I was diagnosed with type 2 16 years ago and have been on a statin for the past 10 years due to high LDL levels. However, before accepting the prescription from my doctor I did some research that indicated that not all statins are created equal. Apparantly side effects like leg pain are most common in Lipitor and less common in some of the generics. I've been taking a daily dose of Simivastatin and have not noticed any negative side effects, while keeping my cholesterol numbers in good shape.
Tor
I'd never take a statin. Ever! Niacin (vit B3) is a much better alternative. Safer in my humble opinion. I also don't believe in a cholesterol-heart disease connection.
This webpage has a lot of info: http://www.thincs.org/
A good video can be found here. Please watch it before taking a statin.
http://www.statinnation.net/
Hasn't some company added a coQ10 to their statin to make it more appealing? ;p Statins block a whole cascade of stuff from happening, including coQ10 being made.
Here's an interesting read: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3096178/
I've been on Pravastatin for over a year and have had no side effects.
There is a recent study in Australia (not yet published I understand, only reported at a conference), that statins significantly contribute to memory impairment in older adults (they compared memory at 2 and 4 years of taking statins to those without taking statins).
Another reason to consider not taking them....
I do, have for years, no problem, I am a big believer.
rick
During my discussions with the FDA yesterday I talked about my bad reactions to statins and how I felt mislead by the rates and seriousness of side affects presented in the FDA information and that my doctors dismissed me. I then described how my doctors refused to report my side effects to the FDA and as a patient I had to find out how to do that and report it myself.
Has anyone else reported adverse affects to the FDA?
Statins work by suppressing hydroxy-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase (HMG-CoA reductase), an enzyme that the liver requires to produce cholesterol. By blocking the enzyme, it impacts the ability of the liver to produce cholesterol. However, by blocking HMG-CoA reductase, the production of other systems that depend on this enzyme are also affected (most notably, CoQ10). Ancel Keys was the one who originally hypothesized that cholesterol was the culprit as the cause of heart attacks and strokes; a theory that has long since been discredited by modern research. Many of these studies were originally intended to prove Keys’ hypothesis but only accomplished the opposite and showed that there was no relationship. However, statin sales are a multi-billion dollar fraud that has been perpetrated on the public worldwide and almost rises to the level of organized crime as pointed out in Statin Nation and numerous articles online. Lipitor alone, enjoyed sales of nearly $30 billion dollars during its peak.
While statins might benefit patients who already have CVD, no benefits (zero, zip, nada) have been shown for prescribing a statin to a person who does NOT have existing CVD. And what about the wisdom of suppressing HMG-CoA reductase? This enzyme is also essential for many other vital body systems including the production of CoQ10. People taking a statin may lower the production of cholesterol by the liver but it will also lower the production of CoQ10, a substance found in almost every cell in our bodies and is needed for energy production, especially in the heart. Many doctors have noticed a quadrupling in the number of congestive heart failure cases in their patients who take statins (just type “statin drugs and congestive heart failure” in your favorite search engine and see for yourself). Coincidence? or cause and effect? Medical doctors Uffe Ravnskov and Peter H. Langsjoen were among the first to sound the warning bell against the use of statin drugs but the marketing machine of Big Pharma essentially swept their warnings and discoveries under the rug.
For those of you taking statins and state that you “have no side effects so far,” do keep in mind that the damage done to your internal systems is a silent one; there is no “ouch” factor. Just as excess sugar in the blood stream will bond to cellular proteins and destroy them (glycosylation), there will be no “ouch” factor involved and you won’t actually feel anything while the damage is taking place. When the damage becomes extensive enough, you will “suddenly” be diagnosed with complications and most diabetics will simply accept it as the “natural progression” of the disease. Taking statin drugs is similar; by the time that side effects become self-evident, sometimes it can be too late (e.g., the FDA-mandated warnings about PERMANENT muscle damage … and did you forget that the heart is a muscle?). Red yeast rice users aren’t spared either because the RYR still contains a statin drug, just one that is produced by the yeast organisms instead of by synthetic chemical production.
Do your own research online. PubMed alone has dozens of articles and studies on the adverse effects of statin drugs. Dr. Uffe Ravnskov has authored several books on the topic of statin toxicity and his “Cholesterol Myths” website can be found at the link below (Dr. Ravnskov is his own webmaster and his books are available on Amazon.com):
http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm
Be sure to also do a search for “Dr. Duane Graveline” in the search engine of your choice. His account of his own personal experiences with short-term and retrograde memory loss (that was directly attributed to statin drug use) should raise additional alarms even among the most skeptical.
I did fine on it for four years and it brought my LDL down to about 74, which is where they want it for T1D's. Recently my new endo suggested I switch from pravastatin (Pravachol) to atorvastatin (Lipitor) because he thinks it works better. I soon felt really creepy sensations and had bad neuropathy symptoms, which they call "statin neuropathy". I told him I wanted to switch back, and it's taken a few weeks but I'm almost back to normal. Had no issues on 40mg of pravastatin.
I've read similar links between A1C and heart disease, as well as high triglycerides and link with CVD. Doctors have a protocol whereby they claim that because of diabetes, they must be more conservative with PWD and prescribe statins even if just a little over 200.
this is an interesting article on women and statins. I stopped taking them because of all the side effects. I started reading as much on the side effects because of all the bad issues that I had. I started to run into articles about the limited data showing benefits for women who take statins. Pretty crazy stuff.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/05/a-new-womens-issue-statins/?_r=0
"In 2012, researchers published a study showing that postmenopausal women who took part in the Women’s Health Initiative were much more likely to develop diabetes if they took statins, and diabetes itself increases the risk of heart disease considerably." According to the article.
it's also well worth keeping an eye on your triglycerides too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BFRi-nH1v8
I take atorvastatin (generic Lipitor), with no side-effects.
Lots of people are skeptical about statins, but I have used pravastatin for several years with no side effects, and my LDL went from the 90's to the low 70's, which is where they want it to be for T1D's. I briefly tried atorvastatin on the advice of a new endo because apparently it is much more powerful, but within days I felt that "statin neuropathy" effect that others have mentioned, and I went back to pravastatin. It took a few weeks for those icky effects to subside, but after 2 months they are almost gone.
The neuropathy thing is really serious for those of us who are older in diabetic years (I'm old enough that I can't quite remember by diabetic date of birth, but I'm about 42DYD [Diabetic Years since Diagnosis]).
This paper repeats what you report:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23121724
In other words, atorvastatin produces symptoms that are the are indistinguishable from those of neuropathy.
This is very different from the liver damage issue; my doctor has already tested me for liver damage (I'm taking atorvastatin); rather this is nerve damage. There are lots of sites out there whacking on the nerve damage issue but little sane argument and no research. Finding a non-self-serving link is difficult, this one, however seems compelling:
http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Js7917e/2.15.html
John Bowler
I am in a way caught in a crossfire here and am trying to figure out what is happening to me and what advice to accept.
I had been on simivastatin since 2002, i.e. about 12 years, without any problems until this fall. Then I developed a severe and recurring pain in my right calf and spite a bone scan, multiple blood tests and xrays the doctors were at a loss. Then I was admitted to hospital a few weeks ago due to an unrelated issue (side effects caused by a blood pressure med) and while there the cardiologist, who is experienced and well respected, determined that my leg pain was caused by diabetic neuropathy. That didn't make much sense to me as I've been managing my diabetes type 2 quite well - latest hba1c was 6.8 nut in past has mostly been below 6). Anyhow the cardiologist also switched my cholesterol med from simivastatin to Lipitor saying it had proven benefits in preventing heart attacks and strokes in diabetics. And I was put on a medication for neuropathy that seems to have helped with my leg problem.
Looking at some of the postings here, if my leg pain was due to a side effect of simivastatin, switching to lipitor might have been the worst thing to do. On the other hand, I'm kind of reluctant to challenge the advice of a leading cardiologist. So hence what I said about being in a crossfire...
I'm glad to see that people are starting to think for themselves when their doctor reaches for that Rx pad. There is a good reason so many doctors recommend statins. Doctors' continuing education is funded by drug companies. Check out "Overdo$ed America" by John Abramson, MD). Same with CDE's. That's where the ridiculous notion that "These drugs will protect you" comes from.
Soluble fiber can make a big difference in cholesterol levels. That's why the makers of Quaker Oats & Cheerios are allowed to advertise that their products can lower cholesterol. Any plant-based food has fiber. Beans are very high in fiber.
My cholesterol went from "high" to (as my doctor put it) "perfect" after three months of dietary changes.
xring:
Also amazing how much of that 'continuing education' takes place in Maui or on a cruiseship in the Caribbean. However, despite acknowledging the doctors' primary role (according to pharma) as pill pushers, this is a pretty complicated issue.
Congratulations on getting your cholesterol down to perfect levels in three months through dietary changes. I believe you are a 1 in 500 exception to the rules considering the millions who have tried that and failed. Wanting to avoid statins I quit smoking, increased my exercise, ate beans until I felt like an important part of the world's natural gas production and ate wild salmon 14 times a week but to no avail. Then a friend of mine who was trying to do the same after warnings from a doctor had an actual heart attack and that was when I went on a statin called simivsstatin. That was 12 years ago and so far so good while on simivastatin.
But again, congratulations on being one of the members of the 1 of 500 club who were successful in controlling your cholesterol levels through dietary measures alone.
I know of no proven causal relationship between high cholesterol and heart disease. If you do, please point to the study.
If high cholesterol leads to heart disease then every person with high cholesterol would have a heart attack. And every heart attack case does not have high cholesterol.
In fact, some heart attack cases have completely normal cholesterol. Check out Tim Russert's story.
The conflicts-of-interest embedded into the medical expert panels that make sweeping statin recommendations are rampant. These research doctors receive speaking honoraria and study funding directly from Big Pharma. Are we to believe that human nature and corruption do not exist in this environment?
There is a valid statistical case made for patients to take statins once they experience a cardiac event, that is secondary prevention. Primary prevention is a hoax.
I question the validity of the recommendation that every diabetic over 40 take a statin drug.