Cholesterol monitor
View Full Version : Cholesterol monitor
I decided to discontinue Lipitor after taking it for 1 yr. 2
months. It took me a bit of time to decide (for myself) that
the hearty stomach spasms I was having happened when I took
Aciphex at bedtime with Lipitor. When I took Aciphex in the
morning and Lipitor at night, I did not have the spasms. One
might ask why I didn’t continue taking Lipitor and Aciphex
separately. However, my thinking is that any drug that will
cause me spasms of this magnitude is a drug that I am not
interested in continuing. In fairness, my doctor did check
to see if there was any reaction between the two drugs, but
none was listed.
My doctor has now prescribed Zocor for me (after a week down-
time from Lipitor). I have done my homework on side effects
of Zocor in the meantime. My doctor is not a believer in
tests; so she will not prescribe a blood test until 2 months
after I have started Zocor.
In April 2003 my cholesterol was 254; then in January 2004,
after taking Lipitor, it was 131. This January blood test
was not done at her initiation, but only done as a result
of a lost blood test by a yearly physical. She would not
have been doing another blood test until April 2004, but
none was done as the January 2004 was available. She
believes that lipid tests should only be done once a year
because cholestrol takes so long to change. When I
suggested buying a cholesterol monitor, she said that I
would be throwing my money away.
I cannot change doctors at this time as I am dependent upon
her for other things. The last time I changed, it took a
while to find another doctor because doctors don’t seem to
take over-age patients.
My question: Has anyone used a cholesterol monitor and can
give me advice regarding its use. Also any other comments
will be helpful to me.
Thanks so very much.
Dee
"Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message
news:10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com...
> I decided to discontinue Lipitor after taking it for 1
> yr. 2 months. It took me a bit of time to decide (for
> myself) that the hearty stomach spasms I was having
> happened when I took Aciphex at bedtime with Lipitor.
> When I took Aciphex in the morning and Lipitor at night,
> I did not have the spasms. One might ask why I didn’t
> continue taking Lipitor and Aciphex separately. However,
> my thinking is that any drug that will cause me spasms of
> this magnitude is a drug that I am not interested in
> continuing. In fairness, my doctor did check to see if
> there was any reaction between the two drugs, but none
> was listed.
>
>
>
> My doctor has now prescribed Zocor for me (after a week
> down-time from Lipitor). I have done my homework on side
> effects of Zocor in the meantime. My doctor is not a
> believer in tests; so she will not prescribe a blood test
> until 2 months after I have started Zocor.
>
>
>
> In April 2003 my cholesterol was 254; then in January
> 2004, after taking Lipitor, it was 131. This January
> blood test was not done at her initiation, but only done
> as a result of a lost blood test by a yearly physical.
> She would not have been doing another blood test until
> April 2004, but none was done as the January 2004 was
> available. She believes that lipid tests should only be
> done once a year because cholestrol takes so long to
> change. When I suggested buying a cholesterol monitor,
> she said that I would be throwing my money away.
>
>
>
> I cannot change doctors at this time as I am dependent
> upon her for other things. The last time I changed, it
> took a while to find another doctor because doctors don’t
> seem to take over-age patients.
>
>
>
> My question: Has anyone used a cholesterol monitor and can
> give me advice regarding its use. Also any other comments
> will be helpful to me.
>
>
>
> Thanks so very much.
>
> Dee
>
>
>
>
>
>
I don't know the answer. But here is another question. Do
you need a prescription to get a blood test? I don't know
the answer to that either. But I suspect at some places, no,
if you are willing to pay for it.
Bill
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:22:09 -0400, "Dee Randall"
<deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote:
>I decided to discontinue Lipitor after taking it for 1 yr.
>2 months. It took me a bit of time to decide (for myself)
>that the hearty stomach spasms I was having happened when I
>took Aciphex at bedtime with Lipitor. When I took Aciphex
>in the morning and Lipitor at night, I did not have the
>spasms. One might ask why I didn’t continue taking Lipitor
>and Aciphex separately. However, my thinking is that any
>drug that will cause me spasms of this magnitude is a drug
>that I am not interested in continuing. In fairness, my
>doctor did check to see if there was any reaction between
>the two drugs, but none was listed.
>
>
>
>My doctor has now prescribed Zocor for me (after a week down-
>time from Lipitor). I have done my homework on side effects
>of Zocor in the meantime. My doctor is not a believer in
>tests; so she will not prescribe a blood test until 2
>months after I have started Zocor.
Perhaps you mean she's not a believer in excessive tests?
Having blood chemistry 6-8 weeks out from starting is not at
all unusual. Fairly standard, actually.
>
> In April 2003 my cholesterol was 254; then in January
> 2004, after taking Lipitor, it was 131. This January blood
> test was not done at her initiation, but only done as a
> result of a lost blood test by a yearly physical. She
> would not have been doing another blood test until April
> 2004, but none was done as the January 2004 was available.
> She believes that lipid tests should only be done once a
> year because cholestrol takes so long to change. When I
> suggested buying a cholesterol monitor, she said that I
> would be throwing my money away.
I would tend to agree. Obviously, you repsonded well to
Lipitor as far as lowering cholesterol. Blood profiles flag
items outside of the reference range, so if blood chemistry
shows, for example, elevated liver functions (ALT & AST)
then it should be drawn more than once per year - maybe two
or three times to track elevations or decrease. Otherwise,
once a year is normal.
L.
>
>I cannot change doctors at this time as I am dependent upon
>her for other things. The last time I changed, it took a
>while to find another doctor because doctors don’t seem to
>take over-age patients.
>
>
>
>My question: Has anyone used a cholesterol monitor and can
>give me advice regarding its use. Also any other comments
>will be helpful to me.
>
>
>
>Thanks so very much.
>
>Dee
"Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message news:<10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com>...
> My question: Has anyone used a cholesterol monitor and can
> give me advice regarding its use. Also any other comments
> will be helpful to me.
> Thanks so very much.
>
> Dee
Dee
My first cholesterol test after starting Lipitor was done on
the morning of the third day of medicating. My level had
dropped more than 40 percent. This was a pharmacy in-house
test, done spur of the moment, before my usual 11 a.m
breakfast. The next morning that reading was confirmed by
proper laboratory blood work, fasting 14 hours.
CK and liver function tests are not good diagnostic tests
for statin induced myopathy. Read the following. Dr.
Phillips is the primary researcher in statin induced
mitochondrial myopathy.
http://www.impostertrial.com/physician.htm "what is known
about statin associated myopathy with normal ck?"
Why are you lowering your cholesterol? It has not been
proven effective in women. You may want to print this out
and take it to your doctor. It is from
www.medicalconsumers.org. (It's not published yet so can't
give url).
There is another good article for your doctor at this url:
http://www.medicalconsumers.org/pages/THEWOMENANDHEARTDISEA-
SEAWARENESSCAMPAIGN.html
DO CHOLESTEROL-LOWERING DRUGS BENEFIT WOMEN?
By Maryann Napoli
Many doctors have come to believe that the cholesterol-
lowering drugs called statins (Lipitor, Zocor, Pravachol,
Mevacor, Crestor) are safer than low-dose daily aspirin.
That becomes apparent whenever statins are featured in the
media as a wonder drug for the prevention of heart disease.
In fact, there's a growing consensus among cardiologists
that all adults should take a statin whether or not they
are at high risk.
Yet women have been underrepresented in the major clinical
trials in which people with and without heart disease were
randomly assigned to take a statin or a placebo (dummy
pill) every day for several years. Women made up less than
one-third of all the study participants. Put that together
with the fact that women under the age of 65 years have a
low rate of heart attack and stroke. Add this disturbing
bit of news from University of British Columbia researchers
who conducted a thorough review of the five prevention
clinical trials: only two of the five trials released their
data regarding the serious adverse effects* suffered by the
study participants who were taking statins. Working with
what they had, that is, the data from only two of the
statin trials, the researchers found that statins did not
prolong life for men or women. Worse, the benefit of taking
statins (a reduced rate of non-fatal heart attacks and
stroke) was offset by an increase in the serious adverse
events. Until all the statin trials release their serious
adverse effects data, the public will not know whether
these drugs are safer than low-dose aspirin.
The sparse information that people receive about
cholesterol treatment was unintentionally but aptly
illustrated recently by one of the country's top medical
journals. The Journal of the American Medical Association,
or JAMA, regularly publishes a "patient page," which
amounts to a layman's translation of one of the more
important papers published in each issue.
