LifeCare Chiropractic

The Best Chiropractic Care in Mesa, Arizona

statin

Cholesterol Lowering Drug (Jupiter) Trial Shenanigans

by

ARE THE DATA FROM ASTRAZENICA, CRESTOR JUPITER TRIAL ON STATINS LOOKING FISHY?

Wow.  I really think if most of the American public knew the real story of what goes behind some of these trials we’d all be sickened.  In it’s essence, the Jupiter trial looked at the prevention of heart disease in patients who had NORMAL cholesterol, but elevated inflammation.  Essential understanding that the “cholesterol blame game” was going away and they needed to find a new lab value that they could use the drug for.

The study was stopped early and declared a rousing success.  Much fanfare was heard and the medical journals and editorials sung it’s praise.  Oops.  A little too soon.  A closer look at the data raises some serious suspicions.  Basically, the trial was stopped early when predetermined events occurred just 2 yrs into the trial.

Furthermore, when you look at a population, certain statistics are expected.  Here’s the quick details:

  • The study found that statin drugs did NOT protect against deaths from heart attack and stroke.
  • In the general population, cardiovascular deaths account for about 40% of the total number of deaths.  Of these heart attacks, around 50% of these are fatal.

But in the Jupiter trial?  Apparently miracles occurred.  Cardiovascular mortality accounted for under 20% (instead of 50%) of the deaths, and the fatality rate of these heart attacks was very low (instead of the expected 50%).  This raises serious questions about the validity of the data and suggests that funding of the trial may have had a strong influence on the interpretation of the data.

Read More

Take Drugs to Lower Cholesterol? Odds Are You Do This

by

drugs to lower cholesterol and exercise
Photo courtesy of http://www.freeimages.com/profile/mjimages

It’s been awhile since I’ve written about how much statins suck, so I thought I’d throw another article about the side effects of statins out there.

Basically, I just can’t figure out why we still use this class of drugs.  At preventing a first heart attack (referred to as primary prevention) you have to treat 1000 people for 5 years to prevent 11 heart attacks.  During this time, another 8 out of the 1000 will develop diabetes.  Another huge chunk of this group will experience a long list of other side effects like muscle pains, muscle damage and liver problems just to name a few.  With all of this taken into account, many in the cardiology community think we should be giving MORE patients statin drugs.
[Read more…] about Take Drugs to Lower Cholesterol? Odds Are You Do This

Exercise and Your Cholesterol Lowering Drug. Don’t Bother

by

Fitness is important for the heart. But what if a common drug used to “protect” your heart completely erased the benefit of exercise?

Quite the conundrum, huh?

Or, at least, it would be for the mainstream medical provider who puts any degree of faith in statins for high cholesterol.

For everyone else who knows the dangers and the incredibly limited benefit, there is no conflict.  It is very well established that statins pretty much suck for preventing a first heart attack and aren’t too much better for secondary prevention either.  Just to make it worse, the list of side effects are quite long and are highlighted in my eBook on statins that can be found by clicking here.

While the side effects of cholesterol lowering drugs are all of concern, the ones related to the heart are of the gravest concern.  After all, aren’t we all taking statins to lower our risk of having a heart attack?

The irony is so strong that it would be laughable if we weren’t spending $20+ billion per year on these drugs.

This particular study finds yet another particularly disturbing side effect of cholesterol lowering drugs.  Here are the details:

  • 37 sedentary overweight or obese adults
  • At least 2 prediabetes risk factors
  • 12 weeks of aerobic exercise training or
  • Exercise in combination with simvastatin (Zocor-40 mg per day)
  • Cardio fitness and mitochondrial function (as measured by citrate synthase activity) were monitored.

And here are the results that should make any cardiologist think twice about prescribing this worthless class of drugs:

  1. Cardiorespiratory fitness increased by 10% in the exercise group.
  2. In the exercise group taking the statins, there was only a paltry 1.5% increase.
  3. Skeletal muscle mitochondrial function in the exercise group increased by 13%.
  4. In the statin group?  A drop of 4.5% in mitochondrial function.

Regular readers of the Rantings will know that I consider mitochondrial function as the holy grail of longevity.  Preserve or improve it, and life it good.  Worsen mitochondrial function and all hell will break loose.

Look at these results again.  Exercise, yes exercise, became worthless in the face of the intake of statin drugs.  Worse than worthless, mitochondrial function deteriorated during exercise, something that should never, ever, ever happen.

If your doctor has told you to take statins to avoid heart attacks, there is just no way he or she is actually reading the medical research centered around cholesterol lowering drugs.  There is no other valid excuse to write that prescription.

Statin Plus Niacin Brings CAD Progression to A ‘Standstill’ – (12-07-00)

by

Statin Plus Niacin Brings CAD Progression to A ‘Standstill’

It’s amazing that a supplement such as niacin, which has been used for decades longer than any cholesterol lowering medication with less side effects, is still relatively unheard of. The levels of niacin used are several grams per day, and only certain companies offer products with these levels. Side effects of niacin can include liver damage, and niacin should be used only under supervision by a practitioner knowledgeable in its use.

