Let's play devil's advocate: your cholesterol is out of whack, and I mean by our standards. The ratios are bad, the docs are wringing their hands. Is there any point that you would take a statin?

Knowing what I know now, NO..

After reading this forum and other research (and having major aches in my legs, which my dr. said had NOTHING to do with statins), I stopped cold turkey. I have not had my cholesterol checked since doing that, and not really too concerned anymore. This is the conclusion I have come to after having two MIs and 5 stents inserted.

hth,
Sallie

Maybe if my triglycerides were through the roof and my hdl was very low. But they'll never get that way eating sugar free and low carb.

There's no evidence it does anything positive for you until AFTER you've had a heart attack. So I wouldn't take it before. I'd do everything I could with supplements and a heart scan and the better sort of testing and if my small LDL was still too high, I might consider it... AFTER I had a heart attack.

They also have no effect for women.

I was on Lipitor for a while, and had horrible seide effects, so no, I would never go on them again. Besides, I don't believe the whole cholesterol = heart disease theory.

My doctor has me taking atorvastatin at the lowest dosage, even though LDL was only 102 on the last test. The reason is that I have multiple risk factors for heart disease (T2D and hypertension too), and he wants it below 80.

So to answer the question, "when would you..." my answer is "...after 2 months of dragging my feet, losing 30 lbs, eating mostly leaves, and my LDL is about 100." Sounds kinda lame really, but I will have new test results soon, and it is bound to show less than 90.

I have never seen it written when you would come off a statin. I hope that I would quit when LDL gets to 75.

NP, I meant to ask this yesterday: what was your LDL before the doc gave you the statin? Around 100?

And if you're thinking they'll want you off the drug when you reach a certain number, probably not. They want people on them for life.

My doctor talked about atorvastatin before the results were in. He was away when the results came (LDL 122). He was planning to put me on a 'protocol'. I saw an older substitute doctor who told me to eat fruits and veggies, ground flax seed, get some exercise, and go hear Dr. Fuhrman speak. I started Fuhrman's nutrition program, and in about 70 days lost 34 lbs, dropped LDL to 102, dropped TG hugely, kept HDL at 36, brought FG from 128 to 101, A1c was 6.2 . I thought victory was in the bag, but after my second round of tests, my original doctor prescribed metformin, atorvastatin and ramipril (for bp) anyway.

He has told me that I would likely be off metformin after one calendar year on it.

But he said there are additional benefits that atorvastatin and ramipril have for kidney health, and gave no indication that I would come off these meds. It seems to me inappropriate to stay on these when the main symptoms are gone. For all I know it is illegal. I did some searching and found something about atorvastatin protecting kidney patients from heart disease, but that is a far cry from what he told me. I was under the impression he was telling me these two drugs are specifically good for kidneys. Sounds bizarre really. If they are that good they should be billed as such. OMG we should all be taking them!

Well I see the drug thing being short term really. Three months or six or a year doesn't much matter to me but I see myself eliminating them soon, possibly needing one or another much later in life.

Anyhow these drugs have not been very harmful. The metformin may have brought my FG down by oh 3 to 5 points, and slowed the rate of gluconeogenesis thence helping me with weight loss, and saving amino acids for amino acid jobs. I noticed that my circulation improved about a week after I started the atorvastatin, which made it easier to take samples for glucose. Blood pressure came down with the ramipril - that was real comforting - and it likely helped with the improvement in circulation.

So in sum, a short stint with drugs does not worry me much. I am seeing no bad side effects. What does worry me is my physician's drugs first attitude. Diet and exercise dwarfs the drugs in both their immediate impact on my health, and the fact that they are part of the real cure (if there is one for T2D). I should say that when I was nearly half way to goal weight I was nearly half way to goal LDL and more than half way to goal FG. So it could have been done without drugs too.

Great answers, all, thank you. And everyone, keep them coming

It's just something that bugs me.... as most seem to believe, the ratios are a good indicator of the cholesterol picture. Mine has improved every 3 month period that I've been tested:

Total cholesterol divided by HDL

8.4
5.0
4.6

LDL divided by HDL

5.0
3.5
3.0

Total chol.

245
200
242

LDL

146
141
172

HDL

29
40
52

Trig.

352
96
88

and yet, the doc is hollering for me to take Zetia. As much faith as I have in LC, it's tough to ignore one's doctor.

Remember that your doctor only knows what the drug companies have been telling him/her. Your doctor is your employee and should give you unbiased information. Ask your doctor about how much information he/she received from the Zetia rep and what sort of freebies came with that information.

No, becasue there are things you can do to lower it..there are alot of nutraceuticals out there that can have a profound effect on hdl/ldl levels and triglycerides.

I'm not quite convinced that total cholesterol is much of a factor.

Mike, I guarentee there were some kind of freebies lol. I've watched drug reps going to the back offices carrying boxes of donuts (oh, that's good to see at a place of health).

one of my buddies is a regional manager for a generic drug company and he brings lunch in daily for the doctors offices that he sees everyday.

and golf clubs and concert tickets and sporting event tickets and booze and...

Oh and another thing..for any new drug they launch he gets money for every prescription written..