The May 12, 2004 issue of JAMA contained a review of all
trials in which women with high cholesterol had been
randomly assigned to take a drug or a placebo. (Most of
the trials involved a statin.) Judith M.E. Walsh, MD, MPH,
and Michael Pignone, MD, MPH conducted the review. Their
conclusion: For women without heart disease, drugs did not
prolong life or reduce the odds of dying of heart disease.
The drug may reduce non-fatal cardiac events (heart
attack, stroke, etc.), but "current evidence is
insufficient to determine this conclusively." For women
with heart disease, drugs do not affect mortality but will
reduce non-fatal events.
Turn to the patient page in the same issue of JAMA, and
none of this important information can be found. Instead,
six sentences are devoted to statins explaining how they
work; the need for regular lab tests to check for statin-
induced liver damage; the possibility of muscle damage,
etc. The reader will find nothing about the drugs'
effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) in preventing or
treating heart disease. The rest of the page was given
over to the usual information about exercise and smoking
cessation. Worse, it has outdated information about the
importance of a low-fat diet; despite the fact that a
review of all relevant studies found that it has little
effect on heart disease prevention (see below). The
patient page is intended for physicians to photocopy and
give to their patients.
And what about the unreported serious adverse effects of
statin drugs? Not a mention in the patient page, of
course, but there it was in the "comments" section of
the JAMA article. At the end of their review, Drs. Walsh
and Pignone discuss possible explanations for why
statins do not prolong life for women with heart
disease. The drugs reduce the odds of dying of heart
disease, but that benefit is canceled by a higher rate
of death from other causes.
"Possible explanations include chance, the limitation that
not all studies reported both heart disease and total
mortality... Another potential explanation might be an
increase in a competing cause of mortality, for example, an
increase in hemorrhagic stroke with cholesterol-lowering
therapy. However, information on the causes of non-heart
disease mortality is not available for all the trials, so
this possibility cannot be proven. [emphasis added]
Publication of cause-specific mortality for many of the
larger trials could help to clarify the association between
cholesterol-lowering therapy and total mortality."
There you have it, the full story is not yet available on
the safety of cholesterol-lowering drugs, though these
trials were published years ago. Traditionally, researchers
design trials to answer specific questions. In this case:
Does this drug reduce the rate of heart attacks and strokes
or the rate of cardiovascular death? But the drug itself
might cause deaths from other causes, and as Drs. Walsh and
Pignone wrote, not all studies reported deaths from other
causes. These concerns are relevant to men, as well.
As for the doctors who say that statins are safer than
aspirin, they might one day be proven correct. But it took
more than 100 years to get the full story on aspirin. (In
fact, there might be more to learn.) Gastrointestinal
bleeding and rarely, hemorrhagic stroke are both
potentially fatal side effects of chronic use of aspirin,
even at low doses. And the dangers of giving aspirin to
children who have flu or chicken pox have only been known
to be associated with the rare risk of Reye's syndrome for
less than 30 years.
For More Information:
-Go to the Web site, sponsored by the above-mentioned
University of British Columbia researchers (www.ti.ubc.ca).
In the archives, locate Therapeutics Letter No. 48 "Do
statins have a role in primary prevention?
-Go to the archives of the British Medical Journal at
www.bmj.com for the review of all studies assessing the
heart disease prevention benefit of reduced dietary fat
intake. Find the March 31, 2001 issue featuring "Dietary fat
intake and prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic
review" by Lee Hooper et al.
--
*Serious adverse effects are any untoward medical occurrences that
result in death, are life-threatening, require hospitalization or
prolongation of hospitalization, or results in persistent or
significant liability.
Maryann Napoli is the associate director of the Center for Medical
Consumers in New York City.
"Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message news:<10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com>...
> I decided to discontinue Lipitor after taking it for 1 yr.
> 2 months. It took me a bit of time to decide (for myself)
> that the hearty stomach spasms I was having happened when
> I took Aciphex at bedtime with Lipitor.
In my experience the spasms were caused by the Lipitor. I
was taking no other drugs at the time. I continued taking
Lipitor in spite of dreadful side effects, including
myopathy, when after 7 months I was diagnosed with
pancreatitis, swollen liver and gall bladder disease--all
with normal CK.
