You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Seeing the other blood pressure thread made me think about statins. I had very high blood pressure, was put on some standard BP tablets, lost a load of weight and BP is now fine.
The Dr wanted to put me on statins initially, or rather once the BP had started to reach normally high levels, to control the BP in the long term. I resisted and suggested that lifestyle changes would get the BP to good levels which the Dr was understandably doubtful about and again pushed me to take statins. Now my BP is fine he is still suggesting I take statins 'as a precaution'.
I asked what the statins would do. Lower BP
If I had lowered the BP to a safe level could I stop taking them. No, keep taking them to maintain good BP.
Now my BP is goo I don't need statins do I? YEs, take them as they will stop you developing high BP.
Is he getting a big bung fromt eh statin sellers or am I missing something?
am I missing something?
He's a medical professional and you're asking a bunch of (ex?) mountain bikers about health and medicine issues?
am I missing something?
Well you missed out the bit about the "BP tablets" on the other thread when you said that your BP went from death zone to fine with just lifestyle changes!
Well I went and had a look and to my suprise statins do have an effect on BP. Every day is a school day
however I guess what your GP is meaning by taking them for prevention is by stopping the build up of plaque in your arteries but not at all sure
Hows your cholesterol levels? Is he also thinking of stroke prevention?
I do think Statins can be over prescribed but also they are proven lifesavers with a very low incidence of side effects
Are you still on the meds for BP?
Add this to the white finger you got the other day and I would be very very concerned about your cardiovascular health.
I am asking for views, not advice 🙂
I wondered if other people had Drs pushing statins quite so much, or if the Drs on here had a professional view on this.
Yeah - 2 months of them to get me out of critical. To be honest, I had forgotten until I started this thread. Once the BP had dropped out of critical and the weight loss was noticeable, about 8 weeks, I stopped the BP tablets to see what would happen and the drop in BP maintained the same rate of reduction. It took about 4 months to get to a 'normal' level and has been good ever since.
Not a deliberate misleading post previously, but sorry - guilty as charged.
He’s a medical professional
Aren't statins the issue that medical professionals struggle most agreeing on? It seems to depend a lot on the personal opinion of the GP.
I'm not suggesting that people who claim to ride bikes are a better source of advice! Just that perhaps WCA might want to have a discussion with another GP to maybe get a different perspective.
https://theconversation.com/bmj-vs-the-lancet-there-are-no-winners-in-the-statins-war-65593
My understanding is that statin use is strongly associated with reduced risk of heart attacks and strokes. I think it's even close to the point at which they are thought to be worth issuing to all middle-aged men regardless of their health. However I've heard enough about side-effects that I'm not keen on them myself.
He’s a medical professional and you’re asking a bunch of (ex?) mountain bikers about health and medicine issues?
A medical professional is a GP in this scenario and generally isn't someone that takes (or has) the time to understand your circumstances, personal observations and own wishes. (I'm generalising here, from experience, before anyone jumps on me!)
Present problem = prescribe something and get out the door