Not on cholesterol meds? New guidelines may change that

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
By Matt Sloane, CNN

(CNN) -- If you're not on medicine to lower your cholesterol yet, you might be soon.
In what's being called a tectonic shift in the way doctors will treat high cholesterol, the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology on Tuesday released new treatment guidelines calling for a focus on risk factors rather than just cholesterol levels.
The new guidelines could double the amount of people on medication to lower their cholesterol, experts say.

"This is an enormous shift in policy as it relates to who should be treated for high levels of cholesterol," said Dr. Steven Nissen, chief of cardiovascular medicine at the Cleveland Clinic.
The biggest change from the old guidelines, he says: Ignore the numbers.


"For many years, the goal was to get the 'bad' cholesterol levels -- or LDL levels -- below 100," Nissen said. "Those targets have been completely eliminated in the new guidelines, and the threshold for treatment has been eliminated."
In their place, the guidelines suggest using specific risk factors to determine who should be treated with cholesterol-lowering statin drugs, and who should simply make lifestyle changes.

Among the four questions to ask to determine risks: Do you have heart disease? Do you have diabetes (Type 1 or 2)? Do you have a bad cholesterol level more than 190? And is your 10-year risk of a heart attack greater than 7.5%?
According to the new guidelines, if you answered yes to any of those four questions, you should be on a statin. Period.
New drugs could drop cholesterol to extreme lows
For those who do not fit those criteria, the committee behind the new policy says lifestyle and behavior management should be sufficient to help manage high cholesterol.
"The focus for years has been on getting the LDL low," said Dr. Neil Stone, committee chairman.

"Our guidelines are not against that. We're simply saying how you get the LDL low is important. Considering all the possible treatments, we recommend a heart-healthy lifestyle and statin therapy for the best chance of reducing your risk of stroke or heart attack in the next 10 years."
Calculating risks

So how do you and your doctor determine if your 10-year risk of a heart attack is above 7.5% and you should be put on a statin?
A simple calculation, said Dr. Donald Lloyd-Jones, chairman of the committee that developed the equation.
"We were able to generate very robust risk equations for both non-Hispanic white men and women as well as African-American men and women," Lloyd-Jones said. "Those equations factor in age, sex, race, total and HDL ('good') cholesterol levels, blood pressure levels, blood pressure treatment status as well as diabetes and current smoking status."

Each of those factors is assigned a numerical value and can be used to determine individual risk percentage using an online calculator.
The hope, Lloyd-Jones said, is that by doing these calculations, patients can be more informed about their risks when going to see doctors.
"The greatest strength behind these guidelines is that they hit at the heart of prevention -- which is that lifestyle, rather than treating isolated risk factors, is the key to reducing risk of chronic disease," said Dr. Sharon Horesh Bergquist, an assistant professor of medicine at Emory University, in an e-mail.
"We tend to focus on 'quick fix' answers such as a pill ... whereas the risk reduction from lifestyle changes, such (as) exercise three-four days a week, reduces risk nearly double to that from any one of the medication interventions."

Double the prescriptions
By changing the way doctors evaluate a patient for statin therapy, Nissen said these new guidelines will effectively double the number of Americans eligible for statin therapy, bringing the total to about 72 million.


So does this mean big bucks for the pharmaceutical companies? Nissen said no -- and in fact, it may mean a downturn in their business.
"Now, except for Crestor, they're virtually all generic -- you can get a three-month supply for $10," he said. "So there's really no money to be made with statins anymore."
He goes on to say that while prescriptions for these drugs will increase dramatically, the guidelines all but shunned other cholesterol-lowering drugs such as Zetia, a big moneymaker for Merck & Co.

Aside from the financial aspects of medicating 35 million more Americans, using statins in a much broader population has been controversial.
Some people, such as cancer expert Dr. David Agus, advocate giving everyone older than 45 a statin, due both to cholesterol-lowering properties and potential benefit in reducing cancer.
Others say that with the potential side effects from statin use -- muscle pains and soreness, a potential moderate increase in liver disease and a risk for developing Type 2 diabetes -- they should be used with care.
Nissen, who strongly disagrees with Agus' suggestion on statins, said a measured approach is best.
"If you have a young woman who is otherwise healthy, giving (her) a statin doesn't make any sense at all," Nissen said. "I do believe the evidence is solid that if you have risk, that statins are enormously beneficial."

