Check Out Our Shop
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 114
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dystopia
    Posts
    21,348
    Lipitor made me trippy. Racing thoughts. Increased anxiety. Pulsing pupils.
    Quit after a few days.

    I’m consistently around 220. Like you said, they want you wayyy lower.

    It’s a personal decision. I’m going with Ernest Hemingway and eating meat even if I get fewer years. My wife has gone plant based. Not vegan. Lots of high performing athletes do it. Forks over knives etc.

    PS. Ask your doctor how statins work. Answer? They don’t know. But they can lower cholesterol. But what side effects do you get?

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Before
    Posts
    28,122
    They know how statins work to lower cholesterol production in the liver.

    But the real issue is whether cholesterol correlation with heart disease is valid. Science marches on, polemics becoming paradigms and paradigms falling from fashion and consenseless.
    Merde De Glace On the Freak When Ski
    >>>200 cm Black Bamboo Sidewalled DPS Lotus 120 : Best Skis Ever <<<

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,016
    Seems negligent for doctors to claim statins are required without actually checking for arterial build-up. Is there some insurance back pressure on such scans? Don't have any hard numbers but am familiar with several people with high cholesterol numbers that have clean arteries, and also the reverse (low numbers but dangerously clogged arteries). Diagnosis on numbers alone sounds lazy.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,941
    First of all, we “absorb” almost zero dietary cholesterol. There is no “bad” cholesterol, it’s essential for life


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dystopia
    Posts
    21,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Buster Highmen View Post
    They know how statins work to lower cholesterol production in the liver.

    But the real issue is whether cholesterol correlation with heart disease is valid. Science marches on, polemics becoming paradigms and paradigms falling from fashion and consenseless.
    Yes. Was being a bit snarky there. It’s systemic. Lots of other non liver effects.

    Statins are a family of drugs that are used for treating hyperlipidaemia with a recognized capacity to prevent cardiovascular disease events. They inhibit β-hydroxy β-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase, i.e. the rate-limiting enzyme in mevalonate pathway, reduce endogenous cholesterol synthesis, and increase low-density lipoprotein clearance by promoting low-density lipoprotein receptor expression mainly in the hepatocytes. Statins have pleiotropic effects including stabilization of atherosclerotic plaques, immunomodulation, anti-inflammatory properties, improvement of endothelial function, antioxidant, and anti-thrombotic action. Despite all beneficial effects, statins may elicit adverse reactions such as myopathy. Studies have shown that mitochondria play an important role in statin-induced myopathies. In this review, we aim to report the mechanisms of action of statins on mitochondrial function. Results have shown that statins have several effects on mitochondria including reduction of coenzyme Q10 level, inhibition of respiratory chain complexes, induction of mitochondrial apoptosis, dysregulation of Ca2+ metabolism, and carnitine palmitoyltransferase-2 expression. The use of statins has been associated with the onset of additional pathological conditions like diabetes and dementia as a result of interference with mitochondrial pathways by various mechanisms, such as reduction in mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, increase in oxidative stress, decrease in uncoupling protein 3 concentration, and interference in amyloid-β metabolism. Overall, data reported in this review suggest that statins may have major effects on mitochondrial function, and some of their adverse effects might be mediated through mitochondrial pathways.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    31,309
    I got higher blood suger so i cut sugar and food intake, the good cholesterol went up the bad cholesterol went down and my a1C went down a couple of points, i lost 15lbs and my BMI went normal
    Last edited by XXX-er; 10-01-2023 at 04:32 PM.
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Before
    Posts
    28,122
    Quote Originally Posted by PB View Post
    Seems negligent for doctors to claim statins are required without actually checking for arterial build-up. Is there some insurance back pressure on such scans? Don't have any hard numbers but am familiar with several people with high cholesterol numbers that have clean arteries, and also the reverse (low numbers but dangerously clogged arteries). Diagnosis on numbers alone sounds lazy.
    I have a scan scheduled for tomorrow. If that shows non subtle arterial plaque, I'll for sure have to go on statins. Yech.

    Summary:
    lipitor has some bad side effects.
    Simvastatin is one option
    Rosuvastatin is another option.

    And red rice yeast supposedly.
    Merde De Glace On the Freak When Ski
    >>>200 cm Black Bamboo Sidewalled DPS Lotus 120 : Best Skis Ever <<<

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Down on Electric Avenue
    Posts
    4,499
    I want in on this cagematch...

    I finally made myself go get a primary care doctor this spring after some slight chest pains. She's a 30 something smokeshow with a storied family of HOF skiers.
    I like going to see her.

