Statins - Can I refuse ?

"Susan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

x-no-archive: yes

Jason said:

Hello,
Based upon the information about those two famous doctors that is mentioned
in
WHAT YOU MUST KNOW ABOUT STATIN DRUGS AND THEIR NATURAL ALTERNATIVES
by Jay S. Cohen, M.D.
those two doctors no longer practice medicine. Whether or not they now
have other jobs--I don't know. I would not want a doctor operating on me
that
had serious memory problems--would you? Jason

It would depend on how it affected their performance. I'd worry more about
whether their hands and vision were steady and if they could concentrate and
maintain attention.

Susan

I would certainly agree with Jason on this point. If the surgeon had a
"serious" memory problem - as Jason postulated - I don't think I would have
the ability to or want to determine how this affected his performance. Unless
the procedure were very minor, I would not want to take the chance no matter
how steady his hands were.

Bill

Bill said:

"Susan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

x-no-archive: yes

Jason said:

Hello,
Based upon the information about those two famous doctors that is mentioned
in
WHAT YOU MUST KNOW ABOUT STATIN DRUGS AND THEIR NATURAL ALTERNATIVES
by Jay S. Cohen, M.D.
those two doctors no longer practice medicine. Whether or not they now
have other jobs--I don't know. I would not want a doctor operating on me
that
had serious memory problems--would you? Jason

It would depend on how it affected their performance. I'd worry more about
whether their hands and vision were steady and if they could concentrate and
maintain attention.

Susan

I would certainly agree with Jason on this point. If the surgeon had a
"serious" memory problem - as Jason postulated - I don't think I would have
the ability to or want to determine how this affected his performance. Unless
the procedure were very minor, I would not want to take the chance no matter
how steady his hands were.

Bill

First of all, Art Ulene was a cardiologist if I'm not mistaken ... not a
surgeon. Secondly, one web page says that he's been married for 43 years
.... let's suppose conservatively that he got married at 20 y/o ... that
makes him at least 63 y/o ... probably older. People in their 60s and
70s routinely begin to have memory failure problems anyway (interesting
that this bio also says that he's "advanced skier, an avid motorcyclist,
and a beginning snowboarder". Doesn't sound very disabled to me.

http://www.speakersonhealthcare.com/speakers/speaker2157.php

If I was a doctor in my own business making a doctor's salary for 30+
years ... and I was still able to bring in significant revenue doing
appearances ... and I believed in my heart (regardless of whether it was
reality or not) in complementary medicine and was philosophically
against medications ... it might be very easy for me to quit my practice
and say that I needed to do that because I was disabled due to statins
.... whether that was accurate or not. Where's the proof?

Larry

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Let's put it this way. If someone has a hx of heart disease and they have
high LDL cholesterol (and especially if they have low or medium HDL), one
has to have a way to keep the coronary arteries from building enough
plaque to cause a clot to cause an MI. If you can find another way to do
that? Great.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Larry E.

Apparently you haven't been watching the studies (e.g., via PubMed
abstracts) that are somewhat consistently showing that it is not the
cholesterol reduction that is preventing the coronary arteries (only in
middle-aged white males with high heart attack risk, BTW) from "building
enough plaque to cause a clot to cause an MI."

It is an unintended anti-inflammatory side-effect of statins that is now
fairly universally thought to do that.

The cholesterol forms on the weakened spot in the artery to form a
high-pressure bandage. Without the protection, there can be a failure of
the artery wall. (Which is what was seen during early statin testing with
dogs - hemorrhagic stroke.)

Without the inflammation, the cholesterol does not form plaque.

Sharon Hope said:

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Let's put it this way. If someone has a hx of heart disease and they have
high LDL cholesterol (and especially if they have low or medium HDL), one
has to have a way to keep the coronary arteries from building enough
plaque to cause a clot to cause an MI. If you can find another way to do
that? Great.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Larry E.

Apparently you haven't been watching the studies (e.g., via PubMed
abstracts) that are somewhat consistently showing that it is not the
cholesterol reduction that is preventing the coronary arteries (only in
middle-aged white males with high heart attack risk, BTW) from "building
enough plaque to cause a clot to cause an MI."

It is an unintended anti-inflammatory side-effect of statins that is now
fairly universally thought to do that.

The cholesterol forms on the weakened spot in the artery to form a
high-pressure bandage. Without the protection, there can be a failure of
the artery wall. (Which is what was seen during early statin testing with
dogs - hemorrhagic stroke.)