I could not sleep without being in a sitting position
because of acid reflux and had to stop eating around 4 p.m.
in order to recline for a few hours at midnight. I suffered
insomnia, not sleeping more than 3 hours a night, in two
shifts. I also developed a helicobactor pylori ulcer, which
I had never had an before statins nor have I had since
stopping statins.
These terrible gastrointestinal side effects of Lipitor (on
Pfizer's side effects list, not shown to be caused by
Lipitor in clinical trials but also not shown NOT TO BE
CAUSED by placebo or incidence) went away within a few weeks
to a month of stopping Lipitor.
> My doctor has now prescribed Zocor for me (after a week
> down-time from Lipitor). I have done my homework on side
> effects of Zocor in the meantime. My doctor is not a
> believer in tests; so she will not prescribe a blood test
> until 2 months after I have started Zocor.
Side effects of all Zocor and all statins may include memory
loss, language difficulties, thinking and learning problems
and transient global amnesia. Read here for the story of
former US astronaut and flight surgeon Duane Graveline MD
who experienced these side effects while on Lipitor:
http://www.spacedoc.net (http://www.spacedoc.net/)
Another recent story on statin induced memory loss from CBS
News: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/24/eveningnews-
/main619351.shtml
She believes
> that lipid tests should only be done once a year because
> cholestrol takes so long to change.
Cholesterol did not take long to change in me.
Zee
"Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message news:<10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com>...
Correction: meant to say, "...not shown NOT TO BE CAUSED
by Lipitor.)
One other side effect I had, from Baycol, which has not gone
away is permanent vision damage. This type of vision damage
which I suffered was shown in the clincial trials for
Baycol, and the information suppressed. The information and
came out in a Baycol trial after the drug had been recalled
on August 8 2001.
Zee
>I don't know the answer. But here is another question. Do
>you need a prescription to get a blood test? I don't know
>the answer to that either. But I suspect at some places,
>no, if you are willing to pay for it.
>
>Bill
>
The answer is Yes, you do need a prescription.
L.
"listener" <listener@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:40ce070e.12214515@news.rcn.com...
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:22:09 -0400, "Dee Randall"
> <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote:
>
She believes
> >that lipid tests should only be done once a year because
> >cholestrol takes
so
> >long to change.
> I would tend to agree. Obviously, you repsonded well to
> Lipitor as far as lowering cholesterol. Blood profiles
> flag items outside of the reference range, so if blood
> chemistry shows, for example, elevated liver functions
> (ALT & AST) then it should be drawn more than once per
> year - maybe two or three times to track elevations or
> decrease. Otherwise, once a year is normal.
Thank you for your response.
Zocor.com says
“It is recommended that liver function tests be performed
before the initiation of treatment, and thereafter when
clinically indicated.”
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I was explained that the liver
portion of the cholesterol test is included in the
cholesterol blood test. (I realize that this liver part of
the test would not be included as a result on a cholesterol
monitor). She believes that this liver results portion of
the test is not needed either at the beginning of
prescribing lipitor or zocor. If it is not taken at the
beginning, how would one know how much it has risen since
the beginning.
Thanks
It seems to me I heard somewhere that listener wrote in article
<40ce070e.12214515@news.rcn.com>:
>On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:22:09 -0400, "Dee Randall"
><deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote:
>>I decided to discontinue Lipitor after taking it for 1
>>yr. 2 months. It took me a bit of time to decide (for
>>myself) that the hearty stomach spasms I was having
>>happened when I took Aciphex at bedtime with Lipitor.
>>When I took Aciphex in the morning and Lipitor at night,
>>I did not have the spasms. One might ask why I didn’t
>>continue taking Lipitor and Aciphex separately. However,
>>my thinking is that any drug that will cause me spasms of
>>this magnitude is a drug that I am not interested in
>>continuing. In fairness, my doctor did check to see if
>>there was any reaction between the two drugs, but none
>>was listed.
>>My doctor has now prescribed Zocor for me (after a week
>>down-time from Lipitor). I have done my homework on side
>>effects of Zocor in the meantime. My doctor is not a
>>believer in tests; so she will not prescribe a blood test
>>until 2 months after I have started Zocor.
>Perhaps you mean she's not a believer in excessive tests?
>Having blood chemistry 6-8 weeks out from starting is not
>at all unusual. Fairly standard, actually.
That's about the schedule my first cardiologist started me
on. All the others (five so far in six years--I wear 'em out
<G>*) gradually lengthened the interval when the liver
results kept coming back normal. I'm now up to six month
intervals, which I suspect will be the maximum.
