Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Fri, Oct-19-12, 09:56
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,866
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default Unbiased review concludes that statins do not have overall benefits for healthy peopl

Unbiased review concludes that statins do not have overall benefits for healthy people

Quote:
The authors point out that if the heart benefits of statins do not translate into a reduction in total serious adverse events, then statins must be increasing the risk of other (adverse) events to an extent which completely negates their positive heart effects. This fact is reflected in the last line of their conclusions which reads:
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Tue, Oct-23-12, 02:32
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

Quote:
The reduction in major CHD serious adverse events with statins as compared to placebo is not reflected in a reduction in total serious adverse events.


I suspect this is due to lowering cholesterol too much. The lower your cholesterol, the higher the cancer rates are iirc.

The graph that gets posted here from time to time using WHO & BHF data shows all-cause mortality rates increase steadily as total cholesterol goes under 200.

Here's a link to it - easier to read than if I post a pic of it here.
http://renegadewellness.files.wordp...ality-chart.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Tue, Oct-23-12, 21:36
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Let's remove all the qualifiers for the drug statin and instead look at what statins actually do when we eat it. Don't even call it a drug, just call it a substance. We'll see if it's really a drug after that.

Let's start with Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statins
Quote:
Statins (or HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors) are a class of drugs used to lower cholesterol levels by inhibiting the enzyme HMG-CoA reductase, which plays a central role in the production of cholesterol in the liver.

Translation: Statins are a class of substances that interfere with liver function - specifically an enzyme that regulates the production of cholesterol. So what happens when we do this? Let's see the effects of that interference with liver function:
Quote:
Adverse effects

The most common adverse side effects are raised liver enzymes and muscle problems. In randomized clinical trials, reported adverse effects are low; but they are "higher in studies of real world use", and more varied.[15] In randomized trials, statins increased the risk of an adverse effect by 39% compared to placebo (odds ratios 1.4); two-thirds of these were myalgia or raised liver enzymes with serious adverse effects similar to placebo.[16] However, reliance on clinical trials can be misleading indications of real-world adverse effects – for example, the statin cerivastatin was withdrawn from the market in 2001 due to cases of rhabdomyolysis (muscle breakdown), although rhabdomyolysis did not occur in a meta-analysis of cerivastatin clinical trials.[15] Other possible adverse effects include cognitive loss, neuropathy, pancreatic and hepatic dysfunction, and sexual dysfunction.[15]

Some patients on statin therapy report myalgias,[17] muscle cramps,[17] or, less frequently, gastrointestinal or other symptoms. Liver enzyme derangements, typically in about 0.5%,[citation needed] are also seen at similar rates with placebo use and repeated enzyme testing, and generally return to normal either without discontinuance over time or after briefly discontinuing the drug. Multiple other side effects occur rarely; typically also at similar rates with only placebo in the large statin safety/efficacy trials. Two randomized clinical trials found cognitive issues while two did not; recurrence upon reintroduction suggests these are causally related to statins in some individuals.[18] A Danish case-control study published in 2002 suggested a relationship between long-term statin use and increased risk of nerve damage or polyneuropathy,[19] but suggested this side effect is "rare, but it does occur";[20] other researchers have pointed to studies of the effectiveness of statins in trials involving 50,000 people which have not shown nerve damage as a significant side effect.[21]

Let's remove the idea that cholesterol is bad, the idea that those are "side" effects, and the idea that statins are a class of "drugs". What do we get? Detrimental effects. That's it that's all. When we find a substance that does bad things to us, we don't call it a drug, we call it a poison. Arsenic is a good one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic_poisoning
Quote:
Signs and symptoms

Symptoms of arsenic poisoning begin with headaches, confusion, severe diarrhea, and drowsiness. As the poisoning develops, convulsions and changes in fingernail pigmentation called leukonychia may occur. When the poisoning becomes acute, symptoms may include diarrhea, vomiting, blood in the urine, cramping muscles, hair loss, stomach pain, and more convulsions. The organs of the body that are usually affected by arsenic poisoning are the lungs, skin, kidneys, and liver.[2] The final result of arsenic poisoning is coma to death.[citation needed]

Arsenic is related to heart disease[3] (hypertension related cardiovascular), cancer,[4] stroke[5] (cerebrovascular diseases), chronic lower respiratory diseases,[6] and diabetes.[7][8]
Night blindness

Long term exposure to arsenic is related to vitamin A deficiency which is related to heart disease and night blindness.[9]

So how does arsenic do all that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arseni...gical_mechanism
Quote:
Biological mechanism

The high affinity of arsenic(III) oxides for thiols is usually assigned as the cause of the high toxicity. Thiols, usually in the form of cysteine residues, but also in cofactors such as lipoic acid and coenzyme A, are situated at the active sites of many important enzymes.[6]

Arsenic disrupts ATP production through several mechanisms. At the level of the citric acid cycle, arsenic inhibits lipoic acid, which is a cofactor for pyruvate dehydrogenase. In addition, by competing with phosphate, arsenate uncouples oxidative phosphorylation, thus inhibiting energy-linked reduction of NAD+, mitochondrial respiration and ATP synthesis. Hydrogen peroxide production is also increased, which, it is speculated, has potential to form reactive oxygen species and oxidative stress. These metabolic interferences lead to death from multi-system organ failure. The organ failure is presumed to be from necrotic cell death, not apoptosis, since energy reserves have been too depleted for apoptosis to occur.

Right, so arsenic interferes with various systems, and doing so causes bad things to happen. Sounds a lot like statins to me. So what's the difference? Arsenic is not classified as a drug, nor does it interfere with systems that produce a substance that we believe is bad, i.e. cholesterol. We're not confused about arsenic. It does bad things. It's a poison. However, if we ever start to believe that ATP is bad for us, I'm sure we'll jump on the arsenic-is-a-miracle-drug bandwagon to get rid of all that bad ATP.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 00:06
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

Yeah most drugs are ridiculous for side effects. But people take them for all kinds of reasons, and the majority don't have side effects. I'll give you my 87 year old diabetic aunt who has been on statins since they came out in the late 80's. No side effects. Still up walking around - to the beach every day (16 blocks) and on the bus to go shopping, etc.

She and my father both had TC in the 300's, but sadly my father died of a heart attack at 56. No statins. Plenty of exercise, nonsmoking, slender. It's a mystery, other than the high TC.

Last edited by gonwtwindo : Wed, Oct-24-12 at 00:14.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 07:23
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,866
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonwtwindo
She and my father both had TC in the 300's, but sadly my father died of a heart attack at 56. No statins. Plenty of exercise, nonsmoking, slender. It's a mystery, other than the high TC.

Maybe not such a mystery, if one has a large portion of their total cholesterol as small particles.

We've had a few links here to people with very high TC that have had coronary scans and because they're low carb, they have very clean arteries.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 13:07
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

I forget - are the small particles the a or the b? Something like that?
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 13:19
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,866
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Pattern B (as in bad), or VLDL.

People tend to make lots of the little cholesterol particles when they eat lots of carbs, especially wheat.

Here's one person who had 2700 LDL-P (which is around 270 LDL in the cheap, calculated test)

Does LDL-P Matter?

Quote:
Last fall I had a NMR LipoProfile done which showed a LDL-P of 2700 (less than 1000 is optimal). For a physician who focuses on heart attack prevention, this was quite horrifying. What should I do? My initial thought was to slug down 20 mg of Crestor daily. The only thing was that I was losing weight (more precisely, fat via body composition testing) and I felt better than ever. My energy was amazing. So I continued and eventually started Kiefer’s protocol described in CNS earlier this year. There was one problem, my LDL-P was not changing and as of this writing the last value was over 3000.

Well, as I do with my patients, I always want to know if a patient has disease or not. That really is the question, not how high is the cholesterol. I know from my practice that risk factor assessment means very little without actually knowing if disease exists. Using standard risk assessment tools can miss people who really are at risk (3). By looking at risk assessment models (like Framingham Risk Score) we can over- or under-estimate risk greatly. My workhorse disease detection is Carotid Intima Media Thickness (CIMT). This test simply put, measures the “lining” of the carotid artery via ultrasound. The thicker the lining is, the greater the risk. It is also a way to assess for plaque (atherosclerosis) of the artery. Having plaque means you have atherosclerosis. I believe it is a significantly better way of looking at risk because we are looking for the actual pathology (1,2).

I had my CIMT done in 2006 on the Standard American “heart healthy diet” eating low fat, higher carb. You know those espoused by the ADA and AHA. My lipids were “normal” at this time. My thickness was 0.6 mm (about the 50th percentile). I also had two small “road bumps “ (minimal plaques) at my left carotid bulb both measuring 1.2 mm. I was not happy. I also had similar findings on a study in 1/2010.

