Statins -Big No-No? page

[shoshin]

I expect that statins are verboten (or at least severely looked down upon), but is there any actual DANGER in taking a low dose while using the Primal approach? I realize that, in theory, one should not need a statin on the appropriate diet, but...I'm just sayin'....

[peril]

You'd need a clinical trial to establish whether or not there was danger. noone's going to do that trial. The best we can say is that studies have shown that the range of 200-240mg/dL for total cholesterol appears to result in lowest all-cause mortality, however no interventions to change TC have proven beneficial except in very limited cases (middle-aged men who've already had a vascular event)

[magicmerl]

Every cell in your body needs cholesterol. Statins disrupt your body so that it can't make cholesterol.

This seems equivalent to you asking if having a section of your bowel removed is *really* bad for you. Just a little bit? Sometimes people need to have a section of bowel removed. But it's in no way desirable and you really should have your bowels working properly and completey instead.

There's a very narrow band of people who benefit from a statin. Basically if you have an inflammation ravaged body, lots of cholesterol buildup in your arteries attempting to repair the damage (and inadvertently blocking said arteries), and you have already had multiple heart attacks. Then you should take a statin as it's better than the alternative (death due to imminent heart attack).

Taking a statin is solving the wrong problem.