Join for free
Page 6 of 18 « First < 4 5 6 7 8 16 > Last »
TedHutchinson's Avatar
TedHutchinson
Senior Member
TedHutchinson is offline
Louth UK
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 194
TedHutchinson is male  TedHutchinson has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 06:30 PM
51

Re: Statins

Originally Posted by Reikiman ->
Very interesting, TedHutchinson.

I will mark this website and it's information.
There is a reasonably easy to understand account of how we got to the current position here Cholesterol & heart disease – there is a relationship, but it’s not what you think
When you actually look at what happens in practice it's relatively easy to see who has the greatest risk of dying from CVD


and those lines showing that people with the lowest Total Cholesterol die soonest are even steeper when you look at all cause mortality statistics.


The images come from the article I've provided a link to so more details there about where the stats come from.
But the simple message is that Cholesterol is a natural substance your body creates for a purpose and preventing your body making cholesterol shortens your life and increases your risk of dying from all causes and even increases your risk of dying from heart disease, the very reason most people are persuaded to use statins.
Wrinkly
Fondly Remembered
Wrinkly is offline
West Yorks.
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,427
Wrinkly is male  Wrinkly has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 06:37 PM
52

Re: Statins

Diet plays a very big part in the levels of cholesterol in the human body, and the diet of the Norwegians is high in fish.
It has been a known fact for years that people round the world who have this sort of diet have the lowest C.V.D. in the world.
So I would say the chart is not helpful to the likes of us with our diet, it seems to have been conducted using smokers and non-smokers more than the food we eat, but thanks for showing it.
I don't know whether this sort of survey has been done on our diet, but then again our diets vary from person to person.
ukmartian's Avatar
ukmartian
Senior Member
ukmartian is offline
Ipswich uk
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,206
ukmartian is male  ukmartian has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 07:53 PM
53

Re: Statins

I get told so many things with ref to Cholesterol levels ...I am Diabetic T2 ...my cholesterol was 5.8 on diagnosis ...i was put on simvastatin which dropped it to 3.8...when i got symptoms from the statin i came off it totally for a year ...my cholesterol went up to 4.5 and i was told it was to high ...they tried statins again over the next year which again caused me massive side effects , so once again i threw them out ...I am now on ezetimibe ...so far no probs ......so what do you believe ......
TedHutchinson's Avatar
TedHutchinson
Senior Member
TedHutchinson is offline
Louth UK
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 194
TedHutchinson is male  TedHutchinson has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 08:18 PM
54

Re: Statins

Originally Posted by Wrinkly ->
Diet plays a very big part in the levels of cholesterol in the human body, and the diet of the Norwegians is high in fish.
But back in 1997 when Ancel Keys the author of the Lipid Hypothesis was saying, "There's no connection whatsoever between cholesterol in food and cholesterol in blood. And we've known that all along. Cholesterol in the diet doesn't matter at all unless you happen to be a chicken or a rabbit." Ancel Keys, Ph.D., professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota 1997."
We knew there was no connection between dietary cholesterol can plasma cholesterol.

The low fat/low cholesterol diet is ineffective
The commonly-held belief that the best diet for prevention of coronary heart disease is a low saturated fat, low cholesterol diet is not supported by the available evidence from clinical trials. In primary prevention, such diets do not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction or coronary or all-cause mortality. Cost-benefit analyses of the extensive primary prevention programmes, which are at present vigorously supported by Governments, Health Departments and health educationalists, are urgently required.
Similarly, diets focused exclusively on reduction of saturated fats and cholesterol are relatively ineffective for secondary prevention and should be abandoned.



It is absolutely true that diets that are high in fish oil are protective for CVD and are in fact far more effective than statins.
Effects of n-3 fatty acids on major cardiovascular events in statin users and non-users with a history of myocardial infarction
Abstract
Aims Recent secondary prevention trials have failed to demonstrate a beneficial effect of n-3 fatty acids on cardiovascular outcomes, which may be due to the growing use of statins since the mid-1990s.
The aim of the present study was to assess whether statins modify the effects of n-3 fatty acids on major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with a history of myocardial infarction (MI).
Methods and results
Patients who participated in the Alpha Omega Trial were divided into consistent statin users (n = 3740) and consistent statin non-users (n = 413).
In these two groups of patients, the effects of an additional daily amount of 400 mg eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) plus docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), 2 g α-linolenic acid (ALA), or both on major cardiovascular events were evaluated.
Multivariable Cox's proportional hazard models were used to calculate adjusted hazard rate ratios (HR(adj)).
Among the statin users 495 (13%) and among the statin non-users 62 (15%) developed a major cardiovascular event.
In statin users, an additional amount of n-3 fatty acids did not reduce cardiovascular events .
In statin non-users, however, only 9% of those who received EPA-DHA plus ALA experienced an event compared with [B]18% in the placebo group.

Conclusion
In patients with a history of MI who are not treated with statins, low-dose supplementation with n-3 fatty acids may reduce major cardiovascular events.
This study suggests that statin treatment modifies the effects of n-3 fatty acids on the incidence of major cardiovascular events
So if you have had a Heart Attack (myocardial infarction MI) these are the only group for whom there is evidence Statins may be helpful which group had the lowest incidence of a major cardiovascular event over the 7 years of the trial?
Omega 3 groups 9%
Statin users 13%
Statin plus omega 3 users 15%
Placebo 18%
So if you know someone who has had a heart attack would they be safer using omega 3 400mg+2g ALA or a statin?

Now perhaps if you were aware that only a small fraction of the omega 3 in ALA is converted to EPA and an insignficant amount ever gets to DHA, would you think that maybe Dr Davis's suggestion to use 3000mg~6000mg of EPA & DHA from high strength fish oils may indeed be a much safer option than any of those suggested in this trial. Bear in mind Dr Davis recommends this in conjunction with 6000iu/daily vitamin D3, ample magnesium and the use of Niacin.

The point is that we have known for the last 25yrs that low fat diets don't work and that saturated fat is not dangerous. We should not permit people to repeat these myths.
TedHutchinson's Avatar
TedHutchinson
Senior Member
TedHutchinson is offline
Louth UK
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 194
TedHutchinson is male  TedHutchinson has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 08:26 PM
55

Re: Statins

Originally Posted by ukmartian ->
I get told so many things with ref to Cholesterol levels ...I am Diabetic T2 ...my cholesterol was 5.8 on diagnosis ...i was put on simvastatin which dropped it to 3.8...when i got symptoms from the statin i came off it totally for a year ...my cholesterol went up to 4.5 and i was told it was to high ...they tried statins again over the next year which again caused me massive side effects , so once again i threw them out ...I am now on ezetimibe ...so far no probs ......so what do you believe ......
It depends whether you want to end your life early or if you want to live longer.
I prefer to stay alive.
Look at the evidence and THINK FOR YOURSELF.
Association between serum cholesterol and noncardiovascular mortality in older age
This study looked at the NON CVD death rate in 5,750 Adults aged 55 to 99 over nearly 14yrs.
They found each 1-mmol/L increase in total cholesterol was associated with an approximately 12% lower risk of noncardiovascular mortality this becomes MORE significant after the age of 65 and increases in magnitude across each subsequent decade.
They conclude
Higher total cholesterol was associated with a lower risk of noncardiovascular mortality in older adults. This association varied across the late-life span and was stronger in older age groups. Further research is required to examine the mechanisms underlying this association.

Do you want to increase or decrease your risk of mortality (dying)?
If you want to die sooner then lower your cholesterol by taking a statin.
If you want to die later then you need to keep your cholesterol in the sweet spot between the lowest risk of CVD and the lowest risk of ALL CAUSE DEATH.
The recent research papers I've linked to earlier in this thread are confirming what we already know.
the best range of TC that one can be at is somewhere between 210,= 5.44 where cardiovascular disease mortality is minimized; and 220= 5.70 , where total mortality is minimized.
That there is a cholesterol sweet spot below and above which depending on your age and sex all cause mortality (and most people don't die of heart disease) is lowest.
Total cholesterol and cardiovascular disease: A U-curve relationship


Remember this is based on data collect prior to 2005 and the more recent paper s (from Norway and Belguim not that different from UK) are suggesting the safer numbers may be even higher.
For most people going under 5.44 = 210 is certainly going to shorten your life.
It's not that difficult to map your current cholesterol number on the graph and decide whether going lower will help or whether raising your TC will be better?
Meg's Avatar
Meg
Supervisor
Meg is offline
Worcestershire
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 42,850
Meg is female  Meg has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 09:19 PM
56

Re: Statins

Originally Posted by TedHutchinson ->
It depends whether you want to end your life early or if you want to live longer.
I prefer to stay alive.
Look at the evidence and THINK FOR YOURSELF.
Association between serum cholesterol and noncardiovascular mortality in older age
This study looked at the NON CVD death rate in 5,750 Adults aged 55 to 99 over nearly 14yrs.
They found each 1-mmol/L increase in total cholesterol was associated with an approximately 12% lower risk of noncardiovascular mortality this becomes MORE significant after the age of 65 and increases in magnitude across each subsequent decade.
They conclude
Higher total cholesterol was associated with a lower risk of noncardiovascular mortality in older adults. This association varied across the late-life span and was stronger in older age groups. Further research is required to examine the mechanisms underlying this association.

