of the dilated cardiomyopathies seen with selenium deficiency. Thus, the epidemic of heart failure and atherosclerosis that plagues the modern world may paradoxically be aggravated by the pervasive use of statin drugs. We propose that current statin treatment guidelines be critically reevaluated.
This is published in what appears to be a legitimate peer reviewed pharmacology journal, but I don't know - can anyone on here vouch for them?
Here's the link to the summary, for anyone who wants to check it out
My goodness Zorro, this is quite some article! It does appear to be a legitimate journal, the summary also appears in the PubMed library. It doesn't seem to have been picked up by any mainstream media.
I found this article explaining some more about the original findings.
Thank you Penel, your link does help clarify what has been proposed in the article's summary. I hadn't posted it under it's own heading as I wasn't clear about the validity of the source and I wouldn't want to scare people unnecessarily! I do hope that Heart UK will offer their view on this.
The link above leads to the site of Wellness Resources...they exist to sell supplements and vitamins. This article was written by a chiropractor and is not presented in a scientific manner, but rather in a rabble-rousing fashion in order to sell CoQ10 and Melanin.
The original abstract from Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology, Mar 2015, is very interesting and I plan to research more on the topic...thanks for posting, Zorro.
I had hoped to find an fuller explanation of the science details, not realising the background to Wellness Resources, so thanks for letting me know about that.
PubMed has a summary, and I have found several articles on the subject on the net, similar to the one from the Wellness Resources.
Thanks to you I communicated with the author of the report via email and did receive a response within a day.
Here is some of the content in the reply email:
Statins have been recognized clinically to raise blood glucose and glycated protein (HbA1c) levels enhancing the development of insulin resistance. However, most clinicians appear to adopt the interpretation that the benefit (prevention of CHD) outweighs the risk (new-onset of diabetes mellitus). Consistently,
“Japan Atherosclerosis Society Guidelines for the Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases 2012” recommends diabetics to maintain LDL-C levels below 120 mg/dL; 40 mg/dL lower than the value for those without risky complications. This recommendation necessitates many diabetics to use statins.
However, we pointed out that statins exhibited no significant benefit for the prevention of CHD in the trials performed by scientists relatively independent of industries after 2004, when a new regulation on clinical trials took effect in EU (Cholesterol
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.
Healthy diet
High Cholesterol but high HDL
High LDL Cholesterol all rest OK
Heart Disease and Cholesterol by Country