Flash-forward to June 2012, about 4 months into CNS, my CIMT showed a thickness of 0.445 mm (13th percentile) and I had the vascular age of a 16 year old! And oh by the way, the “road bumps” were gone. All the while carrying an LDL-P of over 2500 consistently for over a year. I have also had a CT Coronary Calcium score that was zero.

Last edited by Nancy LC : Wed, Oct-24-12 at 13:26.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 13:52
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

Hm. Well that is good news for me. I just noticed on my labs, a linear graph at the bottom showing particle type, and I'm almost completely to the far side of 'a'. Like, 'a' is on one end of the line, and 'b' is on the other.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 18:30
RawNut's Avatar
RawNut RawNut is offline
Lipivore
Posts: 1,208
 
Plan: Very Low Carb Paleo
Stats: 270/185/180 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Florida
Default

I found this interesting

Quote:
CONCLUSIONS:

Statins can rapidly activate AMPK via increased Thr-172 phosphorylation in vitro and in vivo. Such phosphorylation results in endothelial NO synthase activation, which provides a novel explanation for the pleiotropic effects of statins that benefit the cardiovascular system.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17116771

Low carb also activates AMPK.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22674476
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 19:29
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

Or maybe that line means I have mostly b and hardly any a. Ha.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 19:59
RawNut's Avatar
RawNut RawNut is offline
Lipivore
Posts: 1,208
 
Plan: Very Low Carb Paleo
Stats: 270/185/180 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Florida
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonwtwindo
Or maybe that line means I have mostly b and hardly any a. Ha.


It's hard to tell without seeing it. Does it look anything like this?



In this example, the best place to be would be as far away from B as possible and to the right end of A.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 20:56
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

Yes. Without the explanations (i.e., small, dense, etc). The 'x' on mine was above the letter 'n' of "Pattern A". So good?!
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 21:02
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RawNut

I hate it when there's good news about statins. But seriously, trying to show statins in a good light is like ignoring the elephant in the room. Statins do more harm than good, and whatever good it does has no effect on ultimate outcome, i.e. death.

This is interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMP-ac..._protein_kinase
Quote:
Function

AMPK acts as a metabolic master switch regulating several intracellular systems including the cellular uptake of glucose, the β-oxidation of fatty acids and the biogenesis of glucose transporter 4 (GLUT4) and mitochondria.[8][not in citation given][9][10][not in citation given][11][12] The energy-sensing capability of AMPK can be attributed to its ability to detect and react to fluctuations in the AMP:ATP ratio that take place during rest and exercise (muscle stimulation). During muscle stimulation, AMP increases while ATP decreases, which changes AMPK into a good substrate for activation via an upstream kinase complex, AMPKK, or better, where binding of AMP renders activated AMPK that is phosphorylated at Thr-172 a worse substrate for protein phosphatase 2Calpha.[13] AMPKK is a complex of three proteins, STE-related adaptor (STRAD), mouse protein 25 (MO25), and LKB1 (a serine/threonine kinase). During a bout of exercise, AMPK activity increases while the muscle cell experiences metabolic stress brought about by an extreme cellular demand for ATP. Upon activation, AMPK increases cellular energy levels by inhibiting anabolic energy consuming pathways (fatty acid synthesis, protein synthesis, etc.) and stimulating energy producing, catabolic pathways (fatty acid oxidation, glucose transport, etc.).

Low-carb gives people more energy. Statins do not. This means activating AMPK directly without first doing stuff with hormones like insulin to regulate energy flow outside the cell, we end up with a cellular energy deficit. I doubt that's how these "pleiotropic effects on the cardiovascular system" are achieved with statins.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Wed, Oct-24-12, 22:03
RawNut's Avatar
RawNut RawNut is offline
Lipivore
Posts: 1,208
 
Plan: Very Low Carb Paleo
Stats: 270/185/180 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Florida
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonwtwindo
Yes. Without the explanations (i.e., small, dense, etc). The 'x' on mine was above the letter 'n' of "Pattern A". So good?!


That's where you want to be!
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Thu, Oct-25-12, 02:33
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

Yay! It's about time I hear something positive about my health! (Diabetic, high cholesterol, spondylolisthesis, radiculopathy, and the one doctors complain about most: OVERWEIGHT)

Thank you
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:48.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.