Prev: Brachycardia & Tachycardia
Next: Cholesterol Levels Are Falling, But Red Flags Are Rising
From: Flycaster on 5 Oct 2005 06:30
I'm 66 yo, 6' tall and weigh 164, play 1.5-3 hours tennis (doubles at
3.5 level) 5-7 days/wk, lift weights every other day for 1 hour, with an
overall muscular and slender build and have always been active and in
good shape and good health. My mother also was in great shape and
active, but with high cholesterol (controlled by diet and statin), when
she suddenly died at 83 (no documented cause) while in apparently good
health. My last two cholesterol tests (9/03 and 2/05) gave the
following values respectively:

Total: 205 220
HDL: 56 65
LDL: 139 139
Ratio: 3.7 3.4
Trigly: 52 82

Although my cholesterol levels have always been in the 200-230 range,
none of my internists have opted for me to go on statins. They have
said that my "fat" profiles looked good and precluded the use of
statins. However, reading about the overall value of statins (I was in
the pharmaceutical industry for 32 years and know something about how to
evaluate medical research) and their potential for
cardio-protectiveness, I recently asked my doctor to place me on a
statin. My preference was for Lipitor (based on research and the fact
that it won't cost me anything). The doctor said that he would rather I
take Prevacol as he felt that Lipitor would lower my triglycerides too
much.

So, what do you folks feel about my going on a statin and what about
concerns about lowering my trigly too much?

Thanks.


From: David Rind on 5 Oct 2005 07:11
Flycaster wrote:
> I'm 66 yo, 6' tall and weigh 164, play 1.5-3 hours tennis (doubles at
> 3.5 level) 5-7 days/wk, lift weights every other day for 1 hour, with an
> overall muscular and slender build and have always been active and in
> good shape and good health. My mother also was in great shape and
> active, but with high cholesterol (controlled by diet and statin), when
> she suddenly died at 83 (no documented cause) while in apparently good
> health. My last two cholesterol tests (9/03 and 2/05) gave the
> following values respectively:
>
> Total: 205 220
> HDL: 56 65
> LDL: 139 139
> Ratio: 3.7 3.4
> Trigly: 52 82
>
> Although my cholesterol levels have always been in the 200-230 range,
> none of my internists have opted for me to go on statins. They have
> said that my "fat" profiles looked good and precluded the use of
> statins. However, reading about the overall value of statins (I was in
> the pharmaceutical industry for 32 years and know something about how to
> evaluate medical research) and their potential for
> cardio-protectiveness, I recently asked my doctor to place me on a
> statin. My preference was for Lipitor (based on research and the fact
> that it won't cost me anything). The doctor said that he would rather I
> take Prevacol as he felt that Lipitor would lower my triglycerides too
> much.
>
> So, what do you folks feel about my going on a statin and what about
> concerns about lowering my trigly too much?

Pretty much anyone who takes a statin can expect about a 25% relative
decrease in cardiovascular events. However, in absolute terms this
decrease can be very small if the person's baseline risk is small.

More information than just age and lipid profile are needed to calculate
cardiac risk, but most nonsmokers without diabetes or hypertension and
with a relatively low LDL and relatively high HDL (like those above) can
expect a 10-year risk of events of less than 10 percent and probably
less than 5 percent. So in most such people, taking a statin every day
would not be expected to decrease events by more than 1% to 2% over 10
years, and in many people the decrease in events would be even smaller.

I don't know of any particular reason to worry about lowering
triglycerides too much with a statin. The reason for not taking a statin
would be that the benefits are small and there are always potential side
effects. But a reasonable person could choose to take a statin for the
small decrease in cardiovascular events that would be expected.

--
David Rind
drind(a)caregroup.harvard.edu

From: Jason on 5 Oct 2005 13:42
In article <2uOdnV88rZTQNt7eRVn-hQ(a)adelphia.com>, Flycaster
<adam999forgetit(a)adelphia.net> wrote:

> I'm 66 yo, 6' tall and weigh 164, play 1.5-3 hours tennis (doubles at
> 3.5 level) 5-7 days/wk, lift weights every other day for 1 hour, with an
> overall muscular and slender build and have always been active and in
> good shape and good health. My mother also was in great shape and
> active, but with high cholesterol (controlled by diet and statin), when
> she suddenly died at 83 (no documented cause) while in apparently good
> health. My last two cholesterol tests (9/03 and 2/05) gave the
> following values respectively:
>
> Total: 205 220
> HDL: 56 65
> LDL: 139 139
> Ratio: 3.7 3.4
> Trigly: 52 82
>
> Although my cholesterol levels have always been in the 200-230 range,
> none of my internists have opted for me to go on statins. They have
> said that my "fat" profiles looked good and precluded the use of
> statins. However, reading about the overall value of statins (I was in
> the pharmaceutical industry for 32 years and know something about how to
> evaluate medical research) and their potential for
> cardio-protectiveness, I recently asked my doctor to place me on a
> statin. My preference was for Lipitor (based on research and the fact
> that it won't cost me anything). The doctor said that he would rather I
> take Prevacol as he felt that Lipitor would lower my triglycerides too
> much.
>
> So, what do you folks feel about my going on a statin and what about
> concerns about lowering my trigly too much?
>
> Thanks.