    My blood panel told her I was in exceptional shape.
    I laffed.
    She says 'whatever your secret is, keep doing it'. I said it's a lifetime of weed.
    She laffed.

    @57yrs, 5'9", around 215-220lbs...

    Cholesterol total - 158
    Triglycerides - 169
    HDL - 50
    non-HDL Chol. - 108
    LDL - 74
    Chol/HDL ratio - 3
    VLDL - 34

    Tri's and vldl are a tad high for me, everything else well inside the ref. range.

    She says I could drink more water.
    I wonder if living at 6300' ASL for 30+yrs. helps?

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Before
    Posts
    28,122
    well sheeeit, you're just flaunting it whippersnapper
    Merde De Glace On the Freak When Ski
    >>>200 cm Black Bamboo Sidewalled DPS Lotus 120 : Best Skis Ever <<<

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Down on Electric Avenue
    Posts
    4,499
    ^^^^

    It just looked like some kinda cagematch I'd have half a chance in.
    Those don't roll around much for me.


  11. #86
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Behind the Zion Curtain
    Posts
    4,907
    I just looked at my lab results.

    Cholesterol total: 226
    Triglycerides: 84
    HDL: 66
    Non HDL cholesterol: 160
    LDL: 143
    Cho/HDL: 3.4
    VLDL: 17

    I don’t really know what any of that means, but apparently it’s bad as they diagnosed me with Hyperlipidemia and carotid artery disease. I’m now on atorvastatin, clopidogrel, and lisinopril. They may have some side effects but after last week I’ll take side effects over dying.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sandy
    Posts
    14,161
    At one time I had a script for Lisinopril but it did not agree with me so that was short lived.

    I’ve got my order to get my yearly blood work sitting on the table for a month so I probably ought to get in and get it done.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    your vacation
    Posts
    4,776
    Quote Originally Posted by phatty View Post
    Yeah, I've never taken any drugs and avoid Drs. Guess I can't avoid it anymore. Talk to them about the injectables. At your age, it might be an option.
    I did that for almost 45 years (avoiding the dr and pharmaceuticals)
    then they got me a nice room in the icu and cracked my chest open

    don't be a puss everyone I'm on cholesterol meds and bp meds low doses could go off the bp meds tomorrow if I quit my job
    I took myself off them this past year and realized that was stupid and I'm back on again
    I think they have been lowering the numbers for everything the past decade to get more people on meds to make more money seriously
    my cardiologists said don't worry about it they just lowered the number like three years ago so you are still good with the old numbers

    some of you guys don't like beta blockers? I was on em for a year I liked them all weird though not getting your heart rate up like you think you would
    my favorite is a couple beers an extra beta blocker or two and a tylenol pm talk about happy places

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dystopia
    Posts
    21,348
    Quote Originally Posted by fastfred View Post
    my favorite is a couple beers an extra beta blocker or two and a tylenol pm talk about happy places
    Fast Fred
    He’s fast
    Asleep

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    1,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Core Shot View Post
    Fast Fred
    He’s fast
    Asleep
    And probably lucky to be alive!

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    18,076
    Quote Originally Posted by phatty View Post
    Apparently there are injectable statins that are far more effective than the pills but are crazy expensive. Insurance usually won't cover them unless you have bad reactions to most pills.
    I am guessing you're referring to PCSK9 inhibitors, which are very, very different from statins. None of them have gone off-patent yet so they are indeed very expensive, though also very effective. It will be interesting to see how much more often they get rx'ed when the cost comes down.

    https://my.clevelandclinic.org/healt...sk9-inhibitors

    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    First of all, we “absorb” almost zero dietary cholesterol. There is no “bad” cholesterol, it’s essential for life
    The former is correct, the latter not so much, at least in the context of cholesterol that is bound to lipoproteins in the bloodstream. There are people with genetic mutations that cause them to not produce LDL at all, and they get virtually no atherosclerosis and don't seem to suffer any other ill effects. The discovery of these gene variants led directly to the development of PCSK9 inhibitors.

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Where the sheets have no stains
    Posts
    22,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Buzzworthy View Post
    At one time I had a script for Lisinopril but it did not agree with me so that was short lived.
    Same, caused belly problems. Losarten is tolerable for me. Doc wanted me on Statins, so far I have resisted, hoping a lot more oatmeal for Bkfast did the trick along with reduction in beer and booze.
    I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.

