Cholesterol Medications??

[Cooker]

I have a few questions about cholesterol medications. Six months ago my cholesterol showed a ?slight? upward trend (yearly physical). I am scheduled this week for a fasting blood test to re-check it. My PCP said he may want to start me on a low dose of some type of cholesterol medication if it has continued to rise. I questioned going on this type of medication as a preventative. I asked him why I should start a cholesterol drug if I am in range and he said it was for 10 years down the road.

So here are my questions:

1. Does this type of medication have an effect on ACT management?
2. What type of liver issues are associated with these types of medications?
3. Any known (other than liver) side effects from these medications?

Let me say that I have full confidence in my PCP but I have become a bit more questioning since my AVR. My pre surgery heart cauterization should no blockage, in fact all the arteries and veins lit up like somebody plugged in a Christmas tree! Maybe I?m just fighting the losing battle against aging and need to wave the white flag.

 

[Karlynn]

My Cardio is of the same mind. I have a big family history of high cholesterol and no one was over-weight. She said it's a preventative move. However, you know my story up to now. I haven't found one yet that doesn't have some rotten side-effects. I have to say I agree with the theory - but don't like the side-effects of the 2 drugs I've tried so far.

 

[Cooker]

My Cardio is of the same mind. I have a big family history of high cholesterol and no one was over-weight. She said it's a preventative move. However, you know my story up to now. I haven't found one yet that doesn't have some rotten side-effects. I have to say I agree with the theory - but don't like the side-effects of the 2 drugs I've tried so far.

Karlynn....what type of side effects?....Tom

 

[dick0236]

I have been "on" and "off" various cholesterol meds for the past couple years. None seemed to affect my ACT. As of test 10/07 my liver functions are normal. I have noticed tolerable muscled cramping in my hands but can not say it is because of med.
These drugs are all quite expensive and I fought with doc to find one that worked while staying affordable. My current Rx is 20mg Simvastatin (generic for Zocor). This one keeps me in Hi Normal range.

 

[Superbob]

Karlynn....what type of side effects?....Tom

They will kill your appetite for bananas. Oh, yes, and for hot babes.

Just kidding.

Here is a link to some info about possible side-effects of statins:

http://www.medicinenet.com/statins/page2.htm

I gather muscle pain/weakness is among the most serious side-effects, though supposedly rare. Get right back to the doc if anything like that occurs. Also, they need to do liver/kidney readings regularly.


I have been taking statins for several years, and all my cholesterol numbers are now in great range. That, and $1.50 will get me a small coffee at the coffeehouse. But I suppose it's good to be preventive about some of these things.... Oh yes, I, too, take the generic for Zocor -- Simvastatin -- and my numbers really have improved since switching to that particular med.

Good luck, pal.

 

[Blanche]

What Bob said with a post script!

I take the generic Simvastatin and Albert takes Lipitor. We've been doing this for about 6 years now. Neither of us has had any problems and our cholesterol levels are both about 185 now.

I fought this for a long time. But, when it hit 275, it seemed like a good idea to take some action.

But, individual responses to the drug do differ. There have been more than several folks who have reported here that they have had problems.

Blanche

 

[aussigal]

The first time my Cholesterol levels were checked post AVR they were nearly double what they had previously been...so armed with the knowledge of what my arteries currently looked like inside due to one of those fancy CT scans I was promptly ordered onto Statins. Within 3 months of being on 10mg of Crestor my Cholesterol levels had crashed by half., to those of a teenager. Excellent results I believe and quite a load off my mind as well.

My mum's cholesterol is way higher than mine has ever been yet she has somehow resisted/avoided the pills and after 10-15 years is still persisting in trying to lower the levels by diet alone (It isnt working).

Might I suggest you go get one of those fancy 64slice CT scans that shows what your arteries look like inside and gives you a calcium score (I think it is called). It may help you make your mind up if you can actually see whats going on. In my case we could see clearly the right coronary artery is now 100% occluded (luckily that was by-passed or I would have been in big trouble).

As to effect on ACT...I have adjusted my dose downwards by around 5% to account for the statin...this keeps me in high-normal range. I have noticed absolutely no other side-effects other than peace of mind that my arteries are no longer clogging.

 

[Karlynn]

Lipitor made my feet and hands cramp painfully. This was not a good thing since part of my job involves playing piano in front of 200 people every Sunday. (I play with my hands - Cooker - I bet you could play with your feet.) I was on Lipitor for probably 4 years. My cholesterol was good at about 140, but it was not all that high at 215 when I started.

The last statin I was on was Provachol. It made me gain weight (remember) and I had such muscle aches every morning that took hours to go away.

I still have to call my cardio and tell her I stopped taking them.

 

[Diane]

Well for me, I am slightly confused and don't know what I want to do about it at the moment.

My levels aren't really bad but they are also not really good. My doc said if I wasn't a "heart" patient, he wouldn't even think my levels were too high but because of my heart, he would like to see them lower. I realize that I am a "heart" patient but I have congenital heart disease, not coronary artery disease!

