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 Wed, Mar-31-04, 13:27
gotbeer's Avatar
gotbeer gotbeer is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 2,889
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 280/203/200 Male 69 inches
BF:
Progress: 96%
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Default "Doubts raised over drugs for cholesterol"

Doubts raised over drugs for cholesterol

Side effects have included lost memory in some patients

By JOHN FAUBER, jfauber~journalsentinel.com

Posted: March 27, 2004


http://www.jsonline.com/alive/news/mar04/217976.asp

It was hot on the golf course, and, with every hole, the mysterious pain that vibrated through Jeff Bryden's body worsened, finally forcing him into the locker room.

He drank some Gatorade and took a shower, but the pain only intensified, seeming to engulf every muscle in his body.

"I literally couldn't move," he said. "It looked like the exorcist had gotten ahold of me. It was excruciating pain."

As he lay on a bench, a fellow club member who is a doctor saw him and immediately suspected he was suffering a reaction to a drug.

Bryden, 48, of Brookfield, had been taking the cholesterol-lowering drug Lipitor,which he and his doctor now believe may have caused extensive damage to his muscle cells, a condition that could linger for years.

Bryden's case is unusual, maybe even rare. But a growing number of researchers, doctors and patients are wondering whether so-called statin drugs are associated with significantly more side effects, both minor and more serious, than previously thought.

Those complications include muscle pain, kidney and liver conditions, and cognitive problems.

It's a complex and dicey issue, being raised at a time when 36 million Americans are being told they should take the drugs, although currently only 11 million are following that advice.

Four years ago, the makers of the statins Pravachol and Mevacor asked the Food and Drug Administration to allow lower-dose versions of those drugs to be sold over-the-counter. An FDA advisory committee voted against the application.

"But it will come back again," said physician Sidney Wolfe of the advocacy group Public Citizen. "People want to put it in the drinking water."

Although many doctors don't think statins should be sold over-the-counter, some, including cardiologist James Stein, say the statin guidelines should be broadened to include more patients. Stein, an associate professor of medicine at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said he believes that most of the complications reported by patients are overstated.

For many patients, especially those with heart disease or high-risk conditions such as diabetes, statins can be lifesavers. Numerous clinical trials have showed that the drugs can significantly reduce heart attacks, strokes and the need for bypass surgery or angioplasty.

Measuring side effects

As more people take statins, the number of side effects has grown. Some doctors now say they suspect the incidence of side effects is much higher than what has been shown in various clinical trials, including several funded by the drug makers.

"If you believe the clinical trial data, the problems occur at very modest rates," said Beatrice Golomb, an assistant professor of family medicine at the University of California, San Diego, who is conducting two studies on statin side effects.

Those trials generally report side effects in less than 1% to 2% of patients. And many of those complications are minor and disappear if the drug is discontinued or the dose lowered.

But, "there are clinicians whose personal experience is substantially different than what is reported in the trials," Golomb said.

She said that based on her experience and that of other doctors, 20% or more of patients encounter some side effects.

People may be excluded from a trial for a variety of reasons, including medical conditions. Others may be sought out for inclusion because of their ability to tolerate drugs, for example. In addition, people in trials often are paid and receive free care and medication. That may create a disincentive to report side effects for fear of losing those benefits, Stein said.

"People in clinical trials aren't like the rest of the world," he said.

Weighing a drug's risks against its benefits is crucial for people who may have a risk factor or two for heart disease but aren't in the high-risk groups for which statin therapy clearly is recommended.

Group pushes FDA

The issue took on more urgency this month when Public Citizen asked the FDA to remove the statin Crestor, which came on the market in September.

The group cited four cases of kidney failure, five additional cases of kidney damage, six cases of abnormal bleeding, and seven cases of life-threatening rhabdomyolysis in patients taking the blood-thinning drug coumadin, which can interact with Crestor.

Otherwise considered rare, rhabdomyolysis is one of the most serious statin side effects. It's a condition in which muscle tissue is destroyed and released into the blood.

In 2001, Bayer Corp. was forced to remove its statin, Baycol, from the market after it was linked to more than 52 deaths, including 31 in the United States. Most of the deaths involved rhabdomyolysis.

Wolfe, of Public Citizen, said there is even more reason to be concerned about Crestor. He noted that Crestor, unlike Baycol, was linked to rhabdomyolysis cases before it was approved.

The FDA is looking into the status of Crestor and hopes to respond within 180 days, said Mary Parks, a physician and deputy director of the FDA's metabolic and endocrine drug products division.