(article) The results of trial evaluating combined therapy in patients with coronary artery disease came as a surprise to researchers. Dr. B. Greg Brown, of the University of Washington, Seattle, reported at the American Heart Association meeting here that the combination of a statin to lower LDL cholesterol and niacin to raise HDL cholesterol “halted disease progression essentially to a standstill.” The study was designed to assess the effects of niacin 2 g to 4 g per day, simvastatin 10 mg to 20 mg per day and four antioxidant vitamins — E, C, beta-carotene and selenium — in various combinations. The investigators randomized 160 patients with documented coronary artery disease to one of four treatment arms: niacin plus simvastatin plus vitamins, niacin plus simvastatin plus placebo or placebo. Dr. Brown reported that the combination of niacin and simvastatin resulted in a 70% reduction in clinical events after 3 years of treatment compared with the rate in the rest of the patients. The reduction in events using statins alone is in the range of 25% to 35%, he noted. With simvastatin plus niacin, HDL levels increased 30% over baseline. Dr. Brown pointed out that statins alone increase HDL levels about 7% to 10%. Dr. Brown said that side effects with niacin were not significant, and that 90% of patients on combination therapy were still in the study at the end of 3 years. “With education, you can get virtually all patients to stay on [niacin]…You need to build up doses over a period of 1 to 2 months. Diabetic patients especially have difficulty adjusting.

Very-low–dose niacin on HDL in patients on long-term statin therapy – (06-10-02)

by

Very-low–dose niacin on HDL in patients on long-term statin therapy

Remember that niacin is a well established (but hardly used) therapy for hypercholesterolemia. At therapeutic dosages (roughly 2-3 grams/day) the main side effect is skin flushing. This study uses low dose niacin (100 mg/day) to effect HDL levels. How about adding this to a natural approach to lowering overall cholesterol levels instead of statins?

Read entire article here

TREATMENT OF ASTRAZENECA – (11-03-03)

by

The statin wars: why AstraZeneca must retreat

If you would like a small peek into the complex and powerful realm of pharmaceutical manufacturing and marketing, this editorial should give you a taste. We begin to see how data is manipulated around not for the patient’s benefit, but rather for the bottom line of the shareholders.

The Journal : Back Issues.

Read entire article here

STATIN DOES NOT BENEFIT TO LOWER CHOLESTROL – (12-22-03)

by

The statin wars

This is an enlightening series of letters to the editor in regards to the launch of a new statin. What I find interesting about the whole statin thing is that, when the dust all settles, I believe that statins’ benefits will not be related to it’s ability to lower cholesterol but by some other mechanism (most likely some type of anti-inflammatory action). The whole issue is reminds me of a circus, with physicians knowledgeable in functional medicine having little problem lower a patient’s cholesterol and overall burden of inflammation without drugs.

The Journal : Back Issues.

Read entire article here

Cataract Lens Problems? Blame Your Cholesterol Lowering Drug

by

We’re visual creatures; eyesight is critical to us. Cataract lens problems disrupt vision, so if a common drug ups your risk of cataracts, this is important.

I’m not going to ramble on and on about how ineffective statins are at preventing heart attacks (you have to treat 1,000 for 5 years to prevent 11 heart attacks).  Or about the long litany of side effects (diabetes, heart problems, muscle problems, liver problems).

But I do want to take this opportunity to illuminate the attitude of medicine and medical researchers today when it comes to your health.

This particular study finds a disturbing link between statins and your eye health:

  1. 56% of those with type 2 diabetes took statins
  2. Type 2 diabetic had an 86% higher risk of developing cataracts (not new news)
  3. Statin use increased the risk of developing age related cataracts by 57%

So, diabetics are at a much greater risk of developing cataracts.  The risk of developing diabetes is actually increased with the use of statin drugs like Lipitor and Crestor.  Statin drugs, by themselves, increase the risk of cataracts.

In summary, cholesterol lowering drugs increase your risk of both cataracts and developing diabetes and, if you’re lucky enough to be a diabetic (possibly from your Lipitor) AND on a statin, you can begin to SEE a problem.

But here’s where it gets interesting (or rather, MORE interesting–because you were already on the edge of your seat…).

Dr Richard Karas of the Tufts University School of Medicine commented on Heartwire.org, “Without belittling the development of cataracts, which he added are a “life-altering event,” MI, stroke, and diabetes are nevertheless significantly more damaging to health and quality of life.”

In other words, it’s ok if vision loss disrupts your quality of life and ability to drive because preventing a stroke or heart attack is much more important.

All this from a drug, that, to put it in medical terms, sucks.

It’s not like this is a miracle drug saving lives in droves.  Less than 1 in 100 people who take the drug will see a benefit in 3+ years.  I just don’t understand mainstream medicine’s dedication to such a near-worthless drug with an increasing litany of side effects.

The attitude is so pervasive that academia and physicians everywhere think that developing diabetes, losing your eyesight, developing rheumatoid arthritis and muscle weakness are acceptable costs for a modicum of prevention against heart attacks.

So, knowing the small benefits and the growing list of concerns with this class of drugs, was this a factor in your deciding not to take statins when offered by your physician?