warfarin health benefits

Help Support ValveReplacement.org:

leadville

Premium Level User
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
165
Location
Wigan, England
Is there any data out there showing positives to taking long term warfarin ?

Apart from Afib and obviously blood clots and mechanical valves i mean benefits for health .

i'm sure i have heard something but as a life long user i may just be being optimistic.

The liver need to process the chemicals which isnt great but hopefully there is a positive to this negative
 

dick0236

Eat the elephant one bite at a time
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
2,831
Location
louisville, KY USA
Superman;n885150 said:
It causes kids. I’ve had five since I started taking it.
Good to know......I'll have to remember that.:coolhank:

On the serious side after 51 years on the stuff.......
...I still have all my hair......well almost all.
...People think I am 52 or 62 years old rather than my actual age of 82. Drives my wife nuts.
...I still have most of my mental faculties...although I had to look up how to spell "faculties".
...I have never been diagnosed with any disease or disorder other than cardiovasculor disease so maybe 'rat poison" is responsible for keeping me healthy in other ways.
...Being on warfarin and testing regularly has made me more conscious about managing my health

Do I wish I wasn't on warfarin........hell yes, but on balance I think being on warfarin has beaten ALL the alternatives.
 
Last edited:

pellicle

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
5,994
Location
Queensland, Australia
leadville;n885147 said:
Is there any data out there showing positives to taking long term warfarin ?
there is some evidence for that in the presentation by that MD from the mayo I know you watched. He shows that long term elderly mech valvers on warfarin did better than the general population


The liver need to process the chemicals which isnt great but hopefully there is a positive to this negative
its not quite like the way the kidney works. The liver produces an enzyme (well actually the mitochondria in your liver) which is called Cytochrome P450 ... this is what the liver does ... make that ... unlike the Kidneys which are filters which can be damaged by filtering stuff which is toxic the liver just makes this stuff ... the liver is attacked by stuff like smoking, and excessive drinking ... so not warfarin.

Thus long term smoking and drinking has much more deleterious effects than long term warfarin.

:)

(watch out for the having children part tho)
 

Warrick

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
407
Location
New Zealand
For me finding out that I have a patent foramen ovale (PFO) in my presurgery workup and reading this is associated as a stroke cause I feel pretty good that my risk is greatly reduced on the warfarin sauce.
 

pellicle

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
5,994
Location
Queensland, Australia
Warrick;n885170 said:
.. I have a patent foramen ovale (PFO).
well its good that you have a patent on that, but you know the Chinese don't recognise that sort of thing and are likely to just replicate and produce it anyway ;-)
 

leadville

Premium Level User
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
165
Location
Wigan, England
pellicle yes pell that video was what prompted my thinking, it suggests in all the graphs there is a positive benefit

I also at 52 have a full head of hair soooo maybe there's something in that dick0236

I will stop worrying about my liver and start to worry about my kidneys then :Face-Laugh:​​​​​​​
 

dick0236

Eat the elephant one bite at a time
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
2,831
Location
louisville, KY USA
leadville;n885173 said:
positive benefit

I will stop worrying about my liver and start to worry about my kidneys then
Always gonna be something to worry about:confused2:. If it helps, I just went in for a cat scan and they tested my kidneys before injecting the dye into me.....they where OK......like Pellicle says, "there will always be something to worry about".....if you get old enough:Face-Laugh:!!!
 

tom in MO

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
954
Location
MO USA
Well one of my doctors, think it's the urologist, said "If some doctors had their way we'd all be on warfarin past 70 yo just to reduce the risk of stroke"
 

dick0236

Eat the elephant one bite at a time
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
2,831
Location
louisville, KY USA
sassyspy;n885201 said:
Well crap. I don't have all MY hair.
I really think hair loss, or not, has a lot more to do with genetics than warfarin. Both my father and paternal grandfather died with a full head of hair. My maternal grandfather was a cue ball when he died.......and I think my mom had a wig that she wore sometimes.
 

pellicle

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2012
Messages
5,994
Location
Queensland, Australia
leadville;n885147 said:
Is there any data out there showing positives to taking long term warfarin ?

Apart from Afib and obviously blood clots and mechanical valves i mean benefits for health .
not that I've found in some more searching. However to me this indicates either
  • not only is a narrow theraputic range, it has a narrow theraputic effect, suggesting that it is well understood and relatively simple (unlike many drugs which were developed for X and testing found that they do Y Z and a few other tricks too)
  • nobody has been interested in it for the last 30 years, instead focusing their efforts in demonstrating the efficacy of their own developed poisons which cost far more
Lastly a clue to this is found in the following:
https://www.nps.org.au/australian-prescriber/articles/warfarin-balancing-the-benefits-and-harms

Anticoagulation with warfarin significantly reduces the morbidity and mortality related to arterial and venous thromboembolism. For many patients the benefit is clear and the risk of harm is acceptable, so anticoagulation is indicated.

Almost 1.9 million out-of-hospital prescriptions for warfarin were dispensed in 2001.The cost to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (RPBS) of warfarin for the same period was $8.3 million. From Health Insurance Commission statistics coagulation tests numbered 2.5 million in the same year at a cost of $29.4 million. Most of these tests are for routine monitoring of warfarin therapy. There are therefore many patients taking warfarin, but the decision to use the drug and accept the adverse effects requires constant review.


not that I'd suggest that drug companies want to take that revenue away from Labs ... or indeed to go further and say Labs don't want to lose that to Coacucheck-alike devices (and drop that cost to society by probably a factor of 10 or more).
 

leadville

Premium Level User
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
165
Location
Wigan, England
pellicle;n885207 said:
not that I've found in some more searching. However to me this indicates either
  • not only is a narrow theraputic range, it has a narrow theraputic effect, suggesting that it is well understood and relatively simple (unlike many drugs which were developed for X and testing found that they do Y Z and a few other tricks too)
  • nobody has been interested in it for the last 30 years, instead focusing their efforts in demonstrating the efficacy of their own developed poisons which cost far more
Lastly a clue to this is found in the following:
https://www.nps.org.au/australian-prescriber/articles/warfarin-balancing-the-benefits-and-harms

Anticoagulation with warfarin significantly reduces the morbidity and mortality related to arterial and venous thromboembolism. For many patients the benefit is clear and the risk of harm is acceptable, so anticoagulation is indicated.

Almost 1.9 million out-of-hospital prescriptions for warfarin were dispensed in 2001.The cost to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (RPBS) of warfarin for the same period was $8.3 million. From Health Insurance Commission statistics coagulation tests numbered 2.5 million in the same year at a cost of $29.4 million. Most of these tests are for routine monitoring of warfarin therapy. There are therefore many patients taking warfarin, but the decision to use the drug and accept the adverse effects requires constant review.


not that I'd suggest that drug companies want to take that revenue away from Labs ... or indeed to go further and say Labs don't want to lose that to Coacucheck-alike devices (and drop that cost to society by probably a factor of 10 or more).
Thanks Pellicle
 

sassyspy

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2013
Messages
9
Location
seattle
dick0236;n885202 said:
I really think hair loss, or not, has a lot more to do with genetics than warfarin. Both my father and paternal grandfather died with a full head of hair. My maternal grandfather was a cue ball when he died.......and I think my mom had a wig that she wore sometimes.
I've been thinking about wigs. My hair is nearly waist length, but it used to be very thick, now, not so much. But still it's a lot of hair to pile up on my head. Wigs are a struggle unless I just go for it and shave my head!! It comes out by the handful when I brush or wash it.
I cant just blame warfarin. I also no longer have a thyroid gland and thyroid problems cause hair loss, too.
maybe I'm hoping if I can identify a medical reason for it, my insurance would cover treatment! Hah.

anyway not an answer at all to OPs question so I apologize for providing the very opposite of what you were looking for!
Just incidentally, I have found that being on warfarin has forced me to pay more attention to my diet and general health, so I guess that's a positive result.
 

dick0236

Eat the elephant one bite at a time
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
2,831
Location
louisville, KY USA
sassyspy;n885218 said:
........I have found that being on warfarin has forced me to pay more attention to my diet and general health, so I guess that's a positive result
.
Me too.....and, yes, that is a very positive result.
 
2

Latest posts



Top