Hello,
Before you make a decision, I advise you to buy and read this book:
WHAT YOU MUST KNOW ABOUT STATIN DRUGS AND THEIR NATURAL ALTERNATIVES
by Jay S. Cohen, M.D.
There are some excellent alternatives to statins that might be able to
solve your problems that do NOT have serious side effects. Statins have
serious side effects and they are discussed in Dr. Cohen's book.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.



From: Robert on 5 Oct 2005 14:01

"Flycaster" <adam999forgetit(a)adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:2uOdnV88rZTQNt7eRVn-hQ(a)adelphia.com...
> I'm 66 yo, 6' tall and weigh 164, play 1.5-3 hours tennis (doubles at
> 3.5 level) 5-7 days/wk, lift weights every other day for 1 hour, with an
> overall muscular and slender build and have always been active and in
> good shape and good health. My mother also was in great shape and
> active, but with high cholesterol (controlled by diet and statin), when
> she suddenly died at 83 (no documented cause) while in apparently good
> health. My last two cholesterol tests (9/03 and 2/05) gave the
> following values respectively:
>
> Total: 205 220
> HDL: 56 65
> LDL: 139 139
> Ratio: 3.7 3.4
> Trigly: 52 82
>
> Although my cholesterol levels have always been in the 200-230 range,
> none of my internists have opted for me to go on statins. They have
> said that my "fat" profiles looked good and precluded the use of
> statins. However, reading about the overall value of statins (I was in
> the pharmaceutical industry for 32 years and know something about how to
> evaluate medical research) and their potential for
> cardio-protectiveness,

Statins reduce lipids and therefore antiarthrogenic and are
cardio-protective during AMI.
At your age I would take fish oils for cardio protection.
Depending on the individual they may be hard to tolerate. I have always had
GI problems before statins and they certainly don't help me with that.


From: Jason on 5 Oct 2005 15:41
In article <hOCdndzsZtWqiNneRVn-iA(a)got.net>, "Robert"
<RobertsSong(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

> "Flycaster" <adam999forgetit(a)adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:2uOdnV88rZTQNt7eRVn-hQ(a)adelphia.com...
> > I'm 66 yo, 6' tall and weigh 164, play 1.5-3 hours tennis (doubles at
> > 3.5 level) 5-7 days/wk, lift weights every other day for 1 hour, with an
> > overall muscular and slender build and have always been active and in
> > good shape and good health. My mother also was in great shape and
> > active, but with high cholesterol (controlled by diet and statin), when
> > she suddenly died at 83 (no documented cause) while in apparently good
> > health. My last two cholesterol tests (9/03 and 2/05) gave the
> > following values respectively:
> >
> > Total: 205 220
> > HDL: 56 65
> > LDL: 139 139
> > Ratio: 3.7 3.4
> > Trigly: 52 82
> >
> > Although my cholesterol levels have always been in the 200-230 range,
> > none of my internists have opted for me to go on statins. They have
> > said that my "fat" profiles looked good and precluded the use of
> > statins. However, reading about the overall value of statins (I was in
> > the pharmaceutical industry for 32 years and know something about how to
> > evaluate medical research) and their potential for
> > cardio-protectiveness,
>
> Statins reduce lipids and therefore antiarthrogenic and are
> cardio-protective during AMI.
> At your age I would take fish oils for cardio protection.
> Depending on the individual they may be hard to tolerate. I have always had
> GI problems before statins and they certainly don't help me with that.

Robert,
Another great post. I hope that Sharon responds to the OP. I seem to
recall a study mentioned in her report that stated that elderly people
have more serious side effects when they take statins. I don't recall the
reason. I just checked Dr. Cohen's book and he has a section on page 76-78
labelled "Seniors and Statins". The first sentence in that section states:
"Side effects hit seniors the hardest...the overall incidents of adverse
drug reactions in the elderly is two to three times that found in young
adults."
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.



 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Brachycardia & Tachycardia
Next: Cholesterol Levels Are Falling, But Red Flags Are Rising