I fought the doc for about a year on the statins. I know they say it is "rare" but everyone I know that has taken the statin drugs has wound up with the bad muscle pains and had to discontinue them. So I didn't want to go there. Then about 4 1/2 months ago, I finally let him talk me into trying Zetia. He did a cholesterol test after 5 weeks on the Zetia and my levels were improved. Then last week (before Thanksgiving) I had blood drawn for a cholesterol check. Today I went to the doc and my levels were all HIGHER than they were BEFORE I started the Zetia!! What's that all about? The doc said I must have made some changes to my diet or exercise but I know that I didn't do anything different in the last 3 months than I did in the previous 5 weeks.

So I am in a quandry as to if I even want to continue with the Zetia. The doc wants to re-test in 3 months. I just refilled my prescription yesterday so I will take what I have but I am not sure if I will refill the prescription next month. Why would I want to continue with such an expensive drug if it isn't going to help me....it even seems that it is making things worse?

~Diane

 

[Jiddo]

Yeah, my mom just got her cholesterol taken today and it's high so she will be on some sort of statin beginning this week. She was on something (not sure) several months ago and experienced major muscle pain/aches. However, I don't think she has a choice at not taking them at this point because she is feeling very tired these days.
Jennie

 

[Computec]

Reading the replies that you've had thus far I realize that we're all so very different.

I suspect that the drug cocktail we "heart patients" are already on changes the way that our particular statin works. Add to that the differrences in metabolism and everything else that makes a statin sound like a good idea and everyone has to make a decision based on trial and error.

Having dodged the bullet with "clear" arteries feeding my heart and not needing bypass I fought my PCP regarding taking a statin. My cardiologist assured me (?) that I'd be dead from some other cause before cholesterol could kill me. Cool. My PCP assured me that the cholesterol could build up elsewhere and not be seen in the angiogram.

I eventually opted for trying Lipitor. My cholesterol dropped from 285 to 215 with no dietary changes or exercise regime. I'm not sure that it's a benefit but my PCP is less hostile and my cardiologist doesn't really care. Now if I could just quit smoking I'd live to be 200.

I believe that there are benefits to taking a statin. I don't believe that they apply to everyone. If your cholesterol is high and you can't/won't control what you eat or how you exercise then roll the dice. A statin just "might" add years to your life.

Jerry

 

[Cooker]

Thanks everyone. I am almost sure that my overall cholesterol is under 200 but I'm not sure of the break down or even that number. I have printed the ranges from the American Heart Association and will take that along with all questions and concerns (fears) that I have with these type medications. I guess it is obvious that I don't like having to take medicine

 

[tobagotwo]

I'm not a medical professional, but my belief is that the gold standard is the cardiac catheterization. If you're clear, you're clear. These drugs are supposed to stop deposition in the arteries. If you don't have it, why would you expose yourself to another drug?

That's like wearing elephant repellent. It's bound to work.

Many valve patients, particularly bicuspid valve patients, have preternaturally clear arteries, and keep them all their lives. There is a reasonable argument that taking statins in many of those cases would be preventing something that isn't likely to happen anyway (yes, I'm sure it's happened to someone). And the patient is exposed to any long-term side effects, known or unknown in the process, and begins the cycle of drug tolerance/ineffectiveness that can happen over long-term use. The patient needs to determine if that's really a good trade.

It's to be remembered that cholesterol goes up and down all the time, particularly when saturated fats have been ingested (I wouldn't get tested after Thanksgiving, for example). It's only a marker, and only indicates a percentage risk. Nor is it all that accurate. It's used because it's the closest tool we have, and we have drugs that can lower it.

If you have reason to feel that you are not at risk, consider pushing back. You need to determine what's right for you. Perhaps a second opinion from a different doctor group. He can still be a good doctor, even if you disagree about some things.

I would personally not take anything to prevent a condition that I don't have and have no reason to believe I'll get. After all, if my cholesterol is in the normal range, it's normal. That's what the range is for. I would like to see on the website where they say people with normal cholesterol should take their product. I doubt the FDA would let them make such a claim or recommendation.

I would also like to see any studies that say that taking statins with a normal cholesterol count actually prevents the person from going out of range (at either end of the scale). I can't even think how you could prove such a thing. Elephant repellent again. Sounds like wishful thinking from the statin sales rep again. Anything to make more sales.

Best wishes,


I would also want to see any

 

[Superbob]

Reading the replies that you've had thus far I realize that we're all so very different.

I suspect that the drug cocktail we "heart patients" are already on changes the way that our particular statin works. Add to that the differrences in metabolism and everything else that makes a statin sound like a good idea and everyone has to make a decision based on trial and error.

Having dodged the bullet with "clear" arteries feeding my heart and not needing bypass I fought my PCP regarding taking a statin. My cardiologist assured me (?) that I'd be dead from some other cause before cholesterol could kill me. Cool. My PCP assured me that the cholesterol could build up elsewhere and not be seen in the angiogram.