Gary Bruell, a spokesman for AstraZeneca, the maker of Crestor, said the drug was tested in more than 10,000 patients and "is the most-scrutinized statin ever."

Statin problems ongoing

However, for patients such as Bryden, those assurances are not convincing.

Bryden said he had been suffering muscle cramps and fatigue for more than a year before the incident on the golf course in July 2001. He also had switched statins - from Zocor to Lipitor.

He saw a neuromuscular specialist at the Medical College of Wisconsin, who diagnosed his condition as a disease in his muscle cells brought on by statin toxicity, he said. His muscles are still sore, despite the fact that he has been off statins for nearly three years.

"I still have that constant feeling that my muscles are vibrating," he said.

Wendy Peltier, the associate professor of neurology at the Medical College who diagnosed Bryden, said she and other specialists at the college have seen between 30 and 50 patients with statin-related muscle problems in the past few years.

The drugs seem to cause a variety of muscle problems in some people, she said. Most of the time, the problems disappear when the drug is discontinued or the patient is given a supplement. Cases such as Bryden's are rare, she said.

Still, she estimated that about 10% of statin users encounter some kind of muscle problem.

In addition, there have been numerous accounts of statin users experiencing mental problems.

For Duane Graveline, a retired doctor and astronaut, the memory problem was so bad that he wrote a book about it: "Lipitor, Thief of Memory," which was published in February.

Graveline began using Lipitor four years ago after his annual NASA physical showed an elevated cholesterol level. He was put on a low dose of the drug. About six weeks later his wife found him wandering in their front yard. He could not remember recent events, he said.

"I didn't know who she was," Graveline said.

Within about six hours, his memory returned. A neurologist determined that he had had a bout of transient global amnesia. Graveline said he suspected it might be related to Lipitor, so he stopped taking it.

A year later, NASA doctors again told him he needed to get his cholesterol down and persuaded him to go back on Lipitor.

Six weeks later, he said, he had another bout of amnesia, only this time he lost memory of everything after high school.

When he was told that he was a former astronaut and that he was married and had children, "I laughed," he said. "I thought that was absurd."

It took about 12 hours for his memory to return to normal, Graveline said.

Weighing risks, benefits

Barbara LePetri, a cardiologist with Pfizer, the maker of Lipitor, said the company is sponsoring two studies examining whether the drug actually improves cognitive function. Although there may be a very small number of patients who report memory problems, that has to be weighed against the substantial reduction in the risk of heart disease and stroke, she said.

Parks, of the FDA, said the agency is aware of reports of cognitive problems among statin users and is monitoring the situation. She noted that many of the people who take the drugs are older and may have other conditions that cause memory problems.

Studies, however, have raised concern that statins may cause cognitive problems and irritability.

One study looked at 308 men who were given a placebo or the statin Zocor for six months. In memory tests and a test involving a complex maze, the statin users did not perform as well as those on the placebo. The difference was subtle but significant, said the study's lead author, Matthew Muldoon, an associate professor of medicine at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine.

"We don't know why it's happening," he said.

Muldoon said one theory is that along with cholesterol, statins may lower levels of omega-3 fat, which is vital to a healthy brain. Another possibility is that the drugs also lower levels of a substance known as Coenzyme Q10, an anti-oxidant and essential nutrient for cells.

In addition, cholesterol itself is needed for the basic metabolism of every cell in the body. When the level is lowered too much, problems can arise, Muldoon said.

"They are powerful drugs," he said. "We are obligated to do more extensive research because we are asking millions of people to take these drugs for the rest of their lives."

However, some research also suggests that statins may actually lower the risk of Alzheimer's disease.

For now, scientists say that for some people statins may be beneficial and for a select group the drugs may cause problems.

Golomb, of the University of California, soon will complete a large five-year study on statins' effects on cognition, behavior and the brain chemical serotonin. With funding from the National Institutes of Health, she has been studying both detrimental and beneficial effects of statins in 1,000 people.

"What motivated us to do this was all the calls we were getting from people saying, 'I've got this problem,' " Golomb said. "It may turn out that we are able to distinguish groups of people who are more likely to experience risk or benefit."

From the March 28, 2004 editions of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Wed, Mar-31-04, 14:17
arc's Avatar
arc arc is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,186
 
Plan: Meat Only
Stats: 200/169.6/175 Male 5'11''
BF:
Progress: 122%
Location: Eastern WA
Default

Quote:
Numerous clinical trials have showed that the drugs can significantly reduce heart attacks, strokes and the need for bypass surgery or angioplasty.


Which studies/trials are these? Everything I have read has said the best study showed only a 3% absolute death risk reduction, about the same as aspirin.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Wed, Mar-31-04, 16:23
K Walt K Walt is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 606
 
Plan: PP
Stats: 210/170/170
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: NJ
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arc
Which studies/trials are these? Everything I have read has said the best study showed only a 3% absolute death risk reduction, about the same as aspirin.


Two common problems here.

1. The reporter simply parroted the parroting of someone quoting someone else's quote of something he read quoting someone else. It's one of those circular references that just keeps getting repeated and repeated because no one ever goes back and checks where the original statement came from.

Malcolm Kendrick MD has a neat essay on this very topic.

http://www.thincs.org/Malcolm.htm See "Death of the Reference"

2. Reporters always jump on the word 'significant' as if it means the results were momentous or subtantial or overwhelming.

They're confusing statistically signficant -- which is simply a mathematical term referring to whether the data is likely to be just a fluke or a result of pure chance -- with the common meaning of 'significant'.

As arc pointed out, the statin results maybe mathematically significant, but in the real world, they're very meager.

Imagine if someone came up with an herb or potion or vitamin pill that delivered such paltry results against heart disease. The medical establishment would scoff at such a puny effect, and condemn it as useless tripe. But, with a drug put out by some pharmaceutical company with a huge marketing budget, the same lame results are "significant."
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Wed, Mar-31-04, 17:44
woodpecker woodpecker is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 265
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 185/180/165 Male 68 inches
BF:25
Progress: 25%
Location: Nova Scotia
Default

A Canadian study reported in summer 2003 indicated the statins were useless for prevention, but might help a little after you have already had a heart attack. I can find the reference if anyone needs it.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Mar-31-04, 18:55
CindySue48's Avatar
CindySue48 CindySue48 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,816
 
Plan: Atkins/Protein Power
Stats: 256/179/160 Female 68 inches
BF:38.9/27.2/24.3
Progress: 80%
Location: Triangle NC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by woodpecker
A Canadian study reported in summer 2003 indicated the statins were useless for prevention, but might help a little after you have already had a heart attack. I can find the reference if anyone needs it.


yes! Please! Post a link if you can!

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Thu, Apr-01-04, 02:49
woodpecker woodpecker is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 265
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 185/180/165 Male 68 inches
BF:25
Progress: 25%
Location: Nova Scotia
Default

CindySue - Trusts this helps.

Doctors issue warning on cholesterol drugs
Last Updated Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:22:29

VANCOUVER - Medical researchers in British Columbia are cautioning doctors and patients about the preventive use of cholesterol drugs called statins – warning they may be doing as much harm as good.

Millions of Canadians take these drugs to prevent disease that leads to heart attacks and strokes. But Dr. Jim Wright, the head of the Therapeutics Initiative that reviewed published data on 60,000 patients, says the studies showed almost no preventive benefit.

The researchers at the University of British Columbia found the drugs did benefit some of those who already had a heart attack or stroke.

Wright says less than two per cent of healthy people taking the drugs receives any benefit.

He also says more studies need to be done on the risk of statins, as his preliminary research showed some people taking the drug had a slightly higher risk of cancer.

"There may be people out there who are taking the drug and who are going to have a harmful event caused by the drug and no benefit," he says. "So we're just trying to let people know that."


Healthy lifestyle changes can also help lower cholesterol

Wright says if patients were given more information from their doctor, many would likely not take the pill.

The UBC researchers have sent a bulletin to 12,000 B.C. doctors and pharmacists detailing their concerns.

The study reference is McCormack, J. Second Thoughts on Statins, UBC Reports [Vol 49] No. 10 (Oct 2, 2003)

*****
More...


Statins: Did Your Doctor Tell You..

NOTE FROM AUTHOR: Nothing in this article should be construed as medical advice. It is informational in purpose only and taken from numerous readily available articles written by physicians and researchers. For medical advice consult with an informed physician.
This is the information I would want any friend or family member on statins to be told by their physician. Extensive endnotes included. Don't just take my word for this stuff: your life and health may depend on it.


What are statins?
Statins, also called HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, are a class of drugs that are designed to interfere with the biosynthesis of cholesterol. They operate by interfering with one of the first steps in cholesterol synthesis: unfortunately they also inhibit the production of other intermediary substances needed by our body.1

A study of 10 major trials of statins concludes..,
"Do Statins Have a Role in Primary Prevention" is a review of 10 major statin trials conducted by the Therapeutics Initiative of the Department of Pharmacology & Therapeutics of the University of British Columbia. Here are their conclusions2:

"If cardiovascular serious adverse events are viewed in isolation, 71 primary prevention patients with cardiovascular risk factors have to be treated with a statin for 3 to 5 years to prevent one myocardial infarction or stroke."
"This cardiovascular benefit is not reflected in 2 measures of overall health impact, total mortality and total serious adverse events. Therefore, statins have not been shown to provide an overall health benefit in primary prevention trials."
In plain English, the study says that if you are taking statins to prevent myocardial infarction ("heart attack") or stroke:

Only 1 of 71 people (1.4%) will have a heart attack or stroke prevented every 3-5 years. [So, yes, statins do provide some protection against heart attacks.]
Despite protecting 1 person in 71, the death rate of those taking statins was just as high as those not taking statins: as a group, there was no increase in longevity.
By taking statins you are betting that you will be that 1 person in 71 who benefits, that the statins won't cause you to die by some other means and that any adverse effects caused by the drug (see below) will be not be too severe.
Joel M. Kaufman tells us this result of studies before 2003:
Long-term use of statins for primary prevention of heart disease produced a 1% greater risk of death over 10 years vs. placebo when the results of all the big controlled trials reported before 2000 were combined (Jackson PR et al. Statins for primary prevention: at what coronary risk is safety assured? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2001;52:439-46).


A note on relative vs. absolute risk
The statistics your doctor tells you about statins may sound different than the "1 in 71" figure above. Dr. Paul Rosch gives three ways to report the same result4:
1. "Over five years, patients taking this drug had 34% fewer heart attacks compared to controls who took a placebo. (Sounds pretty convincing)"
2. "Over five years only 2.7% of patients taking this drug had a heart attack compared to 4.1% taking a placebo. (Also not too bad)"
3. "If seventy-one people take this drug every day for five years it will prevent one of them from having a heart attack. However, there is no guarantee that you will be that person. (These odds are not very attractive)"
Item 1 uses "relative risk," item 2 uses "absolute risk" and item 3 tells you what the statistics really mean. ("Numbers never lie but you can lie with numbers.")

If you are a woman, elderly, or a man at lower cardiac risk...
According to Beatrice A. Golomb, MD, PhD, the leading researcher for the National Institutes of Health's study of the "side effects" of statins and a firm believer that statins can save lives: "However, benefit to survival with statins or other cholesterol-lowering agents has never been demonstrated in women (even those at high cardiac risk), in the older elderly, or in men at lower cardiac risk" .. . Let me repeat that: statins have never been shown to provide survival benefit for women, the older elderly, or men at lower cardiac risk. Never! No benefit ever shown for women at high risk for a heart attack. Never! .......

But statins reduce deaths from heart attack.
Many doctors and researchers believe that the reduction in mortality from coronary heart disease (recall the 1 in 71 figure) due to statins does not come from lowering cholesterol — it possibly comes from an anti-inflammatory effect.58

This is important because it means the drug is doing something it's designers did not intend. When we interfere with one small mechanism of the incredibly complex human body, especially for a substance needed by every cell of the body, there almost certainly will be unintended consequences and effects elsewhere; they are just as likely to be adverse as benign.

Just as with Hormone Replacement Therapy, drug companies have been touting these unanticipated effects as bonuses in preventing other diseases and as a reason to more widely prescribe statins. Prudence would seem to dictate that we be extremely careful about taking any drug until all of its effects are known, accounted for and thoroughly tested. I, personally, am very uncomfortable with this indication that drug companies are interfering with something that they don't thoroughly understand and expecting patients to pay them for the privilege of long-term testing.

What DOES cause heart disease?
Some current thinking and theories.

In considering coronary heart disease, one researcher points out that the real problem is not "atherosclerosis" - the thickening of the arteries. For the most part, arteries can safely thicken unless there is a rupture in the artery wall which causes "plaque" (an obstruction) to develop, causing conditions such as angina. When these plaques break loose, a clot can develop. A plaque is not enough - you also need the blood clot. It would appear that the usual process leading to death is damage to the artery wall, development of a plaque causing a blockage and development of a clot.60 However, it is also possible for a blood clot to cause death in the absence of any plaque.

So what causes the plaques to develop and what causes an increase in the possibility of a blood clot? Some physicians are pointing to "metabolic syndrome" as the culprit. Metabolic syndrome develops because of abnormal cortisol levels, which leads to insulin resistance and a number of metabolic abnormalities such as raised sugar levels, low HDL levels and raised triglycerides. Raised cortisol levels can come about from depression, use of certain drugs (steroids, for one), and stress. According to one doctor, "...likely the most common cause of metabolic syndrome is chronic stress". . .61

Stress causes cortisol to rise. No wonder cholesterol rises under stress: it is a precursor to the cortisol, its rise an effect, not a cause. Note the irony: how much stress are all of us subjected to by worrying about our cholesterol levels?
One study found that metabolic syndrome predicted heart disease independently of the usual risk factors (including high LDL cholesterol levels). Men with metabolic syndrome had a 76% greater risk of heart attack than those without the syndrome.62

One theory points to the fact that excess levels of the amino acid homocysteine in the blood can help cause LDL (low-density lipoproteins) to adhere to arterial tissue, building up plaques. Deficiencies in vitamins B6, B12 and folic acid can cause this condition.63

Inflammation can also cause blockages and can cause plaques to rupture, thus provoking a heart attack-causing clot. The vitamins that may help to reduce heart disease (conclusive proof is said to be lacking) include vitamins A, D and E (all fat-soluble vitamins) and vitamins C, folic acid, B6 and B12. Deficiencies of certain minerals may cause heart disease, namely magnesium, selenium, possibly
copper and zinc. Other nutrients that might help are coenzyme Q10 and the Omega-3 essential fatty acids. Note that the best sources for many of these nutritional substances are meat and saturated fat.

Over-consumption of certain foods might also help cause heart disease: for instance, too much polyunsaturated oil.64 Sugar might also be a culprit, both by increasing adhesiveness of blood platelets (making them more prone to clotting) and by increasing blood corticosteroid (a stress hormone) levels.65 Sugar may further be implicated because consuming it in quantity can help cause insulin-
resistance; the "carbohydrate theory of arteriosclerosis" notes that an increase in catabolic hormones (that cause substances to break down into simpler ones, as opposed to anabolic, which build molecules and tissue) in the bloodstream due to insulin resistance can damage arteries. There is some evidence that low-carbohydrate diets are preventative of heart disease.66

(Note: the above are abstracts from an article that provides a pretty good overview, with references, on the state of knowledge of the cholesterol theory of heart disease and the use of statins. For the full article see
http://home.earthlink.net/~mbabc/statin.pdf.)

Last edited by woodpecker : Thu, Apr-01-04 at 05:38.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Thu, Apr-01-04, 07:04
Angeline's Avatar
Angeline Angeline is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,423
 
Plan: Atkins (loosely)
Stats: -/-/- Female 60
BF:
Progress: 40%
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Default

Good stuff Woodpecker !!
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Thu, Apr-01-04, 07:11
adkpam's Avatar
adkpam adkpam is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,320
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 185/151/145 Female 67 inches
BF:
Progress: 85%
Location: Adirondack Mountains, NY
Default

What puzzles me is that the original studies on cholesterol were not "significant." There was some fiddling with the numbers to prove the cholesterol/heart trouble connection.
And even now there is dispute about what causes what.
In the meantime, these statin drugs can cause serious side effects.
It is ironic that as soon as low carb eating resulted in better cholesterol numbers, some "experts" started pointing out the weakness in the cholesterol connection. But this isn't mainstream knowledged, and certainly it seems that high triglycerides are just bad news.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Thu, Apr-01-04, 10:51
CindySue48's Avatar
CindySue48 CindySue48 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,816
 
Plan: Atkins/Protein Power
Stats: 256/179/160 Female 68 inches
BF:38.9/27.2/24.3
Progress: 80%
Location: Triangle NC
Default

Thanks Woodpecker.
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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Study: Fat-fighting drugs may raise cancer risk" gotbeer LC Research/Media 1 Mon, Feb-02-04 11:56
Against Statins Voyajer Cholesterol, Heart Disease 4 Sun, Oct-20-02 18:22
Diabetes drugs and cholesterol drugs (a statin and Lopid) that kill (over 400 dead) Voyajer LC Research/Media 0 Mon, Aug-12-02 20:54
Current and Potential Drugs for Treatment of Obesity-Endocrine Reviews Voyajer LC Research/Media 0 Mon, Jul-15-02 18:57
Study urges care in prescribing cholesterol drugs doreen T LC Research/Media 0 Mon, Jan-14-02 19:29


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 20:03.


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