Statins: Friends or Enemies?

Buy Lab Tests Online

Jay

Member
"This Review is intended to help clinicians, patients, and the public make informed decisions about statin therapy for the prevention of heart attacks and strokes. It explains how the evidence that is available from randomised controlled trials yields reliable information about both the efficacy and safety of statin therapy. In addition, it discusses how claims that statins commonly cause adverse effects reflect a failure to recognise the limitations of other sources of evidence about the effects of treatment. Large-scale evidence from randomised trials shows that statin therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events (ie, coronary deaths or myocardial infarctions, strokes, and coronary revascularisation procedures) by about one-quarter for each mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol during each year (after the first) that it continues to be taken. The absolute benefits of statin therapy depend on an individual's absolute risk of occlusive vascular events and the absolute reduction in LDL cholesterol that is achieved. For example, lowering LDL cholesterol by 2 mmol/L (77 mg/dL) with an effective low-cost statin regimen (eg, atorvastatin 40 mg daily, costing about £2 per month) for 5 years in 10 000 patients would typically prevent major vascular events from occurring in about 1000 patients (ie, 10% absolute benefit) with pre-existing occlusive vascular disease (secondary prevention) and in 500 patients (ie, 5% absolute benefit) who are at increased risk but have not yet had a vascular event (primary prevention). Statin therapy has been shown to reduce vascular disease risk during each year it continues to be taken, so larger absolute benefits would accrue with more prolonged therapy, and these benefits persist long term. The only serious adverse events that have been shown to be caused by long-term statin therapy—ie, adverse effects of the statin—are myopathy (defined as muscle pain or weakness combined with large increases in blood concentrations of creatine kinase), new-onset diabetes mellitus, and, probably, haemorrhagic stroke. Typically, treatment of 10 000 patients for 5 years with an effective regimen (eg, atorvastatin 40 mg daily) would cause about 5 cases of myopathy (one of which might progress, if the statin therapy is not stopped, to the more severe condition of rhabdomyolysis), 50–100 new cases of diabetes, and 5–10 haemorrhagic strokes. However, any adverse impact of these side-effects on major vascular events has already been taken into account in the estimates of the absolute benefits. Statin therapy may cause symptomatic adverse events (eg, muscle pain or weakness) in up to about 50–100 patients (ie, 0·5–1·0% absolute harm) per 10 000 treated for 5 years. However, placebo-controlled randomised trials have shown definitively that almost all of the symptomatic adverse events that are attributed to statin therapy in routine practice are not actually caused by it (ie, they represent misattribution). The large-scale evidence available from randomised trials also indicates that it is unlikely that large absolute excesses in other serious adverse events still await discovery. Consequently, any further findings that emerge about the effects of statin therapy would not be expected to alter materially the balance of benefits and harms. It is, therefore, of concern that exaggerated claims about side-effect rates with statin therapy may be responsible for its under-use among individuals at increased risk of cardiovascular events. For, whereas the rare cases of myopathy and any muscle-related symptoms that are attributed to statin therapy generally resolve rapidly when treatment is stopped, the heart attacks or strokes that may occur if statin therapy is stopped unnecessarily can be devastating."

Source
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Defy Medical TRT clinic doctor
Statins are poison. I will NEVER use them again. Was on simvastatin for a number of years and although it did lower LDL, it also lowered HDL and raised Triglicerides. I had a number of side effects ranginging from elevated A1C, leg pains and muscle cramping.
I stopped taking it almost 2 years ago and all side effects stopped and A1C dropped to 5.3 consistently.
I added 2000mg of Niacin (NOT non flush) daily and total chloresteral is under 200, LDL is alittle over 100 but everything else is in range including HDL and Triglicerides. My life style and eating habits have been consistent the only change was stopping statin and added niacin.
 
Let's not forget there's a multi billion dollar statin industry at stake here and hence a lot of money will be going towards studies that show great results.

In the past I have reduced my LDL by 60% using niacin, oats and red yeast rice. The latter is a natural statin so is it the same? I don't know. No one is going to spend the money to find out that's for sure. Also, cutting down on animal protein might be effective (aside - I hear its important to cut back in age range 65-75 and then up it again after 75).

Anecdotally statins may cause eventual liver failure but if that takes 20 years to happen then its not caused by the statins right? They just died of old age, natural causes.

Could it be that we just need to keep our arteries running well with Omega3 and D3 and minimal sugar? Who knows?
 
Study confirms pro-calcific effects of statins on coronary plaques in low-risk patients
July 5, 2018

By Scott Baltic

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - In patients without a history of coronary artery disease, statin use is associated with a slower progression of overall coronary atherosclerosis volume, a reduction of high-risk plaque features and accelerated plaque calcification, according to a new report from PARADIGM, a prospective multinational observational registry.

Statins did not, however, protect against the progression of coronary lesions to high-grade stenoses, as measured by serial coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), researchers report in JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging, online June 13.

Prior studies using intravascular imaging have shown that statins possess a pro-calcific effect on coronary atherosclerotic plaques, lead author Sang-Eun Lee, of Yonsei University College of Medicine in Seoul, South Korea, told Reuters Health by email.

"However, there is a knowledge gap regarding the generalizability of these results to lower-risk patients, or patients at earlier stage of the coronary atherosclerosis, who account for a much greater portion of the population, as these patients are not indicated for invasive assessment," Dr. Lee said.

The analysis covered 1,255 patients with no documented coronary artery disease before their baseline CCTA scan and who underwent at least one further CCTA scan at an interval of no less than two years.

Within this group (mean age, 60; 56.7% men), 781 took statins and 474 were statin-naive. Patients taking statins were on average older and had significantly higher prevalences of hypertension and diabetes.

Over time, statins were associated with a slowing of the increase in percent diameter stenosis, but not enough to slow the progression of non-obstructive coronary lesion to more than 50%.

Compared with statin-naive patients, those taking statins showed higher percent atheroma volume (PAV) per lesion at the initial CCTA scan. Over time, the annualized progression of coronary lesion PAV was significantly slower in statin-taking patients than in statin-naïve patients.

In addition, lesions in statin-taking patients showed higher annualized progression of calcified PAV (1.27% vs. 0.98%, P

The annualized incidence of high-risk plaque features, positive remodeling, spotty calcification and low-attenuation plaques were all significantly lower in the statin-taking group.

The study's findings, Dr. Lee said, "proved the pro-calcific effect of statins on coronary artery plaques in a low-risk population" and suggest "that increasing coronary calcification in statin-taking patients may represent stabilization of atherosclerotic lesions."

While attractive, she cautioned, this hypothesis "remains to be proven and future large-scale trials evaluating atherosclerosis treatment by targeting specific atherosclerotic phenotypes based upon plaque composition and other high-risk plaque features now seem warranted."

Although some researchers claim that statins reduce cardiac events through the calcification of plaques and that calcification equates to "stabilization" of the plaque, "whether the calcification itself is harmful or not is still under debate," Dr. Lee said. "It is still unknown whether the observed pro-calcific effect of statins would indicate a benign or malignant change" from a clinical standpoint.

Dr. Gregg W. Stone, director of Cardiovascular Research and Education at Columbia University Medical Center, in New York City, told Reuters Health by email, "This novel study adds to our understanding of the long-term plaque-specific effects of statins on coronary atherosclerotic plaque in a low-risk patient population."

Statins, he continued, "have been shown in prior invasive studies in high-risk patients to increase plaque calcification, slow lesion progression, and thicken the fibrous cap, all of which serves to reduce plaque vulnerability. The results of the present study are consistent with those findings."

"These data collectively suggest that in concert with their anti-inflammatory effects and other pleiotropic actions, statins reduce myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death by reducing plaque progression and conversion to a high-risk plaque phenotype more prone to thrombose."

The study did not have commercial funding. Several authors disclosed ties to statin manufacturers.
 
Muscle Damage From Statins May Evade Blood Test - ExcelMale.com


Mar 11, 2016 - Statin users with prolonged statin-related muscle pain may also experience muscle damage, even when a blood test used to identify muscle

Do statins affect erections in men? - ExcelMale.com

Apr 13, 2015 - The science on statins and sexual function
is inconclusive, but it does appear that taking a statin may sometimes affect a person's sex life.



Statin Drugs Markedly Inhibit Testosterone Production - ExcelMale.com

Jan 28, 2014 - 532 Statin Drugs Markedly Inhibit Testosterone Production by Rat Leydig Cells in Vitro: Implications for Men Reproductive Toxicology Available ...

Statin Medications and the Risk of Gynecomastia - ExcelMale.com

Abstract Objective Case reports have suggested an increased risk of gynecomastia with HMG‐CoA reductase inhibitors (i.e. statins). A recent ...




 
Many years ago my Total Cholesterol was almost 350 and most of it was bad cholesterol and my triglycerides were about 250. My HDL was only 4. The doctor said "Son, you are about to have a coronary event". He put me on statins and my liver enzymes went through the roof. I was one that was not a candidate for statins but the doctor still wanted me to continue taking them.

I stopped taking them because of the extremely high liver enzymes it gave me and the way they made me feel. That was 12 years ago and my blood work in May of this year had the following cholesterol results:

Ttl Cholesterol

0 - 200

mg/dl

146

LDL

< 100

mg/dl

92

HDL

> 35

mg/dl

40

Triglycerides

< 150

mg/dl

99



So, while my cholesterol isn't perfect and I really need to get the HDL higher, these results are much better than they were 12 years ago. I took the statin, like I mentioned initially, but that was only for a couple of months and haven't take any since.

Over the years I have read about all the negative things that statins can do to your body and I am so glad I stopped taking them. For me, statins are an enemy to one's body.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Buy Lab Tests Online
Defy Medical TRT clinic

Sponsors

bodybuilder test discounted labs
cheap enclomiphene
TRT in UK Balance my hormones
Discounted Labs
Testosterone Doctor Near Me
Testosterone books nelson vergel
Register on ExcelMale.com
Trimix HCG Offer Excelmale
BUY HCG CIALIS

Online statistics

Members online
6
Guests online
8
Total visitors
14

Latest posts

Top