Statins

Pekelo said:
The whole topic is so huge (starting with the asshole Ancel Keys and the 7 countries study) that I am not going to go into details everywhere, there are books written on the subject. But it is easier to watch then to read, so here is a starter:


Doesn't matter what you think of Dr. Oz, he is right on this one and he mentions that this episode is his most important one.

If you search for "cholesterol myth" on Youtube, you will find plenty, in depth hour long videos like this:


Here is my quick summary for conversation starters:

The whole science is flawed on cholesterol causing heart attacks and statins can prevent it. First, high levels of cholesterol isn't a good marker (no real, established correlation) for a future heart problem (half of heart attack patiens have normal cholesterol level). Second, statins don't prevent heart attacks in healthy individuals, and even when they help, they actually help by fighting inflammation and not by lowering the cholesterol level.

So who should take statins? If you had a cardiac arrest already or similar heart problem, sure, take statins.
But if you do so, take CoQ-10 coenzime with it, because statins suck this important coenzime out of the body and specially the heart muscle.

If you have high cholesterol you should check your Tryg/HDL ratio (should be under 2)

http://www.docsopinion.com/2014/07/17/triglyceride-hdl-ratio/

and the Total/HDL ratio (should be under 3.5)

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...expert-answers/cholesterol-ratio/faq-20058006

Those 2 ratios are way better markers than simply just checking your total cholesterol. Generally speaking high cholesterol isn't dangerous if your Tryg is low (below 150) and your HDL (good cholesterol) is high.

The best marker is for a possible heart problem is high Tryglicerids with inflammed small particle bad cholesterol (usually not measured).

For women over 55, taking statins is pretty much worthless and there is no statistical benefits. Wow, we just took out 40% or so of the possible statin market.

Of course there are also the funky issue of just what is considered high? (Once my total number was 201, and 201-239 considered elevated) Well, interestingly Big Pharma keeps pushing the standard of high to a lower and lower level and by this automatically making millions of people available for treatment. Why is it sad or dangerous? Certain insurance companies RAISE your insurance if you have elevated or high level of cholesterol )because you are in the high risk group) so you are basically FORCED to take statins unless you want to pay more for your health insurance.

Anyhow, if there are questions or someone wants to debate me, fire away...
More...
Did you buy any of his meds?
https://www.drsinatra.com/?key=1888...A-58NA3DxakOzskcLib9t77wU68q3WzRoCyugQAvD_BwE
 
lylec305 said:
I take a statin but i don't have any side effects.
More...

I take (simvas)statins for over 10 years. No side effects at all.

Once I stopped taking them for a 2 weeks (had no prescription anymore) and went to the doctor for a checkup and a new prescription. My bad cholesterol was up a lot and I had to start taking it again. After a while my cholesterol was ok again.
 
lylec305 said:
I take a statin but i don't have any side effects.
More...

Good for you. Now you can switch to Amla, if you want to be natural. :)

Also, you may want to take CoQ-10 as an extra, since statins deplete the heart of this important enzyme. Yes, there are studies to back this so much so that now even big pharma makes a statin+CoQ combo.
 
Hey Lylec and Schweiz, what were your cholesterol numbers BEFORE started taking the statins? The reason I ask is because there is a very good chance you don't even need it.

Just an average "high" total cholesterol number doesn't mean anything. It is not a reliable marker for CVD, meaning it is not a good predictor of future heart disease. Not to mention the definition of high keeps getting lowered so more and more people can be put on statins for life.

What is actually a good marker is high VLDL and Trig numbers together. Except VLDL is usually not measured in the normal blood test.

For example let's say my total number is 220, and since this is above the currently advised level of 200 or below, I would be advised by my doctor to take statins. But if I break down my numbers and these are for the sake of the example:

HDL 70
LDL 130
Trig 100

For those not knowing, Total = HDL + LDL + Trig/5

(And that is kind of stupid because they should use ratios instead)

The good HDL is very nicely high, the Trig is very nicely low, so there is really no concern for increased CVD risk.

Not to mention as posted earlier, Trig levels can be lowered naturally without statins...
 
Cholesterol was going up and down between 220 and 260. Cholesterol is down to below 190 with medication.

I have all my life a high blood pressure and that combined with high cholesterol increases the risk of a cerebral infarction. My bloodpressure is normally systolic 150-180 and diastolic 90-120.
With medication it lowered to 130 systolic and 90 diastolic and is more stable (no spikes to +200 anymore)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top