Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54

Thread: Not On Statins? You Will Be. page 2

  1. #11
    Barnyard's Avatar
    Barnyard is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Huntington, WV
    Posts
    286
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    One thing I didn't expect is that it's true, statins are no longer a HUGE money maker for pharmaceutical industry, I would have thought this might play right into their hands.......oh well, they will find another way.......something will come out recommending that everyone should be on Prozac or Seroquel.....
    The life I have today is far better than I deserve.......

    M, 56, 6'0
    SW - 192
    CW - 175
    GW - 165-170

    Current addiction: ice cream (and sugar in general).....doing battle with it!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Western Washington
    Posts
    50
    Mother. Of. God! <Insert facepalm icon here> Why should we be so surprised, though? The sad thing is that all the sheeple will simply follow the Gub'ment guidelines without asking questions, getting progressively sicker and sicker and not understanding why. After all...Big Pharma isn't trying to cure us, they're creating customers.
    Heaviest: 1-22-2012 = 203 lbs, of being skinny fat, beginning PB
    Current: = 182 lbs. 14% body fat.
    Goal: 175 lbs. was made in April 2013.

  3. #13
    jammies's Avatar
    jammies is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,522
    Wait - when I read this study my understanding was that these recommendations will reduce the number of people on statins, not increase it.
    Using low lectin/nightshade free primal to control autoimmune arthritis. (And lost 50 lbs along the way )

    http://www.krispin.com/lectin.html

  4. #14
    Key Tones's Avatar
    Key Tones is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NW
    Posts
    66
    So when research that shows cholesterol levels are not correlated to heart attacks is finally accepted and known, other criteria to put people on statins will already be in place. Good grief.
    2005 Low Carb - lost @ 80 pounds slowly, avg 15 pounds per year
    2010 Paleo Diet
    2013 Stephan Guyenet Low Food Reward/Seth Roberts Shangri-La with MCT Oil

    Last 40 pounds lost with protein-sparing modified fasts, potato hack, and low food reward/Shangri-La Diet with MCT oil.

    Now down 120+ pounds lost

  5. #15
    yodiewan's Avatar
    yodiewan is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Kegas76 View Post
    Not on statins?

    Hahaha! Perfect. I was a huge Star Wars fan growing up. And I love your avatar (big Aqua Teen Hunger Force fan).
    Last edited by yodiewan; 11-13-2013 at 07:11 AM.

  6. #16
    Jacksson's Avatar
    Jacksson is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    281
    From another article.

    "They lower risk by lowering cholesterol." But he acknowledged that clinical studies had not been able to prove that lowering cholesterol to specific targets translated into lower risk that a blockage would halt blood flow to the brain or heart.

    From yet another article.

    They include eating four to five servings of fruit every day, another 4-5 servings of vegetables, eating whole grains and limiting meat, fish and poultry to 6 ounces or less a day.

    And these are from the original article I read.

    Roughly half the cholesterol panel members have financial ties to makers of heart drugs, but panel leaders said no one with industry connections could vote on the recommendations.

    "It is practically impossible to find a large group of outside experts in the field who have no relationships to industry," said Dr. George Mensah of the heart institute. He called the guidelines "a very important step forward" based on solid evidence, and said the public should trust them.

    And this gem.

    Most cholesterol is made by the liver, so diet changes have a limited effect on it.


    The only thing I find good about the logic is that they are no longer focussing on numbers. I have always felt they picked arbitrary numbers to indicate a certain risk or condition but were adamant about that number. Then the number would change. The idea that we should treat people based on risk factors (maybe we should work on eliminating them) instead of numbers is a move in a positive direction but to come right out and say it is a good thing that we are going to give more people drugs is unbelievable.

  7. #17
    MEversbergII's Avatar
    MEversbergII is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Lexington Park, MD
    Posts
    2,124
    Guys, isn't it weird we evolved with an organ that's dedicated to killing us with arterycloggingcholesterol? How great we have the technology to shut that down!

    M.

  8. #18
    MsSmith's Avatar
    MsSmith is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    1,055
    I was taking a statin when I had insurance and when I informed my PCP that I was about to lose my insurance and couldn't afford the rx anymore he said "just take fish oil, then."

    I will not take a statin (or an anti-depressant) ever again. If I am required to take a statin (if it is a condition of the ACA and if I have to enroll in the ACA), then I will throw them in the garbage. I haven't heard that people enrolled in the ACA will be required to take any rx's specifically, I'm just saying...
    Paleo Diet: 8-25-13 Wt: 185 BF% 27
    Primal Diet (Lower Fat/Carb): 9-27, Wt: 176.4
    Potato Hack Diet (Rotation): 11-12, Wt: 171.2
    Primal Diet (LF/C): 1-23-14, Wt: 159.6
    CW: 158 GW: 130 CBF%: 24.38
    48 - 5'7.5"

    "What a wonderful thought it is that some of the best days of our lives haven't happened yet." ~ A.F.

    "Exercising should be about rewarding the body with endorphins and strength, not about punishing your body for what you've eaten." ~ Unknown

  9. #19
    dragonjax's Avatar
    dragonjax is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    1,315
    Read my lips: No new prescriptions!

    No statins for me. Period. I changed doctors when my last one told me that, among other things, my HDL **was too high.**
    F, 43 years old, 4 feet 11.5 inches (yes, that half inch matters!)

    **First-ever 5K race 11/28/13: 37 minutes, 18+ seconds, no stopping**

  10. #20
    Kegas76's Avatar
    Kegas76 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by darylb View Post
    The only thing I find good about the logic is that they are no longer focussing on numbers. I have always felt they picked arbitrary numbers to indicate a certain risk or condition but were adamant about that number. Then the number would change. The idea that we should treat people based on risk factors (maybe we should work on eliminating them) instead of numbers is a move in a positive direction but to come right out and say it is a good thing that we are going to give more people drugs is unbelievable.
    The numbers still matter as they are used in the 10 year risk factor. They are just no longer the goal posts.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •