Statins

[IT Minion]

There speaks an NHS policy man. If people carry on with poor diets or if they have naturally high cholesterol, fine. But don’t exclude those who change their habits but are still told you must take statins as the net widens

I'm not sure of your point, even with massive lifestyle changes the video posted earlier only managed to get their cholesterol down to borderline numbers. He then went opinion shopping until he found a doctor who gave him the answer he liked.

People have studied how well lifestyle changes work.

Effectiveness of altering serum cholesterol levels without drugs - PMC

Drug therapy with statins and other agents can result in dramatic lipidlowering effects. Despite the wealth of data supporting the beneficial effects of pharmacologic therapy on cardiovascular risk, patients often express a desire to accomplish ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

In short: Exercise heavily, lose weight if you're fat, switch to a fish and plant based diet and you might manage a 30% reduction. Everyone should do that, but lifestyle changes like that are really hard and nearly always fail, you need Olympic athlete levels of mental dedication. Statins aim for 30-50% by taking a very cheap pill.

 

[mrrusty]

You're mistaking a Binary choice with a probability distribution. It's a fairly common thing, I think it's because of how our brains are wired.

No I'm not. I understand what I am saying perfectly, but for the purposes of the example kept it simple to illustrate a point - not so easy to start delving down in to compound probabilities in a DIY forum.... I'm really not trying to enter in to an argument. You are entitled to your opinions, just as I am. You have no idea who I am or anything about me, and my opinions are certainly as valid as yours.

 

[IT Minion]

No I'm not. I understand what I am saying perfectly, but for the purposes of the example kept it simple to illustrate a point - not so easy to start delving down in to compound probabilities in a DIY forum.... I'm really not trying to enter in to an argument. You are entitled to your opinions, just as I am. You have no idea who I am or anything about me, and my opinions are certainly as valid as yours.

Not when you say it's a 50/50 chance because it is a yes/no question. But I'll leave it there.

 

[blup]

I'm not sure of your point, even with massive lifestyle changes the video posted earlier only managed to get their cholesterol down to borderline numbers. He then went opinion shopping until he found a doctor who gave him the answer he liked.

People have studied how well lifestyle changes work.

Effectiveness of altering serum cholesterol levels without drugs - PMC

Drug therapy with statins and other agents can result in dramatic lipidlowering effects. Despite the wealth of data supporting the beneficial effects of pharmacologic therapy on cardiovascular risk, patients often express a desire to accomplish ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

In short: Exercise heavily, lose weight if you're fat, switch to a fish and plant based diet and you might manage a 30% reduction. Everyone should do that, but lifestyle changes like that are really hard and nearly always fail, you need Olympic athlete levels of mental dedication. Statins aim for 30-50% by taking a very cheap pill.

I know a bloke who is and as always has been hyper fit , distance running you name it he’s tried it but he has very high cholesterol, so it’s your genes to an extent

 

[blup]

"Must?"

Nobody makes you.

You can take them if you want to reduce the risk of a stroke or heart disease.

At a cost of £1.29 a month.

Hmmmm.

Difficult choice, eh?

What’s cost got to do with it?

 

[blup]

I don't think anyone is forced to, that's part of the scare story.

Some on here have been advised to take them but have said no.

The thrust of advice from the medical profession is to take them and that is in the context of lowering the starting point. Lifestyle and stress are huge factors

 

[denso13]

The thrust of advice from the medical profession is to take them and that is in the context of lowering the starting point.

Yes, for good reasons, it's a cheap method of additional protection. Most people can have a grown up discussion about the pros and cons with their GP.

Lifestyle and stress are huge factors

As with a lot of medication.

 

[Brigadier]

its a totally factual and real cost just get over the fact you were wrong to say the figure was wrong

It might be totally factual, but that doesn't stop it also being totally useless.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

At a cost of £1.29 a month.

Hmmmm.

Difficult choice, eh?

The cost is minimal, what has to be considered are the side effects, which taking any med might cause. Sometimes the cure, is worse than the illness.

In my case, going back to the reason I initiated this thread, I was suffering very many of the side effects, without really attributing them to the statins. The most serious, most debilitating, and most concerning being the waking up in the night in an inexplainable total panic. After several such attacks, then them becoming more frequent, then three such attacks, over 14 days, I was at the point of being in fear of going to sleep on a night.

 

[MNW67]

The cost is minimal, what has to be considered are the side effects, which taking any med might cause. Sometimes the cure, is worse than the illness.

In my case, going back to the reason I initiated this thread, I was suffering very many of the side effects, without really attributing them to the statins. The most serious, most debilitating, and most concerning being the waking up in the night in an inexplainable total panic. After several such attacks, then them becoming more frequent, then three such attacks, over 14 days, I was at the point of being in fear of going to sleep on a night.

That sounds horrible. Could it be sleep apnea.

 

[JohnD]

The cost is minimal, what has to be considered are the side effects, which taking any med might cause. Sometimes the cure, is worse than the illness.

In my case, going back to the reason I initiated this thread, I was suffering very many of the side effects, without really attributing them to the statins. The most serious, most debilitating, and most concerning being the waking up in the night in an inexplainable total panic. After several such attacks, then them becoming more frequent, then three such attacks, over 14 days, I was at the point of being in fear of going to sleep on a night.

I had that, but from a different drug, not the statins.

I complained to the GP who halved the dose.

I avoid watching the news, or horror or war films, before bed, which gave me ideas.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

And another update...

The new GP, issued a fresh month's worth of meds, although I'd recently had a batch from the old GP's - that at least, makes it less off a panic at each prescription month end. The new batch, strangely, included the atorvastatin - the cause of my recent problems. Along with iron tablets, to try to sort out my anaemia, suggested to perhaps be the cause of my increasing lack of stamina. I've had no more of the middle of the night, 'wake up in a panic' episodes. On one, too warm middle of the night, I did get up, and spent 30 minutes, sat out in the garden, without any problems. No more cramps, no more waking with a desperately dry mouth.

I emailed them, on the prescription email address, to point out the error, as soon as I spotted the atorvastatin, and got no response, so I fired off a second copy, to their general email address this morning. The doc, was talking about prescribing an alternative to the atorvastatin, during my appointment.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I emailed my MP, complaining about the ridiculous 8am race of the fittest, to try to claim appointments, suggesting it might be better if appointment were made available at several times per day - plus the only appointments being a choice of those 14 days hence, or a same day one, but only if you can convince them of an urgent need....

Obviously, the fittest, are not the ones so desperately in need of the appointments, so it's a crazy system.

A written reply arrived in the post this morning, not disagreeing with me, but blaming it all on under funding of the NHS, in the first paragraph. The second and subsequent paragraphs - the rest of the two pages, was spent promoting the Labour party, and moaning about the Billionaires, simply getting richer, and the poor getting poorer.

I wonder if I might get a more sensible response by emailing a member of the opposition, maybe the Reform?

 

[JohnD]

I wonder if I might get a more sensible response by emailing a member of the opposition, maybe the Reform?

You'll get a reply blaming foreigners

Who actually save us by filling the NHS jobs that Brits won't or can't do.

I bet you a pound they don't mention that demands on the NHS come from our aging population, that needs more care, more often, and for longer. I bet you didn't visit your GP often when you were 30.

It's a funny thing that oldies object to tax, especially IHT and land tax, that could fund the services they want.

Many of them bought half-price council houses, at the expense of the taxpayer.

 

[JohnD]

...blaming it all on under funding of the NHS...

Which is correct.

What a shame the Brexers were lying.

Who could have seen that coming?

Brexit 350 Million Lie

• JohnD
• 28 Jun 2016