Jump to content
Diabetes forums
  • Welcome To Diabetes Forums!

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today to contribute and support the site.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

SB_Krista

How many diabetics out there taking statins?

Recommended Posts

ShottleBop

My LDL is high--194 at diagnosis, 219 a year and a half later, last September. My HDL, though, has doubled, from 40 to 79, and my trigs are 41. Based on everything I've read, statins do not work because they lower cholesterol (in one recent paper, half the people hospitalized with a heart attack had normal cholesteroal); they work because they have an anti-inflammatory effect--and, while they may improve your risk of having a heart attack, they do not lower total mortality for most people. There is such a thing as too little cholesterol.

 

So I'm not on cholesterol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan S
My LDL is high--194 at diagnosis, 219 a year and a half later, last September. My HDL, though, has doubled, from 40 to 79, and my trigs are 41. Based on everything I've read, statins do not work because they lower cholesterol (in one recent paper, half the people hospitalized with a heart attack had normal cholesteroal); they work because they have an anti-inflammatory effect--and, while they may improve your risk of having a heart attack, they do not lower total mortality for most people. There is such a thing as too little cholesterol.

 

So I'm not on cholesterol.

 

Great ratio there.

 

I presume you meant you're not on a statin? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
art

Me. me , me.

As soon as I was DX'd.

 

Now my doc tells me I have the blood of a child.

 

I want the body that goes with being a child.

 

Art

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ODAR
In an odd sort of way, it was lipitor that led to my diagnosis. My doc reported that I had high cholesterol in the late '90s. He said "There is no need for you to do anything, we have a pill that fixes that" and put me on 20mg lipitor. In Australia I needed a blood test every six months to get that prescription renewed. I did that for a few years and then changed doctors. The new doc added some tests to the list, including white blood count and HbA1c. The first led to the diagnosis of leukemia, the second to type 2. Which the prior doc should have diagnosed five years before.

 

As I made changes to d&e over the next few years I continued to take the lipitor.

 

But I also started to do a lot of reading over the next few years. And the more I read, in scientific papers, diabetes forums and medical sites, the less impressed I became with the giant pharmaceutical industry and the quality of the research papers funded by that industry to justify lower and lower LDL levels needing more and more statins to achieve them.

 

I dropped the lipitor a few years ago. My LDL predictably jumped alarmingly (to my doc) but my HDL and trigs did not. After some concern my doctor accepted my point of view after I asked for further tests including VLDL and apolipoprotein A1 and B, which all came back in normal range.

 

I wrote a bit more on it here Cholesterol, Fats, Carbs, Statins and Exercise

 

 

 

Ok - So can you tell me if these numbers are bad... LDL 4.5 and HDL 1.00 ( I don't have the rest with me but I remember these numbers from my last test in Jan '10)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan S
Ok - So can you tell me if these numbers are bad... LDL 4.5 and HDL 1.00 ( I don't have the rest with me but I remember these numbers from my last test in Jan '10)

 

Well, in the absence of lots of other info, I can't really do that. I can only look at generalities.

 

LDL = 4.5mmol/L = 175 mg/dL

Most doctors would consider that too high, but what really matters in my opinion is how much of it is the nasty dense LDL and how much is benign or "fluffy."

 

Unfortunately LDL is commonly calculated by a formula (Friedewald) and not actually measured and that formula is not particularly accurate. The nasty dense LDL is measured as VLDL, or you can test for other indicators called apolipoptoteins. The problem is that without further information neither you nor your doctors really know if your LDL is good or bad. Incidentally my LDL is higher than yours but my VLDL and apolipoproteins are good so I am unconcerned.

 

HDL = 1 mmol/L = 39 mg/dL.

The AHA advice is to aim for at least 1.4(50) as a minimum level for females. I'm afraid that's one of the few points on that page I agree with - but they're the doctors, I'm not. So you may prefer to go by the guidelines on that page.

 

If your triglycerides were low, less than about 1.3(115) in your case, the HDL and LDL may be OK.

 

And I'll repeat, I'm just a diabetic expressing an opinion, not a doctor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ODAR
Well, in the absence of lots of other info, I can't really do that. I can only look at generalities.

 

LDL = 4.5mmol/L = 175 mg/dL

Most doctors would consider that too high, but what really matters in my opinion is how much of it is the nasty dense LDL and how much is benign or "fluffy."

 

Unfortunately LDL is commonly calculated by a formula (Friedewald) and not actually measured and that formula is not particularly accurate. The nasty dense LDL is measured as VLDL, or you can test for other indicators called apolipoptoteins. The problem is that without further information neither you nor your doctors really know if your LDL is good or bad. Incidentally my LDL is higher than yours but my VLDL and apolipoproteins are good so I am unconcerned.

 

HDL = 1 mmol/L = 39 mg/dL.

The AHA advice is to aim for at least 1.4(50) as a minimum level for females. I'm afraid that's one of the few points on that page I agree with - but they're the doctors, I'm not. So you may prefer to go by the guidelines on that page.

 

If your triglycerides were low, less than about 1.3(115) in your case, the HDL and LDL may be OK.

 

And I'll repeat, I'm just a diabetic expressing an opinion, not a doctor.

 

Thanks Alan - Yes since joining DF - I am being made more aware of Cholesterol etc - but since all my results are in mmol - I have no idea what to compare it too. Also am really naive about cholesterol reading - just only what have been told way back that if you LDL is high - then it's bad!!! I will check my results when I get home tonight and compare them. Hopefully its not as bad as it looks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan S

Great article. At last the message is filtering through. It's a pity that will take another decade to be accepted by the AHA or the AD(diabetes)A and probably a further decade to reach the AD(Dietetic)A.

 

Look how long Krauss and others have been writing about it - without changing things at that level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan S
Thanks Alan - Yes since joining DF - I am being made more aware of Cholesterol etc - but since all my results are in mmol - I have no idea what to compare it too. Also am really naive about cholesterol reading - just only what have been told way back that if you LDL is high - then it's bad!!! I will check my results when I get home tonight and compare them. Hopefully its not as bad as it looks!

This may help you with conversions to US numbers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
davewmich

Platte you said you couldn't take being on the statins, can you tell me your side-effects?? I've been on simvastatin for three months and i'm trying to figure out how much to blame on that pill and not. I had some palpitations etc, they blamed that on anxiety, i've had numbness, again said its your anxiety, lately i've had lots of blood flow anomolies and light headedness (which brought me to this site). I know on one website i found a small percentage of people listed dizzyness and neurological side effects, so ...guess i'll know more when we do some testing this week i hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
foxl
Great article. At last the message is filtering through. It's a pity that will take another decade to be accepted by the AHA or the AD(diabetes)A and probably a further decade to reach the AD(Dietetic)A.

 

Look how long Krauss and others have been writing about it - without changing things at that level.

 

I think its finally making mainstream news is very promising, though. It should not take the deaths of the "old guard," but it seems to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
plattb1
Platte you said you couldn't take being on the statins, can you tell me your side-effects??

 

Yes, for me, lipitor produced some digestive issues. I have been OK on both pravachol & crestor. I have not had any of the neurological side effects or dizziness others have reported.

 

Hope you either identify the problem as being related to the simvastatin & get a substitute or find that it is unrelated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TommyC1

Docs get a pretty good kickback for prescribing statins and blood pressure meds.

Every time they try to get me on them I ask for a cut and they STFU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SB_Krista

Funny you should pose that question, even if rhetorically, fgummett. My PCP says he takes a statin, and my Endo said if he were me with my numbers, he'd take a statin too. Incidently, the Endo prescribed a statin for me NOT because of my numbers which are pretty good, but because of my father's age when he had his first heart attack and the fact that I'm diabetic. I even brought up the issue of big pharma and kickbacks to Dr's who prescribed their statins!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SB_Krista

Alan S: I'm trying to understand the cholesterol issue & numbers better and am wondering about something. You refer to VLDL as being the small, dense bad kind of cholesterol but doesn't VLDL mean very low density lipoprotein ?

And, my blood panel results indicated both LDL and VLDL were calculated, not measured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fgummett
Alan S: I'm trying to understand the cholesterol issue & numbers better and am wondering about something. You refer to VLDL as being the small, dense bad kind of cholesterol but doesn't VLDL mean very low density lipoprotein ?

And, my blood panel results indicated both LDL and VLDL were calculated, not measured.

I agree there must be some confusion here between Very Low Density Lipoprotein and Small Dense Low Density Lipoprotein

 

If you haven't already, I suggest you read the PDF in this post above... http://www.diabetesforums.com/forum/type-1-5-diabetes/48752-how-many-diabetics-out-2.html#post558935 ...I'd print out a copy for your Doctor ;)

 

You may also find this presentation educational: Cholesterol and other Lipids in Your Blood...

Tracy Fulton of the UCSF Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics explores blood chemistry. Series: "UCSF Mini Medical School for the Public" [

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.