I eventually opted for trying Lipitor. My cholesterol dropped from 285 to 215 with no dietary changes or exercise regime. I'm not sure that it's a benefit but my PCP is less hostile and my cardiologist doesn't really care. Now if I could just quit smoking I'd live to be 200.

I believe that there are benefits to taking a statin. I don't believe that they apply to everyone. If your cholesterol is high and you can't/won't control what you eat or how you exercise then roll the dice. A statin just "might" add years to your life.

Jerry

Cap't Cooker:

I think Jerry really nailed it. This is very much an individual thing. I have been taking cholesterol medicine for several years now and all my numbers are terrific. In mid-November, here's what the bloodwork showed:

Total cholesterol: 140 (below 200 is the goal)
HDL ("good cholesterol"): 45 (40-60)
Triglycerides: 101 (below 200)
VLDL: 20 (5-40)
LDL (calc): 74 (0-100)

I could dig through my old records and get some "pre" numbers, but the point is that all of these are improvements. I think our weight-loss Throw-Down is helping. I think exercise is helping. And I think the meds are helping, too. (That said, I will note we went through a trial with Advicor, which is niacin-based and which was spiking my blood sugar. Got off of that and on Simvastatin (generic for Zocor), and all is well for now.)

Should I just dispense with the meds now and see if the numbers deteriorate? My PCP doesn't think so, nor do I right now. So in that sense, they may serve a "preventive" purpose.

But some people do have side-effects that mean statins do them more harm than good. As Jerry said, this is an individual thing.

One thing: You should know your numbers. Should get a copy of the lab report each time one is made, and keep it on file. You're entitled to all those reports and you can track the trends for yourself.

Good luck!

 

[Cooker]

One thing: You should know your numbers. Should get a copy of the lab report each time one is made, and keep it on file. You're entitled to all those reports and you can track the trends for yourself.

Good luck!

He always gives me a copy, I lost it or tossed it

 

[Susan BAV]

Good thread, Tom

Good thread, Tom

Does anyone know this:

My uncle (not blood relation but aunt's husband) has had out-of-sight cholesterol readings, way off the norm. But he said he could just lay off the bacon and other stuff a few days before his cholesterol tests and the numbers wouldn't be in the astronomical range. Can that be true? I don't think he'd fib about something like that. So, if the cholesterol is that transient for at least some people, has it been proven across the board that high LDLs always cause the hardening of the arteries and such?

My dad always had high cholesterol and he apparently had a genetic heart problem, though it wasn't a bicuspid, but shortly before he died from cancer at age 66, he was told his arteries were as clean as a whistle; he regularly feasted on "fresh side" and bacon and the like and did not watch his diet at all. His heart was in an unhealthy condition from hypertrophic cardiomyopathy but his plumbing was excellent and there have been no bypass surgeries or stents on his side of the family.

My husband has a number of close relatives who are the opposite--their hearts are very healthy but their plumbing is a mess and there are lots of bypasses in his extended family.

But all of these people had or have high cholesterol issues.

Is there a test to show the likelihood of the high cholesterol causing serious issues?

All that said and asked, I recently reduced my LDLs significantly and I do believe that I feel better from it.

 

[Computec]

In response to Bob's post...

I completely agree about elephant repellent. I do, however, believe that the statins do not target "just" the coronary arteries.

Medical science is still in it's infancy as far as I'm concerned. It appears that whole milk is good one year and bad the next. A lot of it is based on trial and error with the error occuring first in many cases.

As I said in my previous post, my angiogram was clear. That didn't alter the fact that an xray of my lower back taken 3 years earlier showed plaque buildup in a descending artery. Yes, plaque that is dense enough can show on an xray according to the ortho doctor. Without the ability to know what goes on everywhere in the human body we're left in the dark in many ways. Not everyone has the resources or gumption of Doctor House.

This being the case I see a statin as a possible agent for the good relative to the rest of my circulatory system. Just because I don't see any elephants doesn't mean they don't exist. Blood flows everywhere and a partial blockage is not ruled out by it's absence in any one place. I was fortunate. A hunt in the jungles of my back found an elephant the angiogram didn't find in the base camp.

Jerry

 

[Cooker]

Ok, I was wrong about my previous numbers. Six months ago my total cholesterol was 240.
Today:
TC?........?245
HDL?........?23
TRG?.....?.157
LDL.?.........191
Non-HDL?..222
TC/HDL??.10.6

BP?????110/75
INR?????.3.3
So in six months the total has creped up. I agreed to start on Pravachol (sp?). We will retest in two months and go from there. Overall I am very pleased with my health and did not find waving the white flag too painful.

 

[Cooker]

Just an update...after a little over two months my TC went from 245 to 169 Maybe that doctor knows more than I give him credit for

 

[Susan BAV]

Just an update...after a little over two months my TC went from 245 to 169 Maybe that doctor knows more than I give him credit for...

Nice improvement, Cooker. Do you think that you feel better now also?