Other recommendations
In addition to the guidelines on evaluating cholesterol risk, the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology released two other sets of guidelines relating to overall heart health.
One report gives guidelines for eating a heart-healthy diet, including reducing saturated and trans fats as well as limiting sodium to 2,400 milligrams per day -- 30% less than the average American consumes on a daily basis.
Cholesterol levels: What numbers should you aim for?
The other report dealt with treatment guidelines for physicians on managing weight loss in their patients. They include a call to create individualized weight loss plans and recommend counseling with a dietitian or other certified weight loss professional for at least six months.
That report also goes on to suggest that doctors should begin offering bariatric surgery as a potentially viable option to improve health for patients with a body mass index over 40, or those with a BMI over 35 and other complicating factors.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,238
81
1,725
New York City
Paid for by your local pharma. Seems to me to be five years out of date considering new information especially that we seem to know even less about the matter than thought :(

Not to mention that statins interfere with the synthesis of Coenzyme Q10, an enzyme crucial to heart health. In fact so important , that docs recommend supplementing with Q10. Only problem is pretty much all OTC Q10 is junk and inactive :(
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Paid for by your local pharma. Seems to me to be five years out of date considering new information especially that we seem to know even less about the matter than thought :(

Not to mention that statins interfere with the synthesis of Coenzyme Q10, an enzyme crucial to heart health. In fact so important , that docs recommend supplementing with Q10. Only problem is pretty much all OTC Q10 is junk and inactive :(

actually according to my cardiologist CoQ10 taken orally has been shown to have no effect
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,238
81
1,725
New York City

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Paid for by your local pharma. Seems to me to be five years out of date considering new information especially that we seem to know even less about the matter than thought :(

Not to mention that statins interfere with the synthesis of Coenzyme Q10, an enzyme crucial to heart health. In fact so important , that docs recommend supplementing with Q10. Only problem is pretty much all OTC Q10 is junk and inactive :(

I am with Myles , again....
Is it the beginning of a (worrisome) trend ? :)
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,238
81
1,725
New York City
I am with Myles , again....
Is it the beginning of a (worrisome) trend ? :)

Well as I said, one test on its own is really meaningless.

Also, newer data seems to show that it's the quality (now that they're really able to subfractionate, not subtract like in the old days) not the quantity that's important. It ain't the meat, it's the motion so said the Dead!

Frantz don't worry. We just don't agree on audio. It's a big world out there! :)
 

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
Frantz

Please explain why this is a worrisome trend. Does the notion of a longer healthier life cause you to worry :confused:

It's a worrisome trend for at least a couple of reasons. First is the idea that nearly everyone (including those in good health) needs to be taking a prescription medication with powerful and not completely characterized effects. If this were truly a life-extending treatment (i.e. a longevity drug) that might be a reasonable option. Second is the undeniable fact that there is influence by the pharmaceutical industry on this recommendation. Even the authors admit that it is virtually impossible to find an "expert" in this field without ties to the industry.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Frantz

Please explain why this is a worrisome trend. Does the notion of a longer healthier life cause you to worry :confused:

t'was a joke as Myles and I have slightly different view on many things Audio :D

Concerning Cholesterol my position is for the least unorthodox. I do not believe we are approaching the Cholesterol problem the right way: We set a few numbers and big-pharma is running with these and running the show. My view. Of course there has some correlation between high cholesterol level and cardio-vascular disease but is it a causation? I have my doubts. We are getting more and more sick eating the wrong things amongst them hydrogenated oil which is what almost all vegetable oils are and their effects are for the least not good, we live in a very toxic environment with so many oison it is a miracle we are not dropping like flies, we pass most of our time not moving andout butts for most of the day... In this particular US of A one can venture that fully half the people have a weight problem and I am being gentle by eating too many calories and bad food (read Mickey Dee's and the likes or so much Sugary things it is a wonder we can still chew) .... Our food is processed beyond recognition (e.g the Mac Nugget and untold numbers of "food" ..). What I find most bizarre and I am willing to be convinced of the contrary we have more CV disease than when we were eating saturated fat !! So what gives? I'll stop there and leave the floor for those more educated than I on the subject of good fat vs bad fat and what our cholesterol number really tell us... I am willing to debate it is not what that article and the previous numbers suggest.
 

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
Ummm, almost no unprocessed vegetable oils are hydrogenated.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Guys if big pharma was going to push docs to broadly prescribe an unnecessary, ineffective drug (and I have every confidence that they have done that and will again), I think they'd pick a more profitable one. Statins are deep into generic territory and very cheap. What powerful side effects are we talking about, frantz?

Tim
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
It's a worrisome trend for at least a couple of reasons. First is the idea that nearly everyone (including those in good health) needs to be taking a prescription medication with powerful and not completely characterized effects. If this were truly a life-extending treatment (i.e. a longevity drug) that might be a reasonable option. Second is the undeniable fact that there is influence by the pharmaceutical industry on this recommendation. Even the authors admit that it is virtually impossible to find an "expert" in this field without ties to the industry.

To me pharma is the nature of the beast. I've taken statins for 20 years having made an informed consent

We are all adults and informed consent means making a decision having been appraised of all benefits risks, alternatives and complications. Doctors can decide if they want to recommend per new guidelines as well as the patient who can just say "no".

So help me understand where the problem is.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Ummm, almost no unprocessed vegetable oils are hydrogenated.

Wrong rbbert.. Almost ALL vegetable Oils save from Virgin Oil , Coconut and Palm Oil (maybe peau oil and some nut oil) ... That is the only way to keep them from getting rancid in a hurry.
 

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
Wrong rbbert.. Almost ALL vegetable Oils save from Virgin Oil , Coconut and Palm Oil (maybe peau oil and some nut oil) ... That is the only way to keep them from getting rancid in a hurry.
Apparently you didn't understand what I posted. Who cares if they get rancid, if that what's supposed to happen? That happens to unprocessed vegetable oil. I'm not referring to artificially hydrogenated vegetable oils, that is what I mean by "processed"; in their natural state hardly any vegetable oils are hydrogenated, except coconut and palm which naturally have a lot of saturated fat in their oils.
 

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
To me pharma is the nature of the beast. I've taken statins for 20 years having made an informed consent

We are all adults and informed consent means making a decision having been appraised of all benefits risks, alternatives and complications. Doctors can decide if they want to recommend per new guidelines as well as the patient who can just say "no".

So help me understand where the problem is.

Steve, you are hardly an example of an average American adult in terms of being able to make informed consent on an issue like this.

Very few physicians know enough about statins to be able to effectively counsel a patient in this area. The overwhelming majority of patients are going to assume that two prominent medical associations know more than they do about it and just go along with their recommendation, despite the fact that it is not evidence-based.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,238
81
1,725
New York City
Apparently you didn't understand what I posted. Who cares if they get rancid, if that what's supposed to happen? That happens to unprocessed vegetable oil. I'm not referring to artificially hydrogenated vegetable oils, that is what I mean by "processed"; in their natural state hardly any vegetable oils are hydrogenated, except coconut and palm which naturally have a lot of saturated fat in their oils.

Frantz is right about the processing causing the nut oils to go rancid; as a result they Vit. E that does nothing. These same oils are then incorporated into the cell membrane where they cause a multitude of effects. But their real issue is that they're pro-oxidant being high in omega -6s.
 

rbbert

Well-Known Member
Dec 12, 2010
3,820
239
1,000
Reno, NV
Frantz is right about the processing causing the nut oils to go rancid; as a result they Vit. E that does nothing. These same oils are then incorporated into the cell membrane where they cause a multitude of effects. But their real issue is that they're pro-oxidant being high in omega -6s.
I think in a sense we are talking about two different things. I'm referring to oil in vegetables, along with their (usually) associated phyto-chemicals. I think Frantz (and possibly you) are talking about extracted, packaged vegetable oils? The only oils like that we (I) ever use are olive oil and sometimes canola oil, neither of which are processed, merely extracted.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,238
81
1,725
New York City
I think in a sense we are talking about two different things. I'm referring to oil in vegetables, along with their (usually) associated phyto-chemicals. I think Frantz (and possibly you) are talking about extracted, packaged vegetable oils? The only oils like that we (I) ever use are olive oil and sometimes canola oil, neither of which are processed, merely extracted.



http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/nutrition/healthy-eating/olive-oil-vs-canola-oil.html#b
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Robbery


I suppose that was obvious from the context unless you grow your own vegetable and extract the oil for immediate consumption. As for Canola oil not being processed wrong again you are.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing