During a Lung Health check recently, lungs were fine but I was found to have coronary artery calcification- which meant that I had to see a GP. I do not know the extent or severity of the calcification. Her advice was to start taking statins. I managed to get her to request some blood tests first. Partly because I wanted my folate, ferritin etc checked, but also to see whether statins are necessary.....
I have some reluctance surrounding statins. My mother was put on them and it did not help her and certainly seemed to have some side-effects. Is there now any alternative ? Is one type of statin any better than the rest ?
I have also heard that once on statins, it is dangerous to stop taking them. When I asked the GP about this, she said that the danger was because the statins were preventing heart problems in patients that then were likely to recur if stopped. I am not so sure, but am finding it very difficult to sift through the vast amounts of conflicting online information to get at the truth.
What I did find were that the adverse effects from statins sounded very much like some of the B12 deficiency symptoms that I already have experienced or do experience: memory loss and cognitive function decline, muscle wastage, swelling muscles in lower legs causing pain. I do not want a return to/ further deterioration of these conditions. So are they due to statins depleting B12 or have they another cause ? Is it just coincidence ?
How exactly do statins lower cholesterol to help prevent heart attacks ?
Any information or explanation or personal experience would be helpful. Thanks.
Written by
Cherylclaire
Forum Support
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Everything I've read suggests it isn't great for your long term health to start taking statins. If you do, then best to take a co enzyme q10 as well as they deplete it.
What were the measures they tested, was it the cac score? Can you get any other tests independently?
No other results - this was found because of the Lung Health CT scan - and the GP surgery rang me about an appointment before any report back from the Lung health people, which in any case only informed me of what was found incidentally.
Totally agree with Claire. High triglycerides and low HDL causes issues.
Dr Paul Mason suggests its the Pattern B small dense LDL that results in heart disease. He advises blood that shows 'pattern A' big and fluffy LDLs, so results as below means you are okay. Cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease but increases as a protector for your arteries due to inflammation.
Paul Mason and Eric Berg are misinformed. All types of LDL particle can contribute to atherosclerosis.
"large cholesterol-rich LDL is the predominant type of LDL in familial hypercholesterolemia, and it is firmly established that this LDL is responsible for their premature atherosclerosis. Thus, large and small LDL are atherogenic, and it is not possible to judge which if any is more harmful, overall."
from Low-Density Lipoprotein Size and Cardiovascular Disease: A Reappraisal
LDL Cholesterol, or rather, to be more specific, ApoB/LDL-P are causal for heart disease. Inflammation contributes to and exacerbates existing atherosclerosis but elevated ApoB/LDL-P is quite sufficient, in and of itself. For more information on this and related topics see the following post from Sigma Nutrition:
"If you do, then best to take a co enzyme q10 as well as they deplete it. "
Statins can reduce CoQ10 but unfortunately, there is no good evidence that supplementing CoQ10 is useful for those taking statins - at least no significant benefit was seen in any randomized controlled trials:
Yes - a good scan to get, if you get a chance, and really good that it is identifying other issues with GP surgeries, but there seems to be no pathway thereafter. Perhaps not anticipated ?
I was once offered statins for ventricular ectopics discovered by 24 hr heart monitor a few years ago. Since I was told that although little is understood about this condition, it does not lead to anything more serious and can just disappear, it seemed more sensible to see if it would go away on it's own. It did, a few months later, without the need for statins.
It feels a bit early to start statins yet - especially since my last 10yr CVD risk assessment in August was 7.4% (average for age: 7.8%), cholesterol down (although still higher than it should be) from the last time and BP normal. Would like to know about alternatives, but the GP did not seem to want to budge. Did not feel able to have the B12 discussion with her either. Seemed to have made her decision already -and running late. Think my biggest risk factor for heart attack is hereditary - on both maternal and paternal side. Hard to make a lifelong decision without the facts.
[Too much Google information is a bit like none at all, isn't it ? ]
Six-monthly blood tests a good idea - IF you can get the results yourself and B12 not included !
That's really good - every 4 months or even every 6 months. How is your iron now ?
I had to book my blood test - the first local one a week away. Last time I went, the hospital waiting-room was empty. I was the only patient and went straight in.
GP once told me that below 60 ng/L ferritin, deficiency symptoms can appear. Oral medicine consultant preferred over 80 ng/L.
An impossible task once monitoring stops - last results I got, ferritin back down to 40s, too. Like you, never previously a problem prior to B12 deficiency- as far as I'm aware. So certainly not any previous symptoms.
I probably should take a low supplement, and you probably should also aim for a bit more !
Difficult unless closely and regularly monitored by someone who also aims higher, as never out of their "normal" range. Same with folate for me. We need to be working together towards stabilising at levels beneficial to us - not just "able to stop gums bleeding and hair falling out" as main goal !
When my ferritin had dropped to 41, an iron panel showed a significant iron deficiency and the iron/B12 specialist advised an infusion, which I had 3 months ago. My ferritin had dropped to 30 by then.
My ferritin was in the 40's to start with in 2016, raised to 60's after supplements then dropped down to 30's, supplementing again got it to 50's even 61 at one point.... then supplementing with an aim of 80+ and finally reached 82 (Ta-Daaaaaah !) in late 2020. Never lasted and latest was 2022 when it was 40. Now waiting for today's results. Hard work, this !
Similar highs and lows with folate, which has been at lowest 5.5, at highest after supplements >20 (measurable limit, I'd imagine) and latest (2022) was 10.5. Again, waiting for today's test results.
None of these were ever out of range - (ferritin bottom of "normal" range a tragic 13 ug/L, folate bottom of range 4.6 ug/L) - but can you imagine anyone getting that low ?
I only have records from 2017, when my ferritin was 26 and hovered around that figure, to my knowledge, until 2022, when it had reached the height of 52.9. It peaked in April at 54 then headed back down. All were within range. I think ranges are based on economics rather than optimal health and the remote NHS notion of preventative healthcare.
I had iron deficiency anaemia back in 2008 but I've no idea what my test results were. A problem that could've been nipped in the bud back then, which reminds me of conversations about time travel on this forum some months back.
Oh for the want of the knowledge I have now then/a crystal ball etc...😞 life changing to say the least.
Folate and B12 consistently low from when I have records also, which meant nothing to me, and clearly not my GPs, at the time.
I'm now living with the consequences of those missed deficiencies, as most of us on this forum do.
Quite early on after finding B12 deficiency, my GP also had both folate and ferritin tested - although not out of range at 5.5 and mid-40's, she thought low enough to benefit from 3 months' supplementing. She continued to monitor these regularly after B12 was increased to twice a week and she stopped testing my B12, and after I started self-injecting, and after another GP had the practice stop my NHS injections - right up until covid in fact. She would tell me when to start/stop/reduce supplements, based on what she saw, what I told her, what blood test results informed her. Perfect.
Then she left. I'm not sure whether there is another GP like her at the surgery now. Two of the other good doctors left around the same time, and I don't know the new ones. Given how difficult it now is to see a GP at all, I have been getting blood tests done when I can from my Oral medicine consultant - but rarely, and getting the test results has proved difficult.
Why three experienced professional women GPs should leave the practice at around the same time, one can only guess at - but what a huge loss for the surgery, for the patients. Not sure that I would put much faith in sensationalist videos online for advice- a bit of a minefield of fairground quacks and tub-thumpers - but you can see why people have turned to them ! Someone was bound to step into the void left when primary care backed off - and that was never going to produce a reliable substitute, was it ?
So these tests yesterday will be useful for me, to see if I can make some improvements.
I agree, not all GPs are inept and get things very wrong but most I've dealt with were like that, bar a lovely female one, who actively listens and tries her best to help under her NHS constraints, that I had seen regularly up until May.
I've been the one to monitor my blood levels regularly, the one who's pushing for tests, and this is particularly exhausting and stressful when you're very ill.
I can't do it that way, it's all done online and GPs have visited as I'm now housebound due to this nasty and debilitating illness. Anxiety and fear are my daily companions.
I think test ranges are based on results from 90% of the healthy population in a particular area. That percentage may not be totally accurate, but it is the principle behind it, I’m sure.
Whether or not 90% of the population is healthy is open to debate and as you say is likely based on economic decisions about how many unwell people they wish to acknowledge. So as a whole the sicker we all become the more people who are really unwell will be told there’s nothing wrong with them.
I was offered statins and beta blockers for ectopic heartbeats years several years ago. Strangely I had every test for heart function but no one considered looking at my blood levels for vitamin or mineral deficiencies. I declined all medication and found incidentally that after b12 injections the ectopic episodes disappeared.
I was already on frequent B12 injections by the time I had this - so I think it can take a while for some of us. It took three years to get MMA into range, and a couple of years to stabilise both folate and ferritin levels too.
Sometimes returns a little when stressed for me. Improvements can't be taken for granted !
I'm glad you had all the tests for heart function anyway - just to put your mind at rest - but honestly, isn't it disheartening that, however many of us continue to demonstrate a link to B12 deficiency, it never quite reaches the attention of the "symptom list" editors ?
Statins are prescribed to reduce LDL Cholesterol/ApoB, in order to reduce the risk of developing or advancing existing cardiovascular disease. If you have familial hypercholesterolemia then you will likely have raised LDL/ApoB regardless of lifestyle factors. If you don't have familial hypercholestermia or another chronic condition that affects LDL/ApoB such as mentioned here:
then a raised LDL/ApoB is likely caused by lifestyle choices such as diet, exercise, alcohol, smoking etc.
Age is a factor largely because the risk of developing cardiovascular disease is a result of lifetime exposure to elevated ApoB (although there are age-related changes in cardiovascular function/efficiency).
For sure age is not an illness that can be treated with pills but ignoring an elevated ApoB (if it exists) increases the risk of developing cardiovascular disease and that risk is cumulative over time and very difficult to reverse when it becomes sufficiently advanced.
I am on Crestor because I have heart issues as well as B12 deficiency.I found a low dose of this had less side effects for me, Atorvastatin is usually the first one offered but it can have more side effects and I'd suggest you ask for Crestor (Rosuvastatin )instead.
There are various ones to trial and you need to decide if the benefits outweigh the risk of side effects for you.
People get confused about statins.
For people with cardiac issues and calcification or plaques on arterial walls they aren't just prescribed to reduce cholesterol levels in your blood , although that is an important part of its job to reduce available bad cholesterol which can add to plaques and blockages.
The way statins help to reduce the risk of a cardiac event is by stabilising the calcifications and plaques you may already have by reducing their lipid content. This can help to delay or reduce blockages that could cause a heart attack , reduce oxygen flow and require surgery.
So they act like a preventative in a similar way that blood thinners help to reduce the risk of blood clots.
If you really can't tolerate statins there is an alternative called Ezetimibe which helps to remove cholesterol from the body . This isn't quite as efficient as statins but does also help stabilise plaques and reduce available blood cholesterol which can increase its formation.
If you take statins it's much like taking other medications they work hand in hand with diet and lifestyle changes to help reduce your future risk of cardiovascular disease.
Thankfully , the diet and lifestyle changes we need to use to keep generally healthy also reduce our risk of the side effects of statins that people are most concerned about like muscle and joint pain, tiredness, mild constipation or type 2 Diabetes. Also , despite a lot of coverage of the disadvantages of statins severe side effects are not as common as it would appear.
In terms of research about Statins and Dementia or Alzheimer's the evidence is growing in support of statin use as a way to help reduce the risks of mental health illnesses by helping to reduce plaques effect on blood flow and oxygen volume and so until more research is done most Professionals are on the fence on this topic now.
I can totally understand that people don't want to feel forced to take statins " just in case " if they don't have a risk of heart or stroke problems or have illnesses associated with these conditions and one or two blood cholesterol results are their only issue.
I didn't want to take statins when I got a number of high cholesterol and triglyceride results some time before I was diagnosed with cardiac issues. Not because of fears of side effects but just because I like to try other options if I can before using a medication because I have to take so many of them.
I had a good diet but tried further diet changes and natural alternatives , my GP was excellent and tested me every three months while I tried other things. Unfortunately my cholesterol eventually rose.
It turned out a have a pretty common but little discussed condition called Familial HyperCholesteroleimia. This is a genetic issue that reduces how well the body can process and remove cholesterol from the body.
Many people have it but few get an official diagnosis as most people only discover a cholesterol problem after other health issues have begun because high cholesterol on its own seldom causes noticeable symptoms until it produces another health problem, or people are put on statins without the chance for this to be diagnosed.
250,000 people are diagnosed in the UK which is estimated as about 50% of those with this gene issue.
It did explain the possible cause for me having to have my gall bladder removed before 40 despite being physically fit and underweight. It also hadn't been picked up in my Mother and contributed to her late diagnosed Non Alcohol Related Fatty Liver Disease and Cardiac Artery Disease. So when I began to suffer more with my cardiac problems I knew it was time to start taking them.
So my opinion is , if you haven't got any family history or personal health problems that increase your cardiac or stroke risk and have only just begun to have high cholesterol try other options first but if those don't work you might want to consider statins.
But, if you do have health issues that statins could help by reduce your risks of more serious events or delaying the increase in those problems give statins a trial and then consider the statin alternative because it's better to protect yourself from the risks sooner rather than after more serious things develop.
They are not difficult to taper off even if you've been on them for some time. I know many people who have been on them and tapered them easily when they weren't required anymore.
Great post! Everything I encountered on statins accords with what you said. With familial hypercholesterolemia my understanding is that lifestyle changes are often not sufficient to drop ApoB sufficiently, thus many with the condition may need to consider a statin. Since the exposure to elevated ApoB over a lifetime is what defines the risk, the sooner it is lowered, the lower the long-term risk.
Yes that's right, and with cardiac issues and a high cardiac family history the potential benefits of taking statins for me certainly outweigh the potential risks.
^ The anecdote may mislead people into not being concerned about their intake of saturated fat, which for most people will not be a good strategy for heart health.
I think we should not forget how important statins are for many people who have very high cholesterol and the life’s it saves too, its a great drug in many ways, which I won’t expand on today. x
A very personal decision of course. Dr Sarah Myhill suggests statins have an anti-inflammatory effect similar to VitD. I once read that 'they' had added VitD to a statin ! Her website is excellent.drmyhill.co.uk
Also having met Dr Malcolm Kendrick at a Thyroid Conference a few years ago - also the B12 Conference at Loughborough - I am a fan. His Blog will keep you sane ! drmalcolmkendrick.org
His book - The Cholesterol Con - is a good read. YT videos too.
Zoe Harcombe has plenty to say too on her website. Statins not so beneficial for women.
NHS website mentions correcting Thyroid levels before starting a statin. In fact pior to statins people with raised cholesterol had their thyroids treated !
The RCT mentioned in an earlier link was overseen by Prof Rory Collins ( the Cholesterol Czar ) I believe. Hundreds if not thousands with side effects were removed from the trials !
Homocysteine was found in arterial plaque when researching atherosclerosis prior to the statin launch. So no surprises as to why that research was hidden. Follow the money !
If taking VitD, the uptake of calcium from food is improved - another ingredient of plaque - so it's important to add VitK2-MK7 which guides calcium away from soft tissues - including arteries - into bones and teeth. When there is arterial inflammation cholesterol acts as a plaster to protect and heal - later can become plaque...
My info is gained from 12 years of reading...and learning from others who know more than me 🌻
Yes, I have osteoporosis of the spine so get vitamin D (and Raloxifene) on prescription. Strangely, GPs always insist that if K2 was also required, they would have prescribed it - an argument that makes me smile, since a GP stopped my NHS B12 despite a confirmed functional B12 deficiency diagnosis. The osteoporosis has been downgraded to osteopenia -yippeee !- which was unexpected.
I do take K2 as well, which is why I was surprised at the incidental finding of calcification of heart blood vessels. As this was incidental to a routine Lung Health Check CT scan, no further details available at all re. extent, severity etc.
I don't think statins (Atorvastatin) helped my mum, who had heart attacks for quite a while before it was discovered that she was even having heart attacks - which is why it always concerns me when the cause of any sudden fall is not examined thoroughly, whatever the patient's age or ability.
My other concern is that all of the ill effects of statins sound exactly like the B12 symptoms I have been trying to eliminate for the past 7 years. Why that would be, I can't seem to find out. Unacknowledged/ unrecognised B12 depletion perhaps ? Whatever the cause, I'm not keen on further memory loss or cognitive decline, as you can imagine. No easy way back.
I had blood tests today: Folate & B12 (obv), ferritin, bone profile, thyroid, LFT, CRP and lipid. So will wait and see what that brings up -aside from the huge panic about the massive B12 result ! Such a distraction; really cuts into your 8 minutes, doesn't it ?
Thanks, Marz - I'll do some studying. I want to make an informed personal decision, having seen blood test results first, find out the extent and severity of the damage or narrowing if possible and be able to discuss any alternatives on offer, too. Do miss my previous GP for that.
How long have you been taking this small amount of D3 WITH Calcium ? Extra calcium when D3 already improves the uptake nsturally from food ?? Sorry but it can be the calcium/chalk causing the artery problem. Of course getting Docs to admit this is ???? Just like the B12 issue....
Calcium is involved with osteoClasts and the breaking down of old bone cells. OsteoBlasts are involved in the rebuilding of bone.
I have not drank milk my whole life and a recent bone scan was great at 77 ! Currently taking 5000 iu's D3 - gel capsule as VitD is fat soluble. Are you taking Magnesium ? Really important for healthy bones 🤸💕
I did ask the GP whether the calcium from the tablets could be the cause of the arterial calcification - it seemed the obvious question. She seemed dismissive and vague about "taking a different pathway" and I told her that I was taking K2 as well, which I thought would offer some protection against going down the wrong path.
The stock reply: they would have given it to me on prescription, had that been the case.
Hard to get anywhere with this, isn't it ? Just trying to avoid problems later on- witnessed the dreadful struggle my mum had, despite Atorvastatin and countless other drugs.
3000mg is a gigantic amount of Calcium. I appreciate you had an Osteoporosis diagnosis but this is nearly 3x the RDA. I don't think that such tremendously high calcium doses have been validated as safe, regardless of whether you take K2 with it or not. The research on ultra high dose calcium supplementation is concerning to say the least. If you get 1000mg of Calcium through diet you might be taking in 4,000mg of Calcium. And Calcium is not B12 and definitely not validated as safe at those kinds of doses.
800IU might be an adequate amount of Vitamin D in summer but over the winter or with absorption issues, 2000IU is probably a better dose, depending on blood results.
Says on the tube that "each chewable tablet contains 1,500 mg of calcium carbonate (equivalent to 600 mg of calcium)" ... and that 2 tablets is the manufacturer's recommended adult daily dose.
ah! so this is 1200mg total of elemental calcium. Apologies. Thats at the RDA which makes more sense. It still seems a bit excessive but that depends on background diet and absorption I should think. Looking at the epidemiology and clinical trials I would personally be quite wary of large doses of supplemental calcium ( anything >300mg). Especially if the background diet has sufficient Calcium to begin with (which is the case for most people I believe).
For robust bone health, I believe the main drivers are adequate B12, vitamin D, Vitamin K, adequate Calcium (but not massive amounts), adequate protein, healthy body weight and load bearing exercise. And any thyroid issues well controlled of course. Taurine may also be important.
It's research like the following which gave me some concerns about high dosage Calcium supplementation:
"Conclusions
High total calcium intake was associated with a decreased risk of incident atherosclerosis over long‐term follow‐up, particularly if achieved without supplement use. However, calcium supplement use may increase the risk for incident CAC."
which recommend 800IU vitamin D and enough calcium from diet or supplements to reach 1000mg/1200mg.
But because of research like the one mentioned previously, I would be very hesitant with high dosage calcium supplementation (which I would somewhat arbitrarily regard as >500mg). I can only see a possible justification for it if the background diet is disastrous and/or absorption is terrible but these are often addressable without going to high dose Calcium supplements.
As mentioned by others, the vitamin D may likely not be adequate if its the only source, especially over the winter.
Enough Calcium is important for sure. But I do think its possible to get too much and asking the body to handle huge calcium doses which are way higher than anything the body would normally encounter in food seems like it may have some risks.
Malcolm Kendrick and Zoe Harcombe represent the foremost UK outposts of the cholesterol denialist trend. Their arguments such as they might be are refuted by decades of nutrition science and multiple lines of evidence which converge to a conclusion which contradicts their claims as explained in exhaustive detail by nutrition science communicators like Gil Carvalho and Alan Flanagan and lipidologist Thomas Dayspring above.
Yes I hear you .... I do read carefully and having followed the events of the last three years I think we should be wary of those that like to put good people down.
Have you read MK's Blogs and the 100's of replies.... ?
Its not about "putting good people down". It's about whether Malcolm Kendrick and those with similar views can put forward any good evidence for their claims. One of the chapters in his book is titled:
"Eat whatever you like (Diet has nothing to do with heart disease)"
I cannot think of a more stupid, ridiculous (and dangerous) statement with regard to diet and health.
Anecdotes can be very convincing and we are prewired as humans to put great stock in them. But in the area of cholesterol and heart disease we have something a lot better than anecdotes and that is decades of nutrition research from multiple lines of evidence all pointing in the opposite direction to what Malcolm Kendrick and co. are trying to sell. A blog post, even one with hundreds of replies, is not going to change that.
Reading carefully will not help in improving knowledge if the reading is confined to books or blogs from cholesterol denialists who have a poor understanding of nutrition science and research.
As far as I’m concerned, Dr Malcolm Kendrick, Dr Sarah Myhill, Dr Skinner, Dr Joseph Chandy, etc. are all honourable doctors who were brave enough to follow their conscience/hippocratic oath in putting their patients before BigPharma’s ever expanding influence.
Many others obviously think so too as witnessed by their long waiting lists…..
I have been self injecting B12 for about 15 plus years. I had to start taking a statin - atorvastatin - almost 6 years ago. So far I have done well. I personally cannot feel a difference and the dose I take was reduced about a year ago. My cardiologist also discontinued fenofibrate which I was taking along with the statin. After stopping fenofibrate I have noticed my legs don’t ache as much as they used to. From what I understand, the “danger” with statins are the affect they can have on your muscles. I have friends who take red yeast instead of statins and another who takes a high dose of niacin instead of a statin. The red yeast friends have no complaints but the niacin friend says she sometimes will flush. I would say give the statin a try and just make notations of anything you find different that bothers you and then report to your physician.
I think I would feel less unsure if I had been able to have a sensible discussion with a GP. I would also like more information regarding the severity and extent of the calcification - which, so far, is not known. Otherwise, how can anyone measure later improvements/ deterioration ?
I don't think that is unreasonable, do you ?
At least the results from the blood tests today might help me.
Not in the least bit unreasonable. My cholesterol is checked every 6 months along with triglycerides. My good cholesterol has not risen much but my bad cholesterol and triglycerides have fallen a great deal and continue to stay where they should. I wish I could raise my good cholesterol but haven’t been able to very much. So, overall for me, I believe the statin I take has helped me.
Hi … I have been through the statin discussion with myself and started on them. I have always had high LDL scores.
I did start on them and found I could be quite achy and it didn’t really drop my levels a huge amount and did stop taking them.
BUT for other reasons I did the very restricted FODMAP eating exercise and ended up changing my diet … and surprise (not) it all came back into range and no statins required.
Despite all good intentions I have not managed to maintain my diet and it has crept back up again.
There is a book by Dr Aseem Malhotra called A Statin Free Life which is definitely worth a read.
A fun fact about atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is that the first symptom is often a fatal heart attack.
If this sounds like something worth trying out, I also highly recommend following the advice of Aseem Malhotra.
If you change your mind after 20 years of accumulated arterial plaque from following his advice, the bad news is that atherosclerotic plaque is not reversible and although a statin will reduce risk and stabilise plaque, the heightened risk of a cardiovascular event will remain.
No doubt it sounds like a great plan so I highly recommend everyone give it a try. What could possibly go wrong?
Hi Technoid … I have read your posts over the years with interest so interested to get your feedback.
The FODMAP was not my diet for any length of time but a way of isolating a few things that my digestive system was struggling with. Surprisingly oats, soya, nuts and dark green leaves came top of the list for irritants. Many of the healthy things that everyone was/is telling me will help …. They don’t.
I am now thoroughly persuaded that my diet is key … but as you say it cannot cure … but it can allow some improvements in my quality of life if I make the changes and stick to them. I need a reset!
If you know of a statin that doesn’t make the body ache and feel rubbish I would be happy to consider. Taking CoQ10 made no difference to me. Nothing is fixed in stone yet.
You got it, FODMAP is more a way to figure out which foods are causing issues then slowly reintroducing them if possible to get back to a healthy, diverse, long-term diet.
I think the latest generation of statins have less side effects so might be worth asking GP or pharmacy about a newer formulation. Feeling achy is pretty much the normal state of B12 deficiency and recovering from it in my experience.
Although statins reduce CoQ10, taking CoQ10 doesnt seem to decrease myalgia side effects, contrary to common misconceptions (the theory was tested in clinical trials) as explained by Dr. Stanfield in my post above: healthunlocked.com/pasoc/po...
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.
B12 deficiency - next steps
Symptoms of B12 deficiency
B12 deficiency not treated
New diagnosis B12 deficiency
