Anybody Take Statins to Lower Cholesterol?

No adverse side effects for me but since I started on them my bllod test have shown a drop in my blood sugar levels that was approaching Type II Diabetes. I have just had another blood test so hopefully it continues to fall.
9m people is a lot of people to be on statins. I am not against some people taking them, but it seems a big chunk of the older adult population - 1 in 3?

Its the new blood pressure tablet. They have everybody on those so have to start flogging something else;)
Per the NHS site....
After your NHS Health Check, you'll be given your cardiovascular risk of developing a heart or circulation problem (such as heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes or kidney disease) over the next 10 years.

The healthcare professional may describe this risk as low, moderate or high:

low – you have less than a 10% chance of a heart or circulation problem in the next 10 years
moderate – you have a 10% to 20% chance of a heart or circulation problem in the next 10 years
high – you have more than a 20% chance of a heart or circulation problem in the next 10 years
The cost to savings of statins i believe is huge. There's always a company making money on stuff but current understanding would say the nhs is saving too.
I need to take Astorvastin, a cholesterol medication, and my reading is 2.2 so I suppose it works for me. However my sister in law is a retired GP and would never prescribe to patients when in practise as she reckoned that the studies that were done were inadequate and not proven. I suppose you pay your money, and take your choice.

AB there is some truth in your sis in laws remarks. The research was not great but worst of all the deciding panel in the US was made up of at least 6 in the pay of the Drug Cos .................. out of 8 !

A very high percentage of cholesterol is used immediately on production 85% +

The rest is stored in the liver. The trigger for reactivation is insulin. It is therefore possible to argue that a major reduction in dietry starches and sugars might well get similar reductions
This is my cautionary tale, I'm not sure where to start and want to keep it brief, but.... Last year I had a quadruple heart by-pass. No heart attack, no heart problems, normal cholesterol, good blood pressure, good health, not bad fitness, etc.

I was turning 60 and decided to have a regular check up of everything I could get my hands on, and other people could get their hands on ;). My Cholesterol was in the 5's so I'd been on statins 10mgs with no issue. I went the whole hog on tests inc Heart ECG, ECG stress test (treadmill). Cardiologist & GP said I was in great health and keep up the new fitness drive I'd been on with swimming and running. All perfect health for my age.

Then a guy in the pub said it was all bollox, statins are just a racket and the most important thing to do was to get a calcium score. A few days later a mate said he'd heard the same thing from his GP. A calcium score is a 5 min CT scan (Xray) of the chest to look for calcium build up in the arteries which is the best indicator of blockages forming. I asked my GP for a referral to get one and she was a bit mystified and said I didn't need it & no-one did that & that it was expensive (about the same cost as filling your car up with petrol). I insisted & off I went to the radiology place.

The scan found that my calcium score was through the roof - 17,000 when it should be under 100. The GP referred me back to the cardiologist who went into a spin, I was rushed back for an angiogram where they put dye in the blood and CT scan for the flows. I had 2 x 90% blockages and 2 x 80% blockages. He said he wasn't sure how my heart was functioning and I wouldn't have lasted the year out. I was to stop anything strenuous and within a week I was in for the by-pass operation.

When in hospital waiting for the op just for fun I did the Heart Foundation risk score. The usual cholesterol, blood pressure, alcohol, fitness blah blah (no mention of calcium) and it said I had zero risk of heart problems... Complete bollox. This is the story I'm spreading. The quick calcium score recommended in the pub saved my life.

I have no idea about health or things medicinal but I do know that GP's are overly focussed on flogging statins. The cholesterol score is made up by the Pharmaceutical industry to get the complex cardiovascular system defined by one simple mark out of 10 which then points to one simple drug. Ridiculous if you stop and think about it. Cholesterol is one indicator your body produces to highlight that your diet is not good. Surpressing one indicator with a drug is obviously not the full story.

For me I knew from the normal ECG tests that my heart or engine was running beautifully, my petrol wasn't great but OK with statins, however there was no test recommended to say I was about to run out of petrol. That's what the calcium score can show and well worth getting it checked. I know I am being the bloke in the pub here but that's what saved my life and might save someone else's...

I won't go on about how to reduce the calcium build up but this book explains and I'm sure you can google stuff. Basically you need to take vitamin K2 which is a vital vitamin lost in modern food production. But that's another story.