Two months ago I had a routine cholesterol test and the dr was happy enough with the results [total 6.6; HDL 2.8*; ratio 2.4; se non HDL 3.8] although she thought the total was rather high she said the LDL [se non HDL?] of 3.8 and the ratio were fine. The HDL of 2.8* she thought OK too. My routine check up for hypertension today saw the usual white coat reading of 180/80 whereas the home BP readings of the past 8 days was a more reasonable 121/75.
I am an active and healthy 73 yr female and hate the idea of risking side effects in order to comply with a tick box culture dreamt up by NICE and Rory collins. I do not have diabetes or any other long term condition other than hypertension, neither do I have a family history of heart problems. However my Qrisk is now 15.4% and the dr offered me a statin as I expected. If pharma companies and Rory Collins were more honest about side effects I would trust them better. As it is, without good cause I do not wish to accept a statin merely to comply with NICE's directive of offering them to all risks over 10%. I feel strongly that the NHS likes to make patients out of well people and on principle I do not like that. anyway I like to have a grapefruit for breakfast which is a no-no with a statin I think.
Before my last birthday with my risk a little less than now, the same dr said she did not believe in over medicating the whole population yet with my risk now of 15.4% she presumably had to bring the subject up again. I'm fortunate in having a dr who listens unlike many I've heard of who have a tendency to 'Do as I say, we know what is good for you' attitude. My feeling also is that the medical profession have to comply with NICE and a load of tick box numbers and also they are all afraid of legislation if something goes wrong.
So rant over! Question is, what would anyone else have done ? Accepted a statin or not ?