iride, the 2011 paper referenced here, has the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine heading, it is authored by 4 of their docs with MD's behind their name, and it contains 67 footnotes to other medical research articles on the related subjects in the paper. You, of course, would know more about the Clinic's official position, but how do you just dismiss the information in this paper?View Thread
Perhaps off topic, but related infor. The computer systems in this medical group has been changed often in recent years, and much medical data from the past has been either lost or misplaced. Several times recently, during this whole process, I have had to provide information to the docs involved in my care, as old data and infor. is not currently available to them. My previous myopathy problems were never recorded (never considered drug related, but I figured that relationship out on my own), so that data is not relevant, but other more recent information is missing, and I have had to fill in the gaps. So much for Electronic Medical Records and the progress they supposedly provide.View Thread
No one, NO ONE, asked me about previous experience with statin drugs, before starting on this latest regimen with Pravastatin at 80 mg daily. No one asked about my physical activity level. No one asked about possible family myopathy statin drug problems. They just went with the Standard of Care approach.(They in this case was team of cardiologists, and a couple of other docs as well.) I knew that I had previous myopathy problems, but no one even asked. If it comes down to me having to practice medicine for myself, I can do it, but that is not why I have a whole team of docs lined up to treat me and help me make decisions. There should obviously be some additional flexibility built into the standard of care, it seems to me.View Thread
I have been physically active all of my life, playing sports from basketball, baseball, tennis, racquetball, table tennis, and many other sports as well. That characteristic among patients appears to make this group of potential patients especially intolerant of these statin drugs.
Another quote from the Cleveland Clinic 2011 study:
'Physically active patients were more likely to suffer muscle symptoms than sedentary patients, echoing the observation by Sinzinger and O'Grady that athletes are especially intolerant of lipid-lowering therapy.41
I would suggest that perhaps this group of patients, and likely several other groups as well, should be excluded from statin drug therapy, and that the Standard of Care should be re-examined based on this information. Regardless, it is pure folly to treat all patients in the same way, based on current Standard of Care, and one does not have to have an MD after ones name to see that factView Thread
I would simply ask this question, 'If the Cleveland Clinic Study from 2011 is correct in their introduction, and I quote, 'In addition, at least 25% of adults who start taking statins stop taking them by 6 months, and up to 60% stop by 2 years.4 '
Why are these drugs still the standard of care for all patients?View Thread
The link above it to the Cleveland Clinic Study from 2011, and is the latest Cleveland Clinic Study I could find. Here is the a quote from the abstract from that study in quotes:
'Statins have proven efficacy in preventing heart attacks and death,1 and they are the most widely prescribed drugs worldwide. Nevertheless, they remain underused, with only 50% of those who would benefit from being on a statin receiving one.2 ,3 In addition, at least 25% of adults who start taking statins stop taking them by 6 months, and up to 60% stop by 2 years.4View Thread
Thanks for the input, Brooks. I will look at all the sites mentioned.
What I fail to yet understand, is how can these statin drugs, continue to be the Standard of Care, with all of the evidence stacking up against them. The article from the Cleveland Clinic, says that up to 60% of patients on statins will have muscle problems within 2 years, and yet we continue to make these drugs the Standard of Care? I am not a doctor, but there is something obviously wrong with the Standard of Care standards, when this obvious over treatment with statin drugs is allowed to continue without questions about who sets the Standard...........and what are their financial interests in the results of the Standards. It was one thing before these problems were realized, but these drugs have now been on the market so long that most have now gone generic. My original problems were 11 years ago. How long is the medical community going to wait to investigate this obvious oversight and under reporting of this problem?View Thread
Thank you Bobby, as you obviously understand the problem. I was always active, playing sports and involved in athletics all of my life (70YOM), so it is quite upsetting when a drug therapy that is supposed to improve my condition, makes physical exercise nearly impossible.
Why is the Standard of Care so inflexible in cases such as mine? Why is there not some patient related flexibility built into the Standard of Care? I am told that family docs can get into trouble for not prescribing these drugs, when the Cleveland Clinic study linked above shows that up to 60% of patients have to go off the drugs because of these kinds of problems within two years. Have the drug companies so influenced the Standard of Care, that obvious patient related problems like these cannot be excluded? If so, then the drug companies influence is over done, and should be reduced, IMHO.View Thread
Indeed it is, but the numbers one sees when one Googles the subject, says that the various studies that have been done, show that on average, about 25% of patients on statins go off the drugs within one year because of muscle problems, and up to 60% within 2 years.
One can also see that these drugs are the most widely prescribed drugs ever marketed, with 80 million people on the drugs currently, or in the recent past. These muscle problems have been widely known for over a decade, but the Standard of Care continues to be these drugs, when some studies suggest that the same benefits could be obtained from a bowl of oatmeal each morning. At the very least, someone should be doing more research on these side effects, since so many people are now on these drugs.
If they work for you, great, but I would caution you to be aware of these side effects, look for them to materialize, and respond quickly to them should they in fact happen.View Thread