Considering the importance of liver function and the fact
that so many things affect the liver ISTM any good doctor
and any good patient would want to watch carefully for any
unexpected or undesirable effects from newly prescribed
medications. I hope Dee's doctor is following that plan.
* Actually HMO related reasons.
--
Don donkirk@covad.net
"Zee" <zwalanga@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e5f4a9c2.0406141801.12ecdff0@posting.google.com...
> "Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message
news:<10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com>...
>
> > I decided to discontinue Lipitor after taking it for 1
> > yr. 2 months. It took me a bit of time to decide (for
> > myself) that the hearty stomach
spasms
> > I was having happened when I took Aciphex at bedtime
> > with Lipitor.
>
>
> In my experience the spasms were caused by the Lipitor. I
> was taking no other drugs at the time. I continued taking
> Lipitor in spite of dreadful side effects, including
> myopathy, when after 7 months I was diagnosed with
> pancreatitis, swollen liver and gall bladder disease--all
> with normal CK.
>
> I could not sleep without being in a sitting position
> because of acid reflux and had to stop eating around 4
> p.m. in order to recline for a few hours at midnight. I
> suffered insomnia, not sleeping more than 3 hours a night,
> in two shifts. I also developed a helicobactor pylori
> ulcer, which I had never had an before statins nor have I
> had since stopping statins.
>
> These terrible gastrointestinal side effects of Lipitor
> (on Pfizer's side effects list, not shown to be caused by
> Lipitor in clinical trials but also not shown NOT TO BE
> CAUSED by placebo or incidence) went away within a few
> weeks to a month of stopping Lipitor.
>
>
> > My doctor has now prescribed Zocor for me (after a week
> > down-time from Lipitor). I have done my homework on side
> > effects of Zocor in the
meantime.
> > My doctor is not a believer in tests; so she will not
> > prescribe a blood
test
> > until 2 months after I have started Zocor.
>
>
> Side effects of all Zocor and all statins may include
> memory loss, language difficulties, thinking and learning
> problems and transient global amnesia. Read here for the
> story of former US astronaut and flight surgeon Duane
> Graveline MD who experienced these side effects while on
> Lipitor:
>
> http://www.spacedoc.net (http://www.spacedoc.net/)
>
> Another recent story on statin induced memory loss from
> CBS News: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/24/eveni-
> ngnews/main619351.shtml
>
>
>
> She believes
> > that lipid tests should only be done once a year because
> > cholestrol
takes so
> > long to change.
>
>
> Cholesterol did not take long to change in me.
Zee
Thank you, Zee and others: I feel I'm getting a double
message to my query to my doctor. She says it takes a long
time to change -- 3 months at least -- when giving an answer
to whether a test should be done before taking Zocor, but
then she switches to the answer: you have to start taking
taking Zocor in about a week or your cholesterol will go up.
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
<e5f4a9c2.0406141806.3a727783@posting.google.com>:
>"Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message
>news:<10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com>...
>Correction: meant to say, "...not shown NOT TO BE CAUSED by
>Lipitor.)
That isn't a logical statement. You can't prove a negative,
scientifically or logically. What you can prove is that X
causes Y, or that X has not been shown to cause Y, but you
can't say that X has been shown NOT to cause Y because you
will never test all occurrences of X. Maybe once in several
million tries it WILL cause Y.
--
Don donkirk@covad.net
>"Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message
>news:10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com...
>> I decided to discontinue Lipitor after taking it for 1
>> yr. 2 months. It took me a bit of time to decide (for
>> myself) that the hearty stomach spasms I was having
>> happened when I took Aciphex at bedtime with Lipitor.
>> When I took Aciphex in the morning and Lipitor at night,
>> I did not have the spasms. One might ask why I didn’t
>> continue taking Lipitor and Aciphex separately. However,
>> my thinking is that any drug that will cause me spasms of
>> this magnitude is a drug that I am not interested in
>> continuing. In fairness, my doctor did check to see if
>> there was any reaction between the two drugs, but none
>> was listed.
>>
>>
>>
>> My doctor has now prescribed Zocor for me (after a week
>> down-time from Lipitor). I have done my homework on side
>> effects of Zocor in the meantime. My doctor is not a
>> believer in tests; so she will not prescribe a blood test
>> until 2 months after I have started Zocor.
>>
>>
>>
>> In April 2003 my cholesterol was 254; then in January
>> 2004, after taking Lipitor, it was 131. This January
>> blood test was not done at her initiation, but only done
>> as a result of a lost blood test by a yearly physical.
>> She would not have been doing another blood test until
>> April 2004, but none was done as the January 2004 was
>> available. She believes that lipid tests should only be
>> done once a year because cholestrol takes so long to
>> change. When I suggested buying a cholesterol monitor,
>> she said that I would be throwing my money away.
>>
>>
>>
>> I cannot change doctors at this time as I am dependent
>> upon her for other things. The last time I changed, it
>> took a while to find another doctor because doctors don’t
>> seem to take over-age patients.
>>
>>
>>
>> My question: Has anyone used a cholesterol monitor and
>> can give me advice regarding its use. Also any other
>> comments will be helpful to me.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks so very much.
>>
>> Dee
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>I don't know the answer. But here is another question. Do
>you need a prescription to get a blood test? I don't know
>the answer to that either. But I suspect at some places,
>no, if you are willing to pay for it.
>
>Bill
>
You can order your own blood work at reasonable cost from
www.healthcheckusa.com
"listener" <listener@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:40ce0c2e.13526500@news.rcn.com...
>
> >I don't know the answer. But here is another question. Do
> >you need a prescription to get a blood test? I don't know
> >the answer to that either.
But
> >I suspect at some places, no, if you are willing to pay
> >for it.
> >
> >Bill
> >
>
> The answer is Yes, you do need a prescription.
I saw on this page
http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/simva.htm that "suggested"
by the words Blood Testing Direct - No... as a lead-in to
click on www.directlabs.com which came up as this page:
http://www.directlabs.com/testtypes.php/?source=kanoodleCT
as well as and also gave this but I for some reason the top
information on my page is missing, which is normally NOT
missing. http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/simva.htm
But I couldn't tell if there were some sites that did
offer testing without a doctor's prescription OR a doctor
to send it to.
I note that Costco does cholesterol testing occasionally,
but I've not availed myself of these to know whether they
need a Doctor's OK or not. Does anyone know?
>
>
> L.
"listener" <listener@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:40ce0c2e.13526500@news.rcn.com...
>
> >I don't know the answer. But here is another question. Do
> >you need a prescription to get a blood test? I don't know
> >the answer to that either.
But
> >I suspect at some places, no, if you are willing to pay
> >for it.
> >
> >Bill
> >
>
> The answer is Yes, you do need a prescription.
>
>
> L.
How do you know this to be true? Not that I know the
reverse. It just does not make sense to me. For example, you
can get your own CAT scan and finger prick blood sugar test
without a prescription.
Bill
Bill
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:32:02 -0400, "Dee Randall"
<deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote:
>
>"listener" <listener@nospam.net> wrote in message
>news:40ce070e.12214515@news.rcn.com...
>> On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 14:22:09 -0400, "Dee Randall"
>> <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote:
>>
> She believes
>> >that lipid tests should only be done once a year because
>> >cholestrol takes
>so
>> >long to change.
>
>> I would tend to agree. Obviously, you repsonded well to
>> Lipitor as far as lowering cholesterol. Blood profiles
>> flag items outside of the reference range, so if blood
>> chemistry shows, for example, elevated liver functions
>> (ALT & AST) then it should be drawn more than once per
>> year - maybe two or three times to track elevations or
>> decrease. Otherwise, once a year is normal.
>
>Thank you for your response.
>
>Zocor.com says
>
>“It is recommended that liver function tests be performed
>before the initiation of treatment, and thereafter when
>clinically indicated.”
>
>
>Perhaps I'm wrong, but I was explained that the liver
>portion of the cholesterol test is included in the
>cholesterol blood test. (I realize that this liver part of
>the test would not be included as a result on a cholesterol
>monitor). She believes that this liver results portion of
>the test is not needed either at the beginning of
>prescribing lipitor or zocor. If it is not taken at the
>beginning, how would one know how much it has risen since
>the beginning.
You're already past "the beginning", having taken Lipitor
for some time and now Zorcor. When you have your next
bloodwork done ask if the liver function results are within
normal range and proceed from there.
L.
Don Kirkman <donkirk@covad.net> wrote in message news:<dmouc01q95j5qbf8os2nqre8aa1a770lfi@4ax.com>...
> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
> <e5f4a9c2.0406141806.3a727783@posting.google.com>:
>
> >"Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message
> >news:<10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com>...
>
> >Correction: meant to say, "...not shown NOT TO BE CAUSED
> >by Lipitor.)
>
> That isn't a logical statement. You can't prove a
> negative, scientifically or logically. What you can prove
> is that X causes Y, or that X has not been shown to cause
> Y, but you can't say that X has been shown NOT to cause Y
> because you will never test all occurrences of X. Maybe
> once in several million tries it WILL cause Y.
> That isn't a logical statement.
Makes perfect sense to me.
> Maybe once in several million tries it WILL cause Y.
Yes exactly; that's the once I was thinking of.
Zee
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 20:36:59 GMT, listener@nospam.net (listener)
wrote:
>
>>I don't know the answer. But here is another question. Do
>>you need a prescription to get a blood test? I don't know
>>the answer to that either. But I suspect at some places,
>>no, if you are willing to pay for it.
>>
>>Bill
>>
>
>The answer is Yes, you do need a prescription.
>
>
>L.
No, you don't.
>"listener" <listener@nospam.net> wrote in message
>news:40ce0c2e.13526500@news.rcn.com...
>>
>> >I don't know the answer. But here is another question.
>> >Do you need a prescription to get a blood test? I don't
>> >know the answer to that either.
>But
>> >I suspect at some places, no, if you are willing to pay
>> >for it.
>> >
>> >Bill
>> >
>>
>> The answer is Yes, you do need a prescription.
>>
>>
>> L.
>
>How do you know this to be true? Not that I know the
>reverse. It just does not make sense to me. For example,
>you can get your own CAT scan and finger prick blood sugar
>test without a prescription.
>
>Bill
>
>Bill
>
>
I called a few labs. They all said blood chemistry has to be
done with a prescription.
I can understand finger-prick cholesterol and blood sugar
kits but why would someone want to get their own CAT scan?
L.
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:16:38 -0400, "Dee Randall"
<deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote:
>I saw on this page
>http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/simva.htm that
>"suggested" by the words Blood Testing Direct - No... as a
>lead-in to click on www.directlabs.com which came up as
>this page:
>http://www.directlabs.com/testtypes.php/?source=kanoodleCT
>as well as and also gave this but I for some reason the top
>information on my page is missing, which is normally NOT
>missing. http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/simva.htm
>
>But I couldn't tell if there were some sites that did
>offer testing without a doctor's prescription OR a doctor
>to send it to.
>
>I note that Costco does cholesterol testing occasionally,
>but I've not availed myself of these to know whether they
>need a Doctor's OK or not. Does anyone know?
>>
I found
http://www.bloodworksusa.com/
which apparently does not require a doctor's script for
bloodwork. They don't accept insurance claims. I guess there
are other online "Labs" like this. Who knew? Still, I prefer
to go through my doctor.
L.
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in article
<e5f4a9c2.0406151846.49288c18@posting.google.com>:
>Don Kirkman <donkirk@covad.net> wrote in message
>news:<dmouc01q95j5qbf8os2nqre8aa1a770lfi@4ax.com>...
>> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Zee wrote in
>> article
>> <e5f4a9c2.0406141806.3a727783@posting.google.com>:
>> >"Dee Randall" <deedoveyatshenteldotnet> wrote in message
>> >news:<10crr1mjgm05574@corp.supernews.com>...
>> >Correction: meant to say, "...not shown NOT TO BE CAUSED
>> >by Lipitor.)
>> That isn't a logical statement. You can't prove a
>> negative, scientifically or logically. What you can prove
>> is that X causes Y, or that X has not been shown to cause
>> Y, but you can't say that X has been shown NOT to cause Y
>> because you will never test all occurrences of X. Maybe
>> once in several million tries it WILL cause Y.
>> That isn't a logical statement.
>Makes perfect sense to me.
Probably.
>> Maybe once in several million tries it WILL cause Y.
>Yes exactly; that's the once I was thinking of.
But of course that highlights the impossibility of your
intended meaning that "[side effects were] not shown NOT TO
BE CAUSED by Lipitor."
--
Don donkirk@covad.net
Automatic Translations (Powered by
):
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