Without the inflammation, the cholesterol does not form plaque.

So your point is? You don't make a good case against taking statins.

Larry E.

In article said:

Bill said:

"Susan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

x-no-archive: yes

Jason wrote:

>Hello,
>Based upon the information about those two famous doctors that is

mentioned

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>in
>WHAT YOU MUST KNOW ABOUT STATIN DRUGS AND THEIR NATURAL ALTERNATIVES
>by Jay S. Cohen, M.D.
>those two doctors no longer practice medicine. Whether or not they now
>have other jobs--I don't know. I would not want a doctor operating on me
>that
>had serious memory problems--would you? Jason
>

It would depend on how it affected their performance. I'd worry more about
whether their hands and vision were steady and if they could

concentrate and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

maintain attention.

Susan

I would certainly agree with Jason on this point. If the surgeon had a
"serious" memory problem - as Jason postulated - I don't think I would have
the ability to or want to determine how this affected his performance.

Unless

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the procedure were very minor, I would not want to take the chance no

matter

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

how steady his hands were.

Bill

First of all, Art Ulene was a cardiologist if I'm not mistaken ... not a
surgeon. Secondly, one web page says that he's been married for 43 years
... let's suppose conservatively that he got married at 20 y/o ... that
makes him at least 63 y/o ... probably older. People in their 60s and
70s routinely begin to have memory failure problems anyway (interesting
that this bio also says that he's "advanced skier, an avid motorcyclist,
and a beginning snowboarder". Doesn't sound very disabled to me.

http://www.speakersonhealthcare.com/speakers/speaker2157.php

If I was a doctor in my own business making a doctor's salary for 30+
years ... and I was still able to bring in significant revenue doing
appearances ... and I believed in my heart (regardless of whether it was
reality or not) in complementary medicine and was philosophically
against medications ... it might be very easy for me to quit my practice
and say that I needed to do that because I was disabled due to statins
... whether that was accurate or not. Where's the proof?

Larry

Larry,
I was surprised to learn from your post that Dr. Ulene is a beginning
snowboarder. He must have recovered well. I'm pleased that he is making
a great income as a result of making speeches. It's my guess that he is
taking lots of supplements (eg B vit.) to reduce inflammation. He appears
to have an excellent exercise program.
This is book related to the subject:
"Stop Inflammation Now" by Richard M. Fleming, M.D. (cardiologist).
Jason
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Sharon Hope said:

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Let's put it this way. If someone has a hx of heart disease and they have
high LDL cholesterol (and especially if they have low or medium HDL), one
has to have a way to keep the coronary arteries from building enough
plaque to cause a clot to cause an MI. If you can find another way to do
that? Great.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Larry E.

Quoted message said:

Apparently you haven't been watching the studies (e.g., via PubMed
abstracts) that are somewhat consistently showing that it is not the
cholesterol reduction that is preventing the coronary arteries (only in
middle-aged white males with high heart attack risk, BTW) from "building
enough plaque to cause a clot to cause an MI."

Quoted message said:

It is an unintended anti-inflammatory side-effect of statins that is now
fairly universally thought to do that.

I do not know how universal this is, but there certainly
is this opinion, and that it is C-reactive protein which
is the indication of inflammation. Again, this is something
which I have read.

A previous doctor (now retired) who tried to get me on
statins asked to have a followup done on something else,
and I asked him to include C-reactive protein in the test.
He asked why, and I told him frankly that if it was high,
I might reconsider taking statins. I am still not taking
statins.

Quoted message said:

The cholesterol forms on the weakened spot in the artery to form a
high-pressure bandage. Without the protection, there can be a failure of
the artery wall. (Which is what was seen during early statin testing with
dogs - hemorrhagic stroke.)

This is one of the reasons why cholesterol is necessary.

Quoted message said:

Without the inflammation, the cholesterol does not form plaque.

There is probably always SOME inflammation, and it there
is LOTS of LDL cholesterol of the "wrong" type, the danger
does go up, but all the problems need to be simultaneously
considered, and all the effects. This is NOT being done
by the medical profession or their researchers.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
[email hidden] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

On 16 Dec 2005 13:07:29 -0500, [email hidden] (Herman

Rubin) said:

A previous doctor (now retired) who tried to get me on
statins asked to have a followup done on something else,
and I asked him to include C-reactive protein in the test.
He asked why, and I told him frankly that if it was high,
I might reconsider taking statins. I am still not taking
statins.

Did you do the test? What was the result?

Herman Rubin said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Sharon Hope said:

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Let's put it this way. If someone has a hx of heart disease and they have
high LDL cholesterol (and especially if they have low or medium HDL), one
has to have a way to keep the coronary arteries from building enough
plaque to cause a clot to cause an MI. If you can find another way to do
that? Great.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Larry E.

Quoted message said:

Apparently you haven't been watching the studies (e.g., via PubMed
abstracts) that are somewhat consistently showing that it is not the
cholesterol reduction that is preventing the coronary arteries (only in
middle-aged white males with high heart attack risk, BTW) from "building
enough plaque to cause a clot to cause an MI."

Quoted message said:

It is an unintended anti-inflammatory side-effect of statins that is now
fairly universally thought to do that.

I do not know how universal this is, but there certainly
is this opinion, and that it is C-reactive protein which
is the indication of inflammation. Again, this is something
which I have read.

A previous doctor (now retired) who tried to get me on
statins asked to have a followup done on something else,
and I asked him to include C-reactive protein in the test.
He asked why, and I told him frankly that if it was high,
I might reconsider taking statins. I am still not taking
statins.

These numbers are so just so much hooey. On my latest test my total
cholesterol is up from 9.7 (my norm) to 12.34. (I'm taking a
medication that is probably responsible for the raise), but my
C-reactive protein is one-half of normal..as always.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The cholesterol forms on the weakened spot in the artery to form a
high-pressure bandage. Without the protection, there can be a failure of
the artery wall. (Which is what was seen during early statin testing with
dogs - hemorrhagic stroke.)

This is one of the reasons why cholesterol is necessary.

Quoted message said:

Without the inflammation, the cholesterol does not form plaque.

There is probably always SOME inflammation, and it there
is LOTS of LDL cholesterol of the "wrong" type, the danger
does go up, but all the problems need to be simultaneously
considered, and all the effects. This is NOT being done
by the medical profession or their researchers.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
[email hidden] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

fresh~horses said:

These numbers are so just so much hooey. On my latest test my total
cholesterol is up from 9.7 (my norm) to 12.34. (I'm taking a
medication that is probably responsible for the raise), but my
C-reactive protein is one-half of normal..as always.

What is normal?

In article <[email hidden]>,

Just Cocky said:

On 16 Dec 2005 13:07:29 -0500, [email hidden] (Herman
Rubin) wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A previous doctor (now retired) who tried to get me on
statins asked to have a followup done on something else,
and I asked him to include C-reactive protein in the test.
He asked why, and I told him frankly that if it was high,
I might reconsider taking statins. I am still not taking
statins.

Quoted message said:

Did you do the test? What was the result?

Yes. The result was 0.1, with "normal" being
between 0 and 1.1.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
[email hidden] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

On 17 Dec 2005 12:01:53 -0500, [email hidden] (Herman

Rubin) said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Just Cocky said:

On 16 Dec 2005 13:07:29 -0500, [email hidden] (Herman
Rubin) wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A previous doctor (now retired) who tried to get me on
statins asked to have a followup done on something else,
and I asked him to include C-reactive protein in the test.
He asked why, and I told him frankly that if it was high,
I might reconsider taking statins. I am still not taking
statins.

Quoted message said:

Did you do the test? What was the result?

Yes. The result was 0.1, with "normal" being
between 0 and 1.1.

0.1 is definitely good. My lab results indicate that 0.5+ starts to be
bad news, though.

Just Cocky said:

On 17 Dec 2005 12:01:53 -0500, [email hidden] (Herman

Rubin) said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Just Cocky said:

On 16 Dec 2005 13:07:29 -0500, [email hidden] (Herman
Rubin) wrote:

Quoted message said:

>A previous doctor (now retired) who tried to get me on
>statins asked to have a followup done on something else,
>and I asked him to include C-reactive protein in the test.
>He asked why, and I told him frankly that if it was high,
>I might reconsider taking statins. I am still not taking
>statins.

Quoted message said:

Did you do the test? What was the result?

Yes. The result was 0.1, with "normal" being
between 0 and 1.1.

0.1 is definitely good. My lab results indicate that 0.5+ starts to be
bad news, though.

Remember, CRP is a non-specific inflammatory indicator. Can mean
something's going on in the heart, but doesn't have to mean that. Can
mean inflammation somewhere else in the body.

Larry E.