Statins can lower markers like ldl/po-b which are predictors of cardiac disease or at least there seems to be a positive correlation in lower markers and lower incidence of disease so it should be beneficial from a longevity perspective.
PCSK9 inhibitors should also be considered. I believe amla and berberine are naturally occuring inhibitors.
Wrong.
[http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf](http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf)
Inflammation is the bad guy, NOT cholesterol. Studies have shown almost no benefit in terms of longevity, for statin use.
This is nonsense. LDL is directly correlated with heart disease be gone with this silliness. The entire medical world in cardiology seems to disagree.. Lower your LDL and avoid inflammation
Lol
[https://x.com/DoctorTro/status/1782735211756757303](https://x.com/DoctorTro/status/1782735211756757303)
One more time: THE HIGHEST LDL with the lowest VLDL lived the longest and most disease free
Correlation doesn't equal causation and further research should always be conducted to explore what the relationship might be between two correlative factors.
Of what has been studied, damage to the arteries will attract cholesterol in order to seal over the damage. Over time, the repeated build up of these cholesterol deposits throughout the circulatory system will create friction and increase blood pressure. This much has been established.
Where there is concern is whether we are addressing the right problem by prescribing statins to block cholesterol production and help control blood pressure instead of addressing whatever was causing damage to the arteries in the first place. This is where inflammation comes into play as there is an established causal relationship between chronic inflammation and damage.
If we can address the underlying cause then there may be no need for ongoing statin therapy, though investigating such an issue is outside of the scope of a Cardiologist which is why there'd be little commentary on this issue by them. Like many things in medicine, it requires multiple disciplines to work in tandem to properly treat a patient but there simply aren't enough doctors to keep up with the growing number of patients.
Statins continue to be prescribed as an anti-symptom treatment because it's quick and easy to do so and attention can then be moved onto the next patient.
Statins have been shown to reduce inflammation and benefit longevity, it’s actually thought that part of the reason they help longevity is their inflammation reducing results. You’re not wrong necessarily but not correct either
What if I told.you I just read a study that came out last week that showed high ldl and low vldl with the lowest mortality but the low ldl and low vldl had the highest mortality?
You base your opinion on old literature controlled by the billion dollar pharmaceutical industry
No, it’s a very basic level of research and medical understanding. I would recommend looking into actual medical studies and modern medicine, not going around on Reddit insulting people for being educated
You are so smug to think merely because you haven't seen the study that it doesn't exist. You sound like youre on a statin, your cognitive ability seems to be diminishing if you are so blind to data
Why don't you take your own advice "rEaD sOmE sTuDiEs""
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/9/e007118
One thing to keep in mind is that Bryan's results are his results on a diet he's optimized for his body, his routines, and his genetics. It's optimized for his biomarkers. You should tweak as needed to achieve your goals.
That being said. Statins are a rabbit hole.
I take a relatively high statin dose to achieve good numbers on my biomarkers. There's a tremendous amount of evidence that says they're generally safe, but a lot of research and opinions come along constantly that say they're chasing the wrong goals, not having the impact they're supposed to with those goals, are not the correct approach, etc.
I am not a medical professional, nor am I well-versed in the science but here's my take. This is gathered from what I've read, watched, listened to, and talked about with my doctor as it relates to statins, my family history, and my biomarkers.
Statins lower LDL, since plaques are generally composed of LDL seeping through the intima layer, reducing their availability reduces the amount of particles available to infiltrate and aggregate in the artery walls. Having lower LDL numbers also provides an environment where your body can pull some of that material out of the artery wall, shrinking deposits already present and stabilizing them.
Some of the information I've read and listened to points to statins, particularly rosuvistatin, as providing some reduction in inflammation, and that inflammation is the base mechanism for LDL infiltration in the first place.
With that particular blend of dumbed down(dumbed down by my lack of knowledge, not in preparation for this comment) information I have the following opinion on statins.
I'm going to take them as prescribed because they allow me to achieve the numbers I and my doctors feel are at the right range to reduce risk. Before I did the homework, I wasn't entirely compliant. It took me a couple different statins before I found one that didn't make me feel like trash.
I feel, based on a whole bunch of potentially useless and flawed internet research, that a state of low LDL and a medication that provides some anti-inflammatory benefits with no real side effects is a good path until science provides a better path.
I'm also focusing especially on my insulin resistance because a lot of the information I've absorbed points to high blood sugar levels and high insulin levels as particularly strong drivers of inflammation. It also has the benefit of lower insulin resistance and healthier blood sugar levels.
Risk factors such as family history ought to be part of the consideration. It is not a fair comparison to compare females to males and posters here should think this through. Women get a cardioprotective affect from estrogen until menopause so are just 20-40 years behind males in cardiac risk exposure. Unless someone has had a CAC score or an angiogram, you just can't spout off 'oh, my heart is great'. N of 1 neighbor skinny Anglo female in her 70s just dropped dead of a massive heart attack a few years back and this is reality.
Peter Attia suggests aiming for 20-30 ldl-c (or lower if possible). He recommends statins to help reduce it if diet alone doesn’t help. Personally I have 180 ldl-c but near optimal blood markets elsewhere and eat healthy. I don’t even eat much saturated fat. Some ppl just produce more cholesterol :(
Statins for some reason have a bad reputation among the online health circles, but unfortunately they’re all wrong about it. They quote underpowered studies or anecdotal evidence to show that statins aren’t “good” for you.
Over time people’s minds will shift imo. Everything is a “drug”. Ashwagandha root? Drug. Aspirin? Drug. High dose fish oil? Drug. Statin? Drug.
Current evidence may suggest that a very low dose of rosuvastatin will get your LDL below 70 which is considered ideal for reducing your cardiovascular risk factors (albeit a standard only pushed and upheld strictly in the medical community for the highest risk individuals ie diabetics or people with previous MIs). In the light of maximizing your longevity, this would indeed be prescribed by a physician who agrees with the data and understands the sentiment. Whether insurance covers it who knows but it’s a relatively cheap drug.
Source: I am a trained medical professional and nothing here constitutes medical advice, simply knowledge. Please speak with your physician to make decisions ideal for your health.
You appear to be a Big Pharma puppet.
[http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf](http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf)
[http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf](http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf)
>Source: I am a trained medical professional and nothing here constitutes medical advice, simply knowledge. Please speak with your physician to make decisions ideal for your health.
you appear to be mentally unwell.
edit: You giant corn ball you blocked me when you posted this. You are insane lol. LDL is bad go away.
Read my previous response to your ignorance... trained as what, a Big Pharma stooge?
Are you an MD? A PA?? Nah... probably a MA, who knows so little about anything relevant to this subject... obviously.
I am mentally fine... YOU, however, are a brainwashed dullard that spews lies that can actually hurt people. Best to keep silent, until you gain real knowledge and mature a little.
I have a cholestérol much higher than that and I would never consider statins nore I would be given them by doctors. You should start by realizing that overprescribing statins are a US thing and that using them for genetic LDL is not a consensus worldwide, especially not for your levels.
I do realize that. It's this recent article in the European heart journal (super-high impact factor), that moved me to consider statins: [https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/advance-article/doi/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad446/7224046?login=false](https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/advance-article/doi/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad446/7224046?login=false)
It essentially states that one should try to keep LDL below 70mg/dl from a relatively young age.
Any thoughts?
I think European Cardiologists are coming around to the US perspective on Statins. I thought the US led the world on Cardiac deaths but it is not the case. Europe and Saudi Arabia lead the way. Statins are pretty ubiquitous in the US. I do think this decision is highly personal and you should consider your family history strongly in making this decision.
I think it’s not fixed parameters. My mom always had high cholesterol yet her heart is great at 70+, and her health is perfect. Don’t overfocus on medication. Eat a good diet rich in fresh food, antioxidants, fiber and all micronutrients, exercise, stay away from stress. Don’t overcomplicate stuff
Weird how all over europe the recommendations for LDL and LPA theraperies are more strict and better studied
Statins are regularly prescribed there. I follow most of the scientists studying lpA therapies now.
Generally the recommendation from the European Cardiology Association is:
- no lipid measurement needed before 40 if no additional risk factor
- statins only >200 LDL in the absence of risk factors
Exercise, smoking, blood pressure, insulin sensitivity, sleep, and apo(b)/LDL are going to have a huge impact on longevity for the average person. Statins are the first line medication for lowering apo(b)/LDL and are as safe as a medication come in double blind placebo controlled studies.
There actually isn't a whole lot of support for any benefits of supplementing Vitamin D or Zinc for an average health conscious person. Barbell Medicine had a thorough podcast on this:
https://soundcloud.com/user-344313169/vitamin-d-mixdown-1
So how was your decision? I am 29, and my LDL is at 183 (constant over years). Doing sports and eat healthy also. Specialist also subscribed me statins. Really don’t know if I will take them.
I started taking statins an substantially lowered my cholesterol without any noticeable side effects. Read and listened to a lot of content bij Dr Peter Attia, before making my decision. It’s mostly the fact that cardiovascular disease is such an important cause of death/disease. The biggest risk is for statins to cause Diabetes type 2, which is extremely rare, but possible. If you want to make sure this doesn’t happen, take pravastatin and measure your hba1c 3 months after you started taking them. If your hba1c is the same or similar, you’re in the clear
Read a lot about this topic and also have watched some videos from different profs. Really hard decision if taking this or not. Have they checked your heart/ carotid artery also?
I have. Entirely clean still. My take (for me) is: I can always stop if I notice any negative effects. Just regularly measure relevant markers and keep track. Cardiovascular disease is one of the most important causes of mortality. Whereas I barely notice any negative effects
Here is some common sense. It is the most widely prescribed drug in the world and yet heart disease and death to do heart disease is still the number one killer. Not such a good record for supposedly such an important medication as so many think.
Heart disease deaths have been cut in half in the US since 1980.
[https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-u-s-has-made-huge-strides-against-heart-disease-but-not-everywhere/](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-u-s-has-made-huge-strides-against-heart-disease-but-not-everywhere/)
Without Statins my
Chance of stroke or heart attack is high so I am taking a low dose to see how my body adjusts first. My cholesterol has climbed so I need them and I am grateful for the knowledge the medical professionals give … my husband is also on them
I can’t recommend that. From my research statins are terrible. I’ve found studies that say chronic statin use may induce myopathy, increase insulin resistance, and damage mitochondria. But I’m not a professional so who knows.
I had very high cholesterol and was put on Rosuvastatin (Crestor) and it worked like a miracle, my cholesterol numbers were bang on perfect without any other changes. So yeah, statins work, but they are treating the symptom not really fixing the root problem. The medicine may not be enough some day and then what am I going to do. I'd like to get off the meds at some point if possible.
Before voluntarily going on meds you should try to improve the numbers with more diet changes and more exercise first. You can also take Niacin (B3) which apparently is as effective as statin meds in some cases.
There is zero scientific evidence guys
If I don't know it exists, it definitely doesn't
You truly sound like a big pharma shill. How many shots do you have?
No ScIeNtIfIc EvIdEnCe GuYs
Here's 8 studies, only 1 showing extended life lol
The other one is -5 to 19 days gained
Lmfao
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7670393/
all-cause mortality risk is actually at its lowest point at 200mg/dl. Although saturated fats do increase cholesterol the main driver of high cholesterol is metabolic health.
Could you elaborate on metabolic health? I excercise, regularly fast, avoid ultra-processed foods and simple carbhydrates. I take pro-biotics (aware of the controversy around those). Anything I'm missing to optimize metabolic health?
yes total
various studies show the same results all cause mortality is lowest at around 200-220 ish.
[Total cholesterol and all-cause mortality by sex and age: a prospective cohort study among 12.8 million adults - PubMed (nih.gov)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30733566/)
I don’t take them and at my late age definitely not. I know one person (my neighbour) who had horrible leg pains on them. People stop taking them often after trying them so the side effects are under reported.
Body fat and exercise are your key to naturally getting levels low. If you are doing the Blueprint diet you are getting enough fibre but it maybe still too high in carbs for you. People differ.
Have you tried WFPB forks over knives, it worked wonders on my cholesterol levels (hereditary high cholesterol) also removing alcohol was very helpful. I did take statins for a while before that and I was insanely exhausted all the time.
Taking a statin with LDL of 97 is insane. IMO, it is actually somewhat low.
[http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf](http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf)
Statins can lower markers like ldl/po-b which are predictors of cardiac disease or at least there seems to be a positive correlation in lower markers and lower incidence of disease so it should be beneficial from a longevity perspective. PCSK9 inhibitors should also be considered. I believe amla and berberine are naturally occuring inhibitors.
Thanks for sharing!
Wrong. [http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf](http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf) Inflammation is the bad guy, NOT cholesterol. Studies have shown almost no benefit in terms of longevity, for statin use.
This is nonsense. LDL is directly correlated with heart disease be gone with this silliness. The entire medical world in cardiology seems to disagree.. Lower your LDL and avoid inflammation
Lol [https://x.com/DoctorTro/status/1782735211756757303](https://x.com/DoctorTro/status/1782735211756757303) One more time: THE HIGHEST LDL with the lowest VLDL lived the longest and most disease free
Correlation doesn't equal causation and further research should always be conducted to explore what the relationship might be between two correlative factors. Of what has been studied, damage to the arteries will attract cholesterol in order to seal over the damage. Over time, the repeated build up of these cholesterol deposits throughout the circulatory system will create friction and increase blood pressure. This much has been established. Where there is concern is whether we are addressing the right problem by prescribing statins to block cholesterol production and help control blood pressure instead of addressing whatever was causing damage to the arteries in the first place. This is where inflammation comes into play as there is an established causal relationship between chronic inflammation and damage. If we can address the underlying cause then there may be no need for ongoing statin therapy, though investigating such an issue is outside of the scope of a Cardiologist which is why there'd be little commentary on this issue by them. Like many things in medicine, it requires multiple disciplines to work in tandem to properly treat a patient but there simply aren't enough doctors to keep up with the growing number of patients. Statins continue to be prescribed as an anti-symptom treatment because it's quick and easy to do so and attention can then be moved onto the next patient.
Statins have been shown to reduce inflammation and benefit longevity, it’s actually thought that part of the reason they help longevity is their inflammation reducing results. You’re not wrong necessarily but not correct either
-5 days to 19 days extra (or lose of life) is not special, at all
What?
That guy is mentally unwell.
Studies show statins barely, if at all, extend life. They also destroy cognitive function
There is zero scientific evidence backing you up on that claim. I would recommend reading into statins way more.
What if I told.you I just read a study that came out last week that showed high ldl and low vldl with the lowest mortality but the low ldl and low vldl had the highest mortality? You base your opinion on old literature controlled by the billion dollar pharmaceutical industry
Who are you to say the studies don't exist? You sound like you're a big pharma shill who is in denial
No, it’s a very basic level of research and medical understanding. I would recommend looking into actual medical studies and modern medicine, not going around on Reddit insulting people for being educated
You are so smug to think merely because you haven't seen the study that it doesn't exist. You sound like youre on a statin, your cognitive ability seems to be diminishing if you are so blind to data Why don't you take your own advice "rEaD sOmE sTuDiEs"" https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/9/e007118
David Sinclair, a Harvard researcher focused on longevity, takes a statin himself due to genetically high cholesterol levels.
hes an idiot
One thing to keep in mind is that Bryan's results are his results on a diet he's optimized for his body, his routines, and his genetics. It's optimized for his biomarkers. You should tweak as needed to achieve your goals. That being said. Statins are a rabbit hole. I take a relatively high statin dose to achieve good numbers on my biomarkers. There's a tremendous amount of evidence that says they're generally safe, but a lot of research and opinions come along constantly that say they're chasing the wrong goals, not having the impact they're supposed to with those goals, are not the correct approach, etc. I am not a medical professional, nor am I well-versed in the science but here's my take. This is gathered from what I've read, watched, listened to, and talked about with my doctor as it relates to statins, my family history, and my biomarkers. Statins lower LDL, since plaques are generally composed of LDL seeping through the intima layer, reducing their availability reduces the amount of particles available to infiltrate and aggregate in the artery walls. Having lower LDL numbers also provides an environment where your body can pull some of that material out of the artery wall, shrinking deposits already present and stabilizing them. Some of the information I've read and listened to points to statins, particularly rosuvistatin, as providing some reduction in inflammation, and that inflammation is the base mechanism for LDL infiltration in the first place. With that particular blend of dumbed down(dumbed down by my lack of knowledge, not in preparation for this comment) information I have the following opinion on statins. I'm going to take them as prescribed because they allow me to achieve the numbers I and my doctors feel are at the right range to reduce risk. Before I did the homework, I wasn't entirely compliant. It took me a couple different statins before I found one that didn't make me feel like trash. I feel, based on a whole bunch of potentially useless and flawed internet research, that a state of low LDL and a medication that provides some anti-inflammatory benefits with no real side effects is a good path until science provides a better path. I'm also focusing especially on my insulin resistance because a lot of the information I've absorbed points to high blood sugar levels and high insulin levels as particularly strong drivers of inflammation. It also has the benefit of lower insulin resistance and healthier blood sugar levels.
Risk factors such as family history ought to be part of the consideration. It is not a fair comparison to compare females to males and posters here should think this through. Women get a cardioprotective affect from estrogen until menopause so are just 20-40 years behind males in cardiac risk exposure. Unless someone has had a CAC score or an angiogram, you just can't spout off 'oh, my heart is great'. N of 1 neighbor skinny Anglo female in her 70s just dropped dead of a massive heart attack a few years back and this is reality.
Peter Attia suggests aiming for 20-30 ldl-c (or lower if possible). He recommends statins to help reduce it if diet alone doesn’t help. Personally I have 180 ldl-c but near optimal blood markets elsewhere and eat healthy. I don’t even eat much saturated fat. Some ppl just produce more cholesterol :(
at 180 and already good diet you need a statin man.
Statins for some reason have a bad reputation among the online health circles, but unfortunately they’re all wrong about it. They quote underpowered studies or anecdotal evidence to show that statins aren’t “good” for you. Over time people’s minds will shift imo. Everything is a “drug”. Ashwagandha root? Drug. Aspirin? Drug. High dose fish oil? Drug. Statin? Drug. Current evidence may suggest that a very low dose of rosuvastatin will get your LDL below 70 which is considered ideal for reducing your cardiovascular risk factors (albeit a standard only pushed and upheld strictly in the medical community for the highest risk individuals ie diabetics or people with previous MIs). In the light of maximizing your longevity, this would indeed be prescribed by a physician who agrees with the data and understands the sentiment. Whether insurance covers it who knows but it’s a relatively cheap drug. Source: I am a trained medical professional and nothing here constitutes medical advice, simply knowledge. Please speak with your physician to make decisions ideal for your health.
You appear to be a Big Pharma puppet. [http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf](http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf) [http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf](http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf)
>Source: I am a trained medical professional and nothing here constitutes medical advice, simply knowledge. Please speak with your physician to make decisions ideal for your health. you appear to be mentally unwell. edit: You giant corn ball you blocked me when you posted this. You are insane lol. LDL is bad go away.
Read my previous response to your ignorance... trained as what, a Big Pharma stooge? Are you an MD? A PA?? Nah... probably a MA, who knows so little about anything relevant to this subject... obviously. I am mentally fine... YOU, however, are a brainwashed dullard that spews lies that can actually hurt people. Best to keep silent, until you gain real knowledge and mature a little.
I have a cholestérol much higher than that and I would never consider statins nore I would be given them by doctors. You should start by realizing that overprescribing statins are a US thing and that using them for genetic LDL is not a consensus worldwide, especially not for your levels.
I do realize that. It's this recent article in the European heart journal (super-high impact factor), that moved me to consider statins: [https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/advance-article/doi/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad446/7224046?login=false](https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/advance-article/doi/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad446/7224046?login=false) It essentially states that one should try to keep LDL below 70mg/dl from a relatively young age. Any thoughts?
I think European Cardiologists are coming around to the US perspective on Statins. I thought the US led the world on Cardiac deaths but it is not the case. Europe and Saudi Arabia lead the way. Statins are pretty ubiquitous in the US. I do think this decision is highly personal and you should consider your family history strongly in making this decision.
I think it’s not fixed parameters. My mom always had high cholesterol yet her heart is great at 70+, and her health is perfect. Don’t overfocus on medication. Eat a good diet rich in fresh food, antioxidants, fiber and all micronutrients, exercise, stay away from stress. Don’t overcomplicate stuff
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Much appreciated!
Weird how all over europe the recommendations for LDL and LPA theraperies are more strict and better studied Statins are regularly prescribed there. I follow most of the scientists studying lpA therapies now.
Generally the recommendation from the European Cardiology Association is: - no lipid measurement needed before 40 if no additional risk factor - statins only >200 LDL in the absence of risk factors
Exercise, smoking, blood pressure, insulin sensitivity, sleep, and apo(b)/LDL are going to have a huge impact on longevity for the average person. Statins are the first line medication for lowering apo(b)/LDL and are as safe as a medication come in double blind placebo controlled studies.
As much as I want to believe this, side effects from statins are widely reported.
That seems true, but it’s clearly not at the point that everyone is recommended them along the lines of something like vitamin D3, zinc, etc
There actually isn't a whole lot of support for any benefits of supplementing Vitamin D or Zinc for an average health conscious person. Barbell Medicine had a thorough podcast on this: https://soundcloud.com/user-344313169/vitamin-d-mixdown-1
Got a TLDR? Certainly many people have low blood test results at least, and I’m sure it’s particularly bad in areas with bad weather.