    "Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    23,396
    Quote Originally Posted by phatty View Post
    I have hereditary high cholesterol. My mom's LDL (without statins) was ~600. She's almost 80, overweight and going strong. Her mom was ~900 LDL without statins and lived to 93. I was 15 when I had mine measured the first time and it was 220. 15yrs ago I tried Lipitor and suffered muscle weakness and joint pain. My Dr told they wouldn't help much and took me off it.

    Fast forward to August this year and I had a sudden heart attack while running. I'm 48 and in good shape. I exercise regularly and don't drink/smoke/drugs (Mormon). My cardiologist said my high cholesterol was not the cause but played a role (I have fairly minimal build up). I had a STEMI heart attack where the plaque ruptured in my artery and my body then created a clot causing 100% blockage. My plaque was not as stable due to my high cholesterol. It all happened within 10 minutes and no one would have been able to see anything prior to that day. I now have 2 stents, but also still have no issues with build up.

    Since then, I'm now on Cestor due to my reaction to Lipitor. Apparently there are injectable statins that are far more effective than the pills but are crazy expensive. Insurance usually won't cover them unless you have bad reactions to most pills.

    When I was younger, they said "high" cholesterol was ~200 LDL. My cardiologist said 150 is the new "high". He wants me down at 70 to firm up my plaque. I'm at ~160 now after a month of statins and he's not sure Crestor will get me there. I'm also cutting down red meat and getting back to my regular exercise. I'll see in a couple months how it goes.
    This is important. Most heart attacks are caused by the sudden rupture of relatively small plaques. When you have bad plaques that mostly block the artery the heart develops collateral circulation that bypasses the blockage as the plaque grows, so that part of the heart is protected from a heart attack. That's why bypassing the heart arteries or stenting them open doesn't reduce the risk of heart attack--those procedures aren't targeting the plaques that cause heart attack.

    Quote Originally Posted by Buster Highmen View Post
    Sorry to hear about the HA.

    I'm 67.75, 195 lbs, OK but not great shape (bad right knee so no running, but lots of biking) 125/80 bp, relatively low (127) triglycerides.

    As mentioned, I guess I'm going to have to follow the crowd now and start taking non recreational drugs.

    I keep reading about how the Framingham Heart Study on which statin treatments is based is screwy and incorrect.

    Thank you.
    Anyone looking for a reason to avoid lipid lowering drugs, or vaccines, or anything else medical can always find support somewhere in this age of podcasts and blogs. Contrarian opinions get clicks; orthodox opinions don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by PB View Post
    Seems negligent for doctors to claim statins are required without actually checking for arterial build-up. Is there some insurance back pressure on such scans? Don't have any hard numbers but am familiar with several people with high cholesterol numbers that have clean arteries, and also the reverse (low numbers but dangerously clogged arteries). Diagnosis on numbers alone sounds lazy.
    The benefit of statins was proven before coronary calcium scans were available. There is some evidence that people with higher ccs's may benefit more from statins but that doesn't mean people with low scores don't benefit. Whether or not someone gets statins should still be based on overall risk factors; a high ccs may be of benefit primarily to convince a patient or a patient's doctor to take a statin. Besides the fact that dangerous plaques may not have calcium, the benefits of statins in a person with moderate to high risk but low ccs plays out over time--especially for younger patients the statins will prevent the buildup of plaque in arteries that are clean today but won't be tomorrow.

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    13,985
    Quote Originally Posted by Djongo Unchained View Post
    I want in on this cagematch...

    I finally made myself go get a primary care doctor this spring after some slight chest pains. She's a 30 something smokeshow with a storied family of HOF skiers.
    I like going to see her.

    My blood panel told her I was in exceptional shape.
    I laffed.
    She says 'whatever your secret is, keep doing it'. I said it's a lifetime of weed.
    She laffed.

    @57yrs, 5'9", around 215-220lbs...

    Cholesterol total - 158
    Triglycerides - 169
    HDL - 50
    non-HDL Chol. - 108
    LDL - 74
    Chol/HDL ratio - 3
    VLDL - 34

    Tri's and vldl are a tad high for me, everything else well inside the ref. range.

    She says I could drink more water.
    I wonder if living at 6300' ASL for 30+yrs. helps?
    52yo, 6'1", 180lb

    Total chol: 149
    Triglyc: 90
    HDL: 71
    LDL: 61
    VLDL: 17

    PA says come back next year. Not sure I trust them quacks. Am I gonna die?