Do you want to increase or decrease your risk of mortality (dying)?
If you want to die sooner then lower your cholesterol by taking a statin.
If you want to die later then you need to keep your cholesterol in the sweet spot between the lowest risk of CVD and the lowest risk of ALL CAUSE DEATH.
The recent research papers I've linked to earlier in this thread are confirming what we already know.
the best range of TC that one can be at is somewhere between 210,= 5.44 where cardiovascular disease mortality is minimized; and 220= 5.70 , where total mortality is minimized.
That there is a cholesterol sweet spot below and above which depending on your age and sex all cause mortality (and most people don't die of heart disease) is lowest.
Total cholesterol and cardiovascular disease: A U-curve relationship


Remember this is based on data collect prior to 2005 and the more recent paper s (from Norway and Belguim not that different from UK) are suggesting the safer numbers may be even higher.
For most people going under 5.44 = 210 is certainly going to shorten your life.
It's not that difficult to map your current cholesterol number on the graph and decide whether going lower will help or whether raising your TC will be better?
Ted Huchinson, the fact that you didn't bother to introduce yourself as most new members do but instead posted a number of long quotes with links lead me believe you might be a spammer so I did a Google search and I found someone with your name and location posting similar posts (including the graphs )on numerous sites. I note this person/ salesman/spammer has been banned from a number of sites, are you this person?
Meg.
TedHutchinson's Avatar
TedHutchinson
Senior Member
TedHutchinson is offline
Louth UK
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 194
TedHutchinson is male  TedHutchinson has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 09:25 PM
57

Re: Statins

Originally Posted by Meg ->
Ted Huchinson, the fact that you didn't bother to introduce yourself as most people do but instead posted a number of long quotes with links lead me believe you might be a spammer
Why do you regard posting links to scientific evidence as the equivalent of spamming?

so I did a Google search and I found someone with your name and location posting similar posts (including the graphs on numerous sites).
I always post in my own name because I am proud of the accuracy of the science based information I provide.

I note this person/ salesman/spammer has been banned from a number of sites, are you this person?
Meg.
I am regularly banned from sites for posting science based information.
There are a lot of people who don't like being confronted by the facts. I'm sure most people here do not want to be lied to. I'm sure most people who get to be over 50 can't stand people who don't tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That's why I'm proud always that I refuse to be bullied and refuse to compromise the truth.

I don't suffer fools kindly either.
ukmartian's Avatar
ukmartian
Senior Member
ukmartian is offline
Ipswich uk
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,206
ukmartian is male  ukmartian has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 09:41 PM
58

Re: Statins

Ahhhhhhhh I was 'told off' for stopping my statins...I had strokes on my optic nerves which has somewhat affected my eyesight ...i was told i needed to lower my cholesterol to between 3-4 as this was a sign off cardio vascular decease or risk my eyesight and health....what do i do ...die or go blind lol
TedHutchinson's Avatar
TedHutchinson
Senior Member
TedHutchinson is offline
Louth UK
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 194
TedHutchinson is male  TedHutchinson has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 09:57 PM
59

Re: Statins

Originally Posted by ukmartian ->
Ahhhhhhhh I was 'told off' for stopping my statins...I had strokes on my optic nerves which has somewhat affected my eyesight ...i was told i needed to lower my cholesterol to between 3-4 as this was a sign off cardio vascular decease or risk my eyesight and health....what do i do ...die or go blind lol
Well there are science based alternatives that may keep your doctors happy and improve not only your eyesight but also lower your lipid profile.

Flaxseed dietary fibers lower cholesterol and increase fecal fat excretion,

A meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials for the effects of garlic on serum lipid profiles.Overall, garlic was superior to placebo in reducing serum total cholesterol (TC) and triglyceride (TG) levels serum TC and TG levels in the garlic group were reduced by 0.28 mmol and 0.13 mmol respectively.
The effects of garlic were more striking in subjects with long-term intervention and higher baseline TC levels.

Lipid-Lowering Effects of Time-Released Garlic Powder Tablets in Double-Blinded Placebo-Controlled Randomized StudyTime Release garlic supplement reduced total cholesterol levels by 7.6% and 11.5% more than the placebo. The LDL (“bad”) cholesterol fell by almost 14%. The participants HDL (“good”) cholesterol rose by almost 12%. The dosage found to be most effective was 600 mg a day.

Influence of body mass index and serum lipids on the cholesterol-lowering effects of almonds Full text

Study Suggests Long-Term Almond Consumption Supports Weight Maintenance Explanation of above average, daily almond supplementation was 52 g (or nearly 2 ounces).

I think I posted a link to the omega 3/LDL research earlier.
So you can change your lipid profile, reduce the bad cholesterol and improve the good cholesterol in ways that would keep you alive and your doctors happy.
Azz's Avatar
Azz
Admin
Azz is offline
South Wales, UK
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 8,027
Azz is male  Azz has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
15-02-2012, 10:23 PM
60

Re: Statins

Hi Ted,

I think it's nice to see someone share some of my concerns about 'conventional medicine'. But just a quick note to say the reason Meg suspected you as a spammer is because you came in posting lots of links - something that often raises alarm bells - I know people often ask for citation when posting claims, but perhaps it's something worth bearing in mind in future when joining other forums?

With regards to some of your points, I too am a big supporter of:
  • Garlic
  • Linseeds
  • Omega 3 oils

All of which I have on a daily basis.

I also think there are better ways to reduce bad cholesterol (I say bad because there is good and bad cholesterol). Changing to a healthy diet, without all the artificial crap, 'bad' oils and sweet/sugary things would be the first thing I do if I ever found myself if such a situation.
 
Page 6 of 18 « First < 4 5 6 7 8 16 > Last »



© Copyright 2009, Over50sForum   Contact Us | Over 50s Forum! | Archive | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Top

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.