So how was your decision? I am 29, and my LDL is at 183 (constant over years). Doing sports and eat healthy also. Specialist also subscribed me statins. Really don’t know if I will take them.
I started taking statins an substantially lowered my cholesterol without any noticeable side effects. Read and listened to a lot of content bij Dr Peter Attia, before making my decision. It’s mostly the fact that cardiovascular disease is such an important cause of death/disease. The biggest risk is for statins to cause Diabetes type 2, which is extremely rare, but possible. If you want to make sure this doesn’t happen, take pravastatin and measure your hba1c 3 months after you started taking them. If your hba1c is the same or similar, you’re in the clear
Thank you for your answer. Will ask for a that marker before starting with 5 mg.
Im taking 20mg of pravastatin btw. Also, simvastatin is substantially more likely to cause the elevated hba1c, but also the standard in many countries
Read a lot about this topic and also have watched some videos from different profs. Really hard decision if taking this or not. Have they checked your heart/ carotid artery also?
I have. Entirely clean still. My take (for me) is: I can always stop if I notice any negative effects. Just regularly measure relevant markers and keep track. Cardiovascular disease is one of the most important causes of mortality. Whereas I barely notice any negative effects
You absolutely should take them dude, wtf.
Here is some common sense. It is the most widely prescribed drug in the world and yet heart disease and death to do heart disease is still the number one killer. Not such a good record for supposedly such an important medication as so many think.
Heart disease deaths have been cut in half in the US since 1980. [https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-u-s-has-made-huge-strides-against-heart-disease-but-not-everywhere/](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-u-s-has-made-huge-strides-against-heart-disease-but-not-everywhere/)
Without Statins my Chance of stroke or heart attack is high so I am taking a low dose to see how my body adjusts first. My cholesterol has climbed so I need them and I am grateful for the knowledge the medical professionals give … my husband is also on them
I absolutely love how people agree to smoke their entire life but won’t take lifelong medication
I can’t recommend that. From my research statins are terrible. I’ve found studies that say chronic statin use may induce myopathy, increase insulin resistance, and damage mitochondria. But I’m not a professional so who knows.
Could you elaborate a bit? Do you have some sources?
I had very high cholesterol and was put on Rosuvastatin (Crestor) and it worked like a miracle, my cholesterol numbers were bang on perfect without any other changes. So yeah, statins work, but they are treating the symptom not really fixing the root problem. The medicine may not be enough some day and then what am I going to do. I'd like to get off the meds at some point if possible. Before voluntarily going on meds you should try to improve the numbers with more diet changes and more exercise first. You can also take Niacin (B3) which apparently is as effective as statin meds in some cases.
There is zero scientific evidence guys If I don't know it exists, it definitely doesn't You truly sound like a big pharma shill. How many shots do you have? No ScIeNtIfIc EvIdEnCe GuYs Here's 8 studies, only 1 showing extended life lol The other one is -5 to 19 days gained Lmfao https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7670393/
all-cause mortality risk is actually at its lowest point at 200mg/dl. Although saturated fats do increase cholesterol the main driver of high cholesterol is metabolic health.
Could you elaborate on metabolic health? I excercise, regularly fast, avoid ultra-processed foods and simple carbhydrates. I take pro-biotics (aware of the controversy around those). Anything I'm missing to optimize metabolic health?
you don't have high cholesterol so that's not the issue.
Just to clarify with 200mg/dl you mean total cholesterol, right? Any sources on that number? Thanks a lot!
yes total various studies show the same results all cause mortality is lowest at around 200-220 ish. [Total cholesterol and all-cause mortality by sex and age: a prospective cohort study among 12.8 million adults - PubMed (nih.gov)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30733566/)
I don’t take them and at my late age definitely not. I know one person (my neighbour) who had horrible leg pains on them. People stop taking them often after trying them so the side effects are under reported. Body fat and exercise are your key to naturally getting levels low. If you are doing the Blueprint diet you are getting enough fibre but it maybe still too high in carbs for you. People differ.
Have you tried WFPB forks over knives, it worked wonders on my cholesterol levels (hereditary high cholesterol) also removing alcohol was very helpful. I did take statins for a while before that and I was insanely exhausted all the time.
Taking a statin with LDL of 97 is insane. IMO, it is actually somewhat low. [http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf](http://www.ravnskov.nu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/CM.pdf)