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    14,941
    LDL isn’t bad, it’s the concentration of LDL and particle size that can be bad. That’s a bit of a simplification but true


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Down on Electric Avenue
    Posts
    4,499
    Well hell, I think skeered just stomped me in the cage match.

    Damn.

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    18,076
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    LDL isn’t bad, it’s the concentration of LDL and particle size that can be bad. That’s a bit of a simplification but true
    My understanding is that apolipoprotein B, which is a component of LDL, is the primary bad guy. LDL and ApoB are correlated, so LDL is a decent biomarker on average, but ApoB is what actually causes ASCVD.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31642874/
    https://peterattiamd.com/measuring-c...f-apob-part-1/

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    13,985
    Quote Originally Posted by Djongo Unchained View Post
    Well hell, I think skeered just stomped me in the cage match.

    Damn.
    A few years back I had a panel where my total was something like 125. It's my lame claim to fame.

    I always like to attribute it to the butter, cheese, cream, and bacon I regularly eat.

    ETA: found the results from 2020:

    Total chol: 120
    Triglyc: 47
    HDL: 70
    LDL: 37
    CHOL/HDLC: 1.7
    NON-HDL CHOL: 50

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Before
    Posts
    28,122
    Quote Originally Posted by old goat View Post


    Anyone looking for a reason to avoid lipid lowering drugs, or vaccines, or anything else medical can always find support somewhere in this age of podcasts and blogs. Contrarian opinions get clicks; orthodox opinions don't.
    I thought this was an impressive read, well founded in biochemistry .
    https://www.amazon.com/Clot-Thickens.../dp/1907797769



    The benefit of statins was proven before coronary calcium scans were available. There is some evidence that people with higher ccs's may benefit more from statins but that doesn't mean people with low scores don't benefit. Whether or not someone gets statins should still be based on overall risk factors; a high ccs may be of benefit primarily to convince a patient or a patient's doctor to take a statin. Besides the fact that dangerous plaques may not have calcium, the benefits of statins in a person with moderate to high risk but low ccs plays out over time--especially for younger patients the statins will prevent the buildup of plaque in arteries that are clean today but won't be tomorrow.
    So, is this more clickbait?

    One of the articles I read addresses the claim that statins have a 25% reduction in HAs .

    The claim is that %age is with regard to the number of people that had heart attacks in the study group, not the total number of people in the study.

    I think it was something like 3.6% in the control group (no statins) had a heart attack while 1.7% that took statins still had heart attacks. So if analyzed over the entire group, there was a 1.9% difference. The weird thing was that the latter analysis is applied to side effects to statins, so that's inconsistent.

    Can anyone corroborate that? If that stat is valid, it makes me even more suspicious since the 25% is such a significant portion and a great sales pitch.

    I do apologize OG if I offended you in my anti doctor rant years ago. At that time, I was fighting with my dad's negligent doctors who had him on warfrin and aspirin when he was passing out from internal stomach hemorrhaging and getting transfusions monthly. I think there were about 6 instances, he always hid them from me. After repeatedly failing to cauterize the ulcers, I forced his doctors to send him to the Mayo in Jacksonville where people with skillz fixed him. He eventually died of a stroke, possibly related to the thinners.

    I've had other issues with health care when I needed doctors references (according to a neurosurgeon) and they refused. It's not the individual, it's the industry.
    Merde De Glace On the Freak When Ski
    >>>200 cm Black Bamboo Sidewalled DPS Lotus 120 : Best Skis Ever <<<

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Before
    Posts
    28,122
    Quote Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn View Post
    LDL isn’t bad, it’s the concentration of LDL and particle size that can be bad. That’s a bit of a simplification but true


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    This is my understanding as well as the common LDL tests don't distinguish between big, more benign LDL and smaller, more hazardous, LDL.
    Merde De Glace On the Freak When Ski
    >>>200 cm Black Bamboo Sidewalled DPS Lotus 120 : Best Skis Ever <<<

Similar Threads

  1. Can you embed YouTube videos in a thread?
    By Sinecure in forum Ask TGR
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-20-2012, 05:50 AM
  2. Cheese & Rice - delete your thread!
    By upallnight in forum General Ski / Snowboard Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-14-2006, 01:37 PM
  3. Replies: 58
    Last Post: 02-01-2005, 05:55 PM
  4. Utah MINI Last minute stuff-dump it here thread
    By Buzzworthy in forum TGR Forum Archives
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 12-16-2004, 11:50 AM
  5. Profanity in the thread topic lines
    By powstash in forum TGR Forum Archives
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 03-10-2004, 10:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •