You are not alone in the "Lipitor" lecture. I think I posted here some time back that my Internist thinks it should be put in drinking water... If they do that, I will have to find something other than water to drink.

Why are they lecturing you? I would think they would be happy to see that you have been able to drop it. Perhaps it will even drop more. By the way, how did you do that, if you don't mind me asking?

You are not alone in feeling mistrust with your doctors. This issue for me has improved though, when I got rid of some of my doctors. I find it stressful having to watch out for my own care without the medical knowledge one needs to do so...

Cathie

Well, I'm still taking my Lipitor everyday and it's had no effect on my PN which I've had for over 20 years........l-o-n-g before I started Lipitor. The same doc that's treating my PN is the one who put me on Lipitor and it has reduced my cholesterol significantly and my heart doctor approves. So, guess that's two docs the anti-statin group hasn't convinced. If I die from taking Lipitor I'll sure come back and post it here. LoL

The fact that the whole cholesterol shebang was CREATED from faulty data, and then massaged and twisted to look good, when there is little truth, well, that bothers me alot.

So yesterday, my doctor shootches up to me to do the blood pressure...
this is when she usually delivers her coup... putting my arm against her side and sliding on the cuff... She says " I take Lipitor you know, and it works" ...just like when she wanted me on HRT a few years ago.

So I say, good for you...if you like that then go for it. I will try Zetia, and when the new Merck non flush Niacin extended release comes out, I'll try that. But no statins for ME.

This is a personal choice...and we all it appears, will have to make it.
Dan...you should read The Cholesterol Myths on how the data has been massaged mathematically from the start. The benefits are just not there.
And if you have no serious sequelae then you are lucky. When Lipitor goes off patent we will start to see the negative studies more often, and not have to hunt for them the way I do now.(but they already exist) As I see it, liver damage, heart muscle damage from low CoQ-10 levels, memory loss similar to Alzheimer's, increased hostility and aggression, liver cancer and PN are just too much risk for a drug with little behind it.

You know I have a friend who had a massive right sided stroke, at work. She is 47. Has no risk factors. Normal blood pressure, low cholesterol, not overweight, nada. She did have history of migraines. Well while she was in intensive care, after her dramatic pTA treatment which dissolved the clot...
one of her doctors automatically put her on Lipitor. She consulted with her neuro, and he agreed...she didn't need it. Since her miraculous recovery, she has not had one headache. (the thought was she dissected her carotid artery lifting heavy stuff helping her mother move. This triggered a blood clot which blocked her internal carotid.) Her carotid healed and she is now back to normal, and NOT taking Lipitor. It is just an example of a prescription reflex with no throught as to the quality of life for the patient. Just because the drug company is persuasive.

If you have massively high cholesterol... a genetic familial thing...then yes, consider aggressive treatment. These patients however are not common. If the drug companies had their way ALL of us would be on statins. In fact about 3 yrs ago Time and Newsweek had articles to that effect.

--in my suspicious way, I posit that the reason you keep getting those Lipitor lectures despite your own cholesterol reductions from other methods is that you're costing somebody money along the way. Possibly your own doctor--there've been documented cases of docs receiving "incentives" from pharma companies for writing certain prescriptions--VERY unethical, of course, but these days docs are trying to increase their incomes any way they can (remember that New York Times article a few weeks back on phrama produced speaking engagements?).

And, given your position, you're dangerous to drug companies (and pharmacies) looking to maximize profit. (Watch your back. )

Seriously, this just points up how few practitioners actualy take time to research the drugs they prescribe. Most know only what the pharmaceutical reps tell them--the scantily clad, flirtatious, always buying lunch pharamceutical reps.

I still remember having those (friendly) arguments with my Dad's heart surgeon--the gentleman who started the now famous heart unit in Staten Island (and whose son I was tutoring for the SAT)--over statins; he said all the cardiac docs were all being told get that total cholesterol score under 100 whether the patient was otherwise a cardiac risk or not . . .I sent over a few articles, and he did become a lot more thoughtful about the subject.

There are 3 copies of a revealing new study on doctor $$ kickbacks in psychiatry on this board:

Here is one link:
http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/sh...ad.php?t=22729

Now I know drug reps...I know they get a readout downloaded into their computer monthly on the # of Rxs written each month from their assigned doctors. I bet some of you didn't know this...but it is TRUE...
wanna read about it? http://www.cbc.ca/disclosure/archive...datatrade.html

So they come in and say... Dr. Blah Blah...your numbers are down this month.
If you get them up for me, I'll get you the $300 text book, vacation in Hawaii,
or even bucks... and it gets done. I have heard that if a doctor just calls a colleague and discusses the drug, the calling Doc gets bucks!

Then there is the ghostwritten study...where prestigious names are bought and plastered right on the study (never having done or even read it) to impress other doctors. This whistle was blown about 5 yrs ago.
Then there is the "hide negative studies" which the NY Attorney General sued Glaxo to reveal. Now you can read the truth about Paxil on their website. But only after being sued. Some of the medical journals have changed their criteria for publishing now. Negative studies are being required.

Basically it all boils down to bucks. And yes, we have laughed here about the Lipitor extermination squad planting a bomb in my car! LOL
(When the dangerous Redux scandal was brewing, I got into trouble with Ayerst personally...a rather feeble attempt to shut me up at work...that failed of course, and Redux was whipped off the market a few months later for causing heart damage and PPH. It was sort of like getting hit with a rubber band (you know when you shoot them at someone?)... I didn't bat an eye at that one!

So happy to hear that our MrsD dodged a bullet and it going on vacation again. Will miss you much, as always, but sooooo glad you get to go.



rose

Hi Mrs. D.!

Did you once say that you are avoiding gluten? I ask, because I'm wondering if your thyroid problem might be partly due to an auto immune attack on your thyroid, as an auto immune reaction to one or more incoming food proteins that you may be "sensitive" to--like gluten (protein-like, in wheat, rye, barley, etc.), &/or casein, &/or soy proteins, &/or corn proteins, &/or yeast proteins, &/or egg proteins, etc (if you are "sensitive" to any of these proteins).

Also, have you ever been exposed to radioactive iodine releases from a "leaky" nuclear power plant that was upwind or upwater from you? (like 3 Mile Island, in PA, for example).

I agree with your refusing to take Statins, for all the good reasons you've stated!

If you like acupuncture, consider trying that too.

Do you use iodized salt? If yes, you might want to substitute a little kelp (not too much), instead, just in case you were getting too much iodine.

Hang in there, and be well! I have learned so much from you, over the years!

Carol
http://cantbreathesuspectvcd.com

MRSD
You have always been so helpful to me on this forum. I do wish all the best for you. So many people have offered such good medical ideas thus far I really have nothing to add - except to say good health to you and my wishes that all goes well for you.
Re; statins - I too have had high cholesterol. It runs in the hight 200's (now is 277) but has been in the 400's. I refuse the statins also. Take cod liver oil, niacin, etc. My mother is a very healthy 87 and has the same cholesterol levels (very high) all her life. (no meds for it)
Enjoy your summer. Hope you can continue to keep us updated.
Sydney

I knew about the perks that docs get for prescribing stuff. I once saw a special on a 20/20 kind of show that someone went into a meeting of pharmacy reps and doctors and some guy wore an undercover camera and recording device.

During this meeting, there were trips raffled off and "incentives" to prescribe this and there was also "incentives" for the doctors not to send patients to specialists so it was cost effective (or something to that effect) it was about 10 years ago. But I never forgot that some doctors were paid NOT TO do stuff. That much I remember.

And I have a question about the tobacco companie. If everyone knows and admits that Lung Cancer is attributable to cigarette smoking (I"m not talking about the smokers, they have an addiction), my question relates to the continued existence of the tobacco companies.

If the government knows that cigarettes kill people, and warnings are even on the packs of cigs themselves, would someone please explain WHY these tobacco companies are allowed to keep making the tobacco.

I went on a tobacco website once and it offered "ways to quit smoking". It actually offered tips. I even saw a commercial once on tv that was from a Tobacco Company.

I mean, isn't this an oxy-moron. The tobacco company giving advice on quitting, but they are still allowed to manufacture the product.

I watched the 60 minutes segment a long long time ago when the whistle was blown on the fact that tobacco companies knew how bad nicotine was.

But cigarettes are still made. And sold. And I still don't get it. I know it's all about money, but jeez. It's killing people. And no one puts these tobacco guys out of business????

Melody

I'm thankful for the thread about the cholesterol lowering drugs. What an eye-opener this was. My doctor is retesting my cholesterol in about 5 months. She says if it's not down enough she's putting me on a drug. She didn't say which one just that she was going to put me on one. I don't think so. I have enough problems dealing with the PN I already have. I'm certainly not going to do *anything* to make it worse on purpose! And the PN sides seem to be the lesser of some of the side effects of these kinds of drugs. And not just the statins.

I found a message board that discusses all these kinds of drugs and there are many people there that have experienced bad sides from the cholesterol lowering drugs.

http://www.spacedoc.net/board/index.php