Cycling UK Forum

Do diagnosis of familial hyper cholestereama... confirmed with dna testing, diet good exercise good what to do?
Consultant and GP way up the evidence and statins the way to go. Right type right dose
Simples

Winged wheels wrote:..............statins the way to go. Right type right dose
Simples

When you can't put on your socks unaided, and getting down the stairs first thing in the morning feels like mission impossible, it ain't so simple.
I'm not imagining it, muscle stiffness and pain is the most frequent reported side effect for all 3 statins I have tried.
The first one I took for at least 20 years with no side effects. Read the packeage insert.....side effects are more likely the older you are and the lighter you are.....well, I was never 70 before, and I haven't been this light for half a century.

In patients who have had either heart attack or stroke, you can show statistically benefits of statins in terms of reduced liklihood of repeat episodes. This is thought to be linked with the statins stabilising existing plaques.....fewer bits of thrombus etc. breaking off into the circulation has got to be a bonus.
In patients who have "raised blood cholesterol" with no symptoms, its much harder to show any benefit.

If I could find a statin which didn't give me side effects, I'd take it to-morrow.....why wouldn't I?
As it is, I don't expect to live for ever.....if I took statins, I still wouldn't live for ever, but it might just feel like it!

Exactly.
+1

Luckily, I have been prescribed Repatha injections. So far, no detectable side effects.

Winged wheels wrote:Do diagnosis of familial hyper cholestereama... confirmed with dna testing, diet good exercise good what to do?
Consultant and GP way up the evidence and statins the way to go. Right type right dose
Simples

yeah take the pills so a private company makes the cash from the NHS when you can fix any 'issue' by yourself.

Cannot disagree with anything written on this thread.
So far so good but am sceptical and uncomfortable with the idea.
Read widely; BMJ, New England Journal of Medicine and discussions with many consultants. Going with it for now as no issues. My main motive is not to stroke out, seen too many, during and afters...am a paramedic by the way. Will stop one day when I start thinking its time to hang the bike up for the last time.
Thanks all happy riding keep safe, I will report back if any side effects.

Winged wheels wrote:Do diagnosis of familial hyper cholestereama... confirmed with dna testing, diet good exercise good what to do?
Consultant and GP way up the evidence and statins the way to go. Right type right dose
Simples

And I’d agree with them.

Read malcolm kendrick the great cholesterol con, my lipids are around 7-9 and have been for over 10 years and i do not take statins as they are the biggest con in medical history and have made billions for the drug companies over the years. I was told that i had a 18% chance of having a heart attack and that was 10 years ago, so i said to my doctor why did you not tell me that i have a 82% chance of not having a heart attack, i rest my case!

531colin wrote:

Winged wheels wrote:..............statins the way to go. Right type right dose
Simples

When you can't put on your socks unaided, and getting down the stairs first thing in the morning feels like mission impossible, it ain't so simple.
I'm not imagining it, muscle stiffness and pain is the most frequent reported side effect for all 3 statins I have tried.
The first one I took for at least 20 years with no side effects. Read the packeage insert.....side effects are more likely the older you are and the lighter you are.....well, I was never 70 before, and I haven't been this light for half a century.

In patients who have had either heart attack or stroke, you can show statistically benefits of statins in terms of reduced liklihood of repeat episodes. This is thought to be linked with the statins stabilising existing plaques.....fewer bits of thrombus etc. breaking off into the circulation has got to be a bonus.
In patients who have "raised blood cholesterol" with no symptoms, its much harder to show any benefit.

If I could find a statin which didn't give me side effects, I'd take it to-morrow.....why wouldn't I?
As it is, I don't expect to live for ever.....if I took statins, I still wouldn't live for ever, but it might just feel like it!

My experience exactly. My ankle joints would give way and I had difficulty going downstairs, muscle pain and overwhelming fatigue as well. What I wasn't aware of was that statins can affect the immune system and I found myself with fungus infections. All gone now since I stopped and now I feel human again.

foxychick wrote:Read malcolm kendrick the great cholesterol con, my lipids are around 7-9 and have been for over 10 years and i do not take statins as they are the biggest con in medical history and have made billions for the drug companies over the years. I was told that i had a 18% chance of having a heart attack and that was 10 years ago, so i said to my doctor why did you not tell me that i have a 82% chance of not having a heart attack, i rest my case!

Quite so.

In addition, we must accept that we will die. What matters is not stupidly trying to avoid death but the manner of one's death; and the manner of one's life up to then. A massive stroke or a fatal heart attack whilst going for the Dentdale sign on a sunny Sunday run with the club seems preferable to a slow degeneration perched in a gimmery somewhere, being abused by a large "nurse" for making a wet patch or scowling at the gruel.

The quack persuaded me to take statins for a bit, until I rebelled because of the joint aches that suddenly appeared (and have disappeared since I rejected the pink pill). That was 9 years ago. I remain an eager thruster at the pedal (and elsewhere). One day I'll drop dead out of the blue (or at least I hope so).

The critical question is: should the statin stop the brain blott or chest-clutcher, what will happen instead as we go on surviving?

Perhaps a case can be made for statins to prevent a merely debilitating stroke or heart attack. But the above question then becomes even more pressing.

Cugel

foxychick wrote:Read malcolm kendrick the great cholesterol con, my lipids are around 7-9 and have been for over 10 years and i do not take statins as they are the biggest con in medical history and have made billions for the drug companies over the years. I was told that i had a 18% chance of having a heart attack and that was 10 years ago, so i said to my doctor why did you not tell me that i have a 82% chance of not having a heart attack, i rest my case!

and if you want to look at markers as we get older then the best ones IMHO are Blood Pressure and Blood sugars and that will tell you if your body is at optimal limits ...

Makes mental note to read the thread as I've been on them for 6 months or so

Bonefishblues wrote:Makes mental note to read the thread as I've been on them for 6 months or so

Do bear in mind that the this thread will disproportionately represent people who have suffered such side effects. I've been taking statins for 12 years, and have never had any adverse effects at all.

Alan O wrote:

Bonefishblues wrote:Makes mental note to read the thread as I've been on them for 6 months or so

Do bear in mind that the this thread will disproportionately represent people who have suffered such side effects. I've been taking statins for 12 years, and have never had any adverse effects at all.

That you've noticed. Yet. I used to be like you, then after some years a worsening problem was linked to the statins and then pretty much proven to be linked.

mjr wrote:

Alan O wrote:

Bonefishblues wrote:Makes mental note to read the thread as I've been on them for 6 months or so

Do bear in mind that the this thread will disproportionately represent people who have suffered such side effects. I've been taking statins for 12 years, and have never had any adverse effects at all.

That you've noticed. Yet. I used to be like you, then after some years a worsening problem was linked to the statins and then pretty much proven to be linked.

Oh, I'm not arguing either way, and I'm sure it's possible that I could get problems later. I'm simply suggesting that when reading a thread like this, it's easy to forget that it's unlikely to be statistically representative of the general population.

It could well be statistically significant for the certain type of people who use these fora, relatively active, relatively well educated and prosperous?