Diabetes Forums - Other Medications http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum Ask about others experience with meds taken for related problems with diabetes. en Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:54:53 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/images/styles/takeoutred/misc/rss.jpg Diabetes Forums - Other Medications http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum <![CDATA[Levels of 'bad' cholesterol down among Americans]]> http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45813-levels-bad-cholesterol-down.html Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:31:55 GMT CBC News - Health - Levels of 'bad' cholesterol down among Americans
Quote:
Though levels of "bad" cholesterol have fallen dramatically among Americans, a high percentage of people with high cholesterol are still failing to get treatment.

A U.S. study found that in people 20 and older, levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), considered to be more harmful than high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), fell by approximately one-third between 1999 and 2006. Prevalence of LDL-C in that age group went from 31.5 per cent in 1999-2000 to 21.2 per cent in 2005-2006.

The study, conducted by researchers at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is published in the Nov. 18 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

The authors of the study attribute the drop to the use of cholesterol-lowering medications. Yet despite the progress, more could be done to lower LDL-C levels in high-risk people, they say.

"It's very encouraging when LDL levels decrease," lead author Elena Kuklina told CBC News. "But on the other hand, when you look at people, especially those at high risk, it's discouraging."

"Nearly one in five people in the U.S. have high LDL levels."

High levels of LDL-C can lead to a build-up of plaque in the arteries, which can narrow them, leading to a condition called atherosclerosis. This condition can increase a person's risk of stroke and heart attack, according to the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.

The study involved 7,044 participants who were divided into three groups based on their relative risk of developing atherosclerosis: high risk, intermediate risk and low risk. Factors such as evidence of heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity, level of physical activity and levels of LDL-C determined in which category a participant was placed.

High levels of LDL-C were classified as equal to or greater than 100 mg/dL for those people deemed high risk; as equal to or greater than 130 mg/dL for those of intermediate risk and equal to or greater than 160 mg/dL for people considered low risk.

People categorized as high risk had the greatest prevalence of high LDL-C levels. In 1999-2000, 69.4 per cent of high-risk participants had high LDL-C levels versus 58.9 per cent in 2005-2006. To be deemed high risk, participants had to have a self-reported history of coronary heart disease, angina, heart attack, stroke or diabetes, and to have a fasting blood sugar level of 126 mg/dL.

In this high-risk category, one-fifth of the study's participants qualified for cholesterol-lowering drugs but did not receive them in 2005-2006. The authors suggest that many people with high levels of LDL-C are not screened often enough, or their doctors fail to adequately assess their cholesterol levels and prescribe lipid-lowering medications.

"In a study of 500 randomly selected U.S. physicians, almost half failed to classify their patients' risk levels correctly," write the authors.

Finally, patients diagnosed with high levels of LDL-C often failed to make the necessary lifestyle changes to lower their levels. These included consuming more fibre, soy and nuts, cutting back on saturated fat and becoming more physically active.
]]> Other Medications fgummett http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45813-levels-bad-cholesterol-down.html Pharma corruption of medical science by Beatrice Golomb http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45796-pharma-corruption-medical-science.html Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:45:02 GMT Beyond Belief: Candles in the Dark - Beatrice Golomb
Quote:
Beatrice Golomb, MD, PhD., highlights pharma corruption at The Science Network. She presents Data from NIH, FDA and JAMA including a meta analysis which reveals that orchestrated pharma strategies disguise bad science to appear positive and certain. An example of multiple orchestration of conflict of interest, is Charles Nemeroff now sacked from Emory University.

Unfortunately the reaction by most working scientists to this manipulation is drawn out often with nothing happening. Shock first, a period of recovery followed by denial, then perhaps action years later. This gives pharma plenty of time to devise new manipulation strategies.

Beatrice a high status researcher, says it is now very difficult to judge the work of other scientists in regards to medical products. It's not the scientists that are fault, but what happens to their work afterwards.
]]> Other Medications fgummett http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45796-pharma-corruption-medical-science.html Are you using Zetia? http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45751-are-you-using-zetia.html Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:05:18 GMT It may not help according to this article: Popular cholesterol drug may hurt, not help - Heart health- msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33949973/ns/health-heart_health) It may not help according to this article:

Popular cholesterol drug may hurt, not help - Heart health- msnbc.com ]]> Other Medications JayDee1950 http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45751-are-you-using-zetia.html Crestor vs. Lipitor http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45750-crestor-vs-lipitor.html Mon, 16 Nov 2009 01:38:18 GMT My Endo just put me on Statins. She wants me to take Crestor vs. Lipotor b/c Lipitor has a tendency to pull HDL down while Crestor does not.

Has anyone else ever heard of this happening? I asked a Nurse Practitioner and she wasn't aware that Lipitor lowered HDL to a point. ]]> Other Medications Ategeler http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45750-crestor-vs-lipitor.html Legal Disclaimer - Oh What A Giveaway..! http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45743-legal-disclaimer-oh-what.html Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:31:31 GMT Attachment 4089 (http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/attachments/other-medications/4089-legal-disclaimer-oh-what-crestor.jpg) Actual screen capture of the Advert as shown in the Fat Head Movie... :eek: Attachment 4089

Actual screen capture of the Advert as shown in the Fat Head Movie...

:eek:
Attached Images
File Type: jpg crestor.jpg (41.6 KB)
]]> Other Medications fgummett http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45743-legal-disclaimer-oh-what.html New Views of Cholesterol; Statins and Heart Attacks http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45719-new-views-cholesterol-statins.html Sat, 14 Nov 2009 16:46:04 GMT SIRA: New Views of Cholesterol; Statins and Heart Attacks

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShottleBop (Post 522465)
In 2002, Dr. Beatrice Golomb (head of the [University of California San Diego] Statin Effects Study) gave an hour-long lecture that aired on UCSD-TV, sponsored by The Sam and Rose Stein Institute for Research on Aging, titled "New Views on Cholesterol: Statins and Heart Attacks". It is available on YouTube, here. It is well worth watching--lots of useful information regarding diet, cholesterol, and effects of statins. Recommendations generally:
  • Get Daily Exercise
    Don't smoke
    Eat lots of fresh fruits, vegetables, and nuts
    Totally avoid hydrogenated fats
    If you drink, don't drink to excess
    If you have heart disease, eat fatty fish a couple of times a week
    If you are a middle-aged male at high risk for heart attack, consider lowering your cholesterol (not necessarily by use of statins, but don't rule them out)

Other items of interest:

Garlic is useful in lowering cholesterol.

Saturated fat is probably of neutral effect on heart disease--raises HDL, but also raises LDL.

The stearic acid in chocolate raises HDL, but does not raise LDL.

Wine--in moderation and in conjunction with a meal--can have a beneficial effect on insulin sensitivity.

Butter has no effect on your risk of heart attack; margarine has been shown to increase the risk of a heart attack (stick margarines were compared; those who ate more than 2.5 pats of margarine a day vs. those who ate less than one pat).

A high-carb, low-fat diet raises triglycerides and increases your insulin resistance.

Both a Mediterranean diet (Lyons study) and the consumption of fatty fish a couple of times a week have been shown to have the same benefit for those who have previously had a heart attack as does taking statins--even though neither diet reduces cholesterol.

Statins do reduce the risk of heart attack (both long and short-term) and of nonfatal stroke. HOWEVER: they show reduction of total mortality only in middle-aged men who are at high risk (those who have already had a heart attack, for example, or *cough* those who have diabetes *cough*[*]). For women, there is no evidence that statins reduce total mortality (and some, non-statistically-significant, evidence that higher-but-not-insanely-high cholesterol may actually be beneficial). For folks in their mid-80s, high-but-not-insanely-high cholesterol is associated with longevity.

By blocking the production of cholesterol, statins block the production of vitamin D and of many other substances, including testosterone.

Confirmed harmful effects of statins (not everyone gets these, but a statistically significant number do):
  • Muscles--weakness, fatigue, pain
  • Cognitive reductions
  • Peripheral Neuropathy

Suspected harmful effects: sleep disorders, erectile dysfunction, mood

Beatrice Golomb eats eggs for breakfast every day.

_________________
* I may be rationalizing, but I believe that the risk is attendant to uncontrolled blood sugar levels, and that, by keeping my blood sugars under control, I am already "covering" that element of increased risk.
I just watched this well balanced, highly factual and very interesting presentation and want to thank ShottleBop for posting it :congrats:

I would strongly endorse the recommendation that if you are in the least bit interested in cholesterol and the role of statins you need to watch this.

At about the 15 minute mark she gives great reasons for why we should all be eating more chocolate!

---

In terms of discussion, I would comment that while it seems to be established that an high Total-C/HDL ratio seems to show an increased risk of cardio-vascular disease, I do not recall that this presentation discussed WHY this ratio would be raised in the first place... what is the underlying cause of the imbalanced LDL, HDL and Triglycerides?

By way of answer, my suggestion is that there is an underlying inflammatory condition -- such as caused by high BG levels, for example -- which leads to tissue damage for which the body responds by sending out cholesterol to do it's job of repair. Much like aspirin, statins seem to have an anti-inflammatory effect and it may be that which helps, more-so than their cholesterol lowering effect.

In other words, the cholesterol is the not the cause... much like the 100% association of police to crime scenes should not be misinterpreted to suggest that the police are the cause of the crime. ]]> Other Medications fgummett http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45719-new-views-cholesterol-statins.html Are all mets same? http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45699-are-all-mets-same.html Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:07:31 GMT I am on a business trip and have consumed all met tables brought from home. In this town I could only buy Glucophage (which is also Metformin) which is made by different company. Is there any different if I take other brand? I am on a business trip and have consumed all met tables brought from home. In this town I could only buy Glucophage (which is also Metformin) which is made by different company. Is there any different if I take other brand? ]]> Other Medications mkudsy http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45699-are-all-mets-same.html Reports on Pfizer drug studies misleading: review http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45691-reports-pfizer-drug-studies.html Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:44:08 GMT CBC News - Health - Reports on Pfizer drug studies misleading: review (http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/11/12/pfizer-neurontin.html) ---Quote--- Analysis of a dozen published studies testing possible new uses for a Pfizer Inc. epilepsy drug found that reporting of the results was often... CBC News - Health - Reports on Pfizer drug studies misleading: review
Quote:
Analysis of a dozen published studies testing possible new uses for a Pfizer Inc. epilepsy drug found that reporting of the results was often misleading, indicating the medicine worked better than internal company documents showed.

According to the report, when a company-funded study's primary finding wasn't favorable, that result was usually buried and something else positive was highlighted, without disclosing the switch.

'In every instance, the published article made the drug look better than it would have.'— Dr. Sidney Wolfe

The documents used in the review were obtained by lawyers suing Pfizer for refunds on prescriptions paid for by insurers and consumers. The lawyers, who are seeking class action status for the cases, claim Pfizer concealed evidence the epilepsy drug Neurontin didn't work for those unapproved uses, including nerve pain, migraines and bipolar disorder.

One of the report's authors is an expert witness for the plaintiffs; another has received fees from the lawyers.

Pfizer disputes the report's conclusions, saying the company never "attempted to mislead the medical community about the effectiveness" of the drug for certain uses.

"We believe the review suffers from significant bias, insufficient data, poor methodology, and cannot pass the threshold of credible scientific research," Pfizer said in a statement.

The report, by researchers at the University of California at San Francisco and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health comes two months after Pfizer was fined a record $2.3 billion US — including an unprecedented $1.2-billion US criminal fine — for illegally marketing other blockbuster drugs.

The report appears in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine.

Dr. Sidney Wolfe, head of health research at consumer group Public Citizen, called it the first comprehensive look "at studies in which a company and people working for it so maliciously manipulated the data to make a drug look more effective than it actually was.

"In every instance, the published article made the drug look better than it would have," said Wolfe, a member of the Food and Drug Administration's drug safety advisory committee. "This results in harm."
Off-label use

Neurontin was approved by the FDA a decade ago for treating seizures and later for pain caused by shingles — but not for other conditions. Its potential side-effects include suicidal tendencies and depression.

While doctors can prescribe drugs for unapproved, or off-label uses, drug companies are legally barred from promoting their products for such uses. Drugmakers often test drugs for additional conditions and publicize the results. But they don't always seek approval for those new uses, particularly if the new findings aren't convincing.

Experts believe most Neurontin sales were for off-label uses — the ones in the reviewed studies. Sales peaked at $2.7 billion US in 2004, when Pfizer paid $430 million US in government fines to settle allegations it improperly marketed the epilepsy drug for unapproved uses. By last year, Neurontin sales fell to $387 million US due to cheaper generic versions sold as gabapentin.

For the new review, the researchers examined 20 patient studies funded by New York-based Pfizer and its Parke-Davis unit on use of Neurontin for preventing migraines or treating nerve pain or bipolar disorder. The studies were published in medical journals or presented at conferences, mostly over the last decade.

In eight of the 12 published studies, the main outcome listed in internal documents differs from the one later given in the published report. In half the cases, a new primary outcome was substituted and in others, the original main outcome was instead reported as a secondary measure or wasn't disclosed at all.

The authors cited some limitations to their review, including not knowing who made the changes.
'Ethically disturbing'

"We cannot be certain that selective reporting was a decision made by employees of Pfizer and Parke-Davis, since the authors of the published reports included nonemployees," the researchers wrote.

Arthur Caplan, director of the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Bioethics, called the report "one of the most ethically disturbing papers I've read in some time" and "an indication that people have been playing fast and loose with studies," particularly industry ones.

Caplan said the FDA should have the power to audit industry drug studies. Wolfe said there should be bigger fines and jail terms for manipulating study data, plus tougher rules for studies being published in journals.

Medical journals in recent years have required that studies be listed on a federal website, called ClinicalTrials.gov, to be eligible for publication. That move was made partly to make it harder for industry to hide studies on products that don't pan out and only publish those with good results. The study descriptions also list their primary and secondary outcomes.

Pfizer said it now has 1,245 company-sponsored studies listed on the website.
]]> Other Medications fgummett http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45691-reports-pfizer-drug-studies.html <![CDATA[Donuts... Is There Nothing They Can't Do..?]]> http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45657-donuts-there-nothing-they.html Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:03:48 GMT CTV News | Statin drugs may reduce risk of gallstone surgery (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091112/gallstones_091111/20091112?hub=Health) ---Quote--- People who take statins, the popular medications that lower cholesterol, are less likely to develop gallstones that lead to... CTV News | Statin drugs may reduce risk of gallstone surgery
Quote:
People who take statins, the popular medications that lower cholesterol, are less likely to develop gallstones that lead to having their gallbladder removed.

Researchers reporting in this week's issue of JAMA, Journal of the American Medical Association found that statin medications prescribed for at least a year appear to reduce the risk for gallstone surgery, called cholecystectomy.

The reason may have something to do with the way statins work.

Most gallstones are made from cholesterol deposits that occur in bile, a fluid that helps break down fats in our intestines. While all bile naturally contains some cholesterol, if there is too much, gallstones can form. That can lead to severe cramping pain and intestinal problems; in the most serious cases, the gallbladder has to be removed.

Since statins decrease liver cholesterol biosynthesis, it's thought they also lower the risk of gallstones by reducing cholesterol concentrations in the bile.

While that might sound logical, the authors led by Dr. Michael Bodmer, of University Hospital in Basel, Switzerland, note that data on the action of statins on gallstones in humans has been scarce.

Bodner led a team that conducted a large, long-term study on the link between statin use and the risk of developing severe gallstone disease that resulted in gallbladder removal.

They reviewed data on more than 27,000 U.K. patients who underwent gallbladder surgery between 1994 and 2008. They then compared them with more than 100,000 control patients. Of these, 2,396 patients and 8,868 controls had a history of statin use.

The researchers found that those on statins were one fifth less likely to develop gallbladder disease. However, they didn't see the effect on those who took the medications for less the year. The surgery risk was reduced only when patients had completed five prescriptions of treatment, reflecting about one to 1.5 years of treatment.

Patients who had filled fewer than five prescriptions saw zero benefit, those who had filled five to 19 prescriptions had a 15 per cent reduced risk, while those who had filled 20 or more had a 36 per cent reduced risk.

And the higher the dose of statin, the lower the risk of gallstone surgery.

"This large observational study provides evidence that patients with long-term statin use have a reduced risk of gallstone disease followed by cholecystectomy compared with patients without statin use," the authors write.

The researchers found it didn't matter the age of the patients or their gender or even the kind of stain they took; the findings still held.

Even adjusting for important risk factors for gallstone disease, including obesity, high-fat diets and estrogen replacement therapy didn't significantly alter the results.

"Our findings may be of clinical relevance given that gallstone disease represents a major burden for health care systems," the researchers conclude.
Here is the Abstract at JAMA: http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content...2/18/2001?home
Quote:
Results A total of 27 035 patients with cholecystectomy and 106 531 matched controls were identified, including 2396 patients and 8868 controls who had statin use. Compared with nonuse, current statin use (last prescription recorded within 90 days before the first-time diagnosis of the disease) was 1.0% for patients and 0.8% for controls (AOR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.95-1.27) for 1 to 4 prescriptions; 2.6% vs 2.4% (AOR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.93) for 5 to 19 prescriptions, and 3.2% vs 3.7% (AOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.59-0.70) for 20 or more prescriptions. The AORs for current use of statins defined as 20 or more prescriptions were similar (around 0.6) across age, sex, and body mass index categories, and across the statin class.
]]> Other Medications fgummett http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45657-donuts-there-nothing-they.html Lowering my HgbA1C http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45590-lowering-my-hgba1c.html Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:28:01 GMT Is there a quick method for lowering my HgbA1C level. At present, it is 7.2 and I need to get it to 6.9 or lower to get a job that I am applying for. Is there a quick method for lowering my HgbA1C level. At present, it is 7.2 and I need to get it to 6.9 or lower to get a job that I am applying for. ]]> Other Medications flybye747 http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45590-lowering-my-hgba1c.html metformin for seniors over 70? http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45564-metformin-seniors-over-70-a.html Tue, 10 Nov 2009 12:36:54 GMT My dad is 82 and has had Type 2 for about 10 years. His blood sugar is all over the place and doesn't seem to relate to anything he eats or doesn't eat.

He was put on metformin for about a month and his blood sugar was great.

Then his doc took him off it and said people over 70 shouldn't take metformin. His blood sugar is again very high no matter what he eats or doesn't eat.

His doc is a geriatric "specialist" at the VA (it's free for him there) and he refuses to go see my endocrinologist. There's just no talking him into anything and he won't listen to me (and I have very well controlled Type 2 so it's not like I don't know what I'm talking about). Even my endo listens to me when I tell her about some new study I read. The only thing that ticks me off is that she thinks 180 after one hour and 140 after two hours is "tight control" (I go for way less than 140 after one hour and under 110 after two hours).

His doc tells him to test BS before eating and no other time. Sometimes before meals it's as high as 200. His doc is not concerned. I think his doc is guilty of malpractice and if not that, then certainly ignorance and negiligence.

Why can't people over 70 take metformin? It worked so well for my dad (and works great for me too).

Thanks in advance for any help . ]]> Other Medications Sherlock http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45564-metformin-seniors-over-70-a.html Why not just insulin http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45516-why-not-just-insulin.html Mon, 09 Nov 2009 09:15:21 GMT If my diabetic condition is caused by a lack of insulin why am i taking Metformin,Glyburide, Januvia and Lantus? why not just Lantus dosed to the polint where my sugar levels are normal?:confused: If my diabetic condition is caused by a lack of insulin why am i taking Metformin,Glyburide, Januvia and Lantus? why not just Lantus dosed to the polint where my sugar levels are normal?:confused: ]]> Other Medications jambo101 http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45516-why-not-just-insulin.html Could your pet get H1N1? http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45487-could-your-pet-get.html Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:12:53 GMT CTV News | Could your pet get H1N1? It's unlikely, vets assure

I just love the photo they chose to illustrate this story...

]]> Other Medications fgummett http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45487-could-your-pet-get.html Aggrenox http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45340-aggrenox.html Tue, 03 Nov 2009 06:22:39 GMT So I had a TIA over the weekend and dr says I have had 2 strokes in the past. He upped my lowdose asprin to aggrenox. It comes with a warning for diabetics that it will mess with your BG. Any body have experience? Should I expect higher? lower? swings?
some of the "false" hypo symptoms I have been having are apperantly TIAs.
april ]]> Other Medications moonlitride http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45340-aggrenox.html Lisinopril - NOT! -- What next? Any experience? http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45294-lisinopril-not-what-next.html Sun, 01 Nov 2009 20:16:34 GMT Hey gang, I wanted to see what Metformin and Lantus did before I started any Blood Pressure or Cholesterol meds that the Dr ordered for me back in July. I like to log side effects from one med at a time. Well started the Lisinopril 8 days ago. From about day 4 I noticed a little tickle in the... Hey gang,
I wanted to see what Metformin and Lantus did before I started any Blood Pressure or Cholesterol meds that the Dr ordered for me back in July. I like to log side effects from one med at a time.

Well started the Lisinopril 8 days ago. From about day 4 I noticed a little tickle in the back of my throat that was reminiscent of the feeling I used to get that eventually put me on Nexium; silent reflux - that never gave me heartburn but injured my larynx. So I thought I'd just had some reflux and by the next day it usually settles down. Well from Day 4 to Day 8 it kept increasing to the point of causing a dry cough and a lot of feeling like someone was putting their finger down my throat -- creating a bit of a gag reflex.

So I went to the net and a little reading quickly revealed that this is a pretty typical side effect of Lisinopril (I hadn't looked up side effects BEFORE I started it - I've stopped doing that for fear of hypochondria affecting my judgment). I knew that most BP meds gave some dizziness and headaches but those side effects were starting to affect my day as well. Some reported that all Lisinopril side effects will eventually go away. But I'm not willing to accept these --at all. There are many BP meds out there to try. In a week my BP readings hadn't gone down at all either. But it probably needs to build up in my system.

Did any of you have a bad experience or have similar side effects to mine on Lisinopril?
And then what did you end up on for Blood Pressure that proved minimal (to no) side effects for you?

Any help would be great! ]]> Other Medications NewdestinyX http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/other-medications/45294-lisinopril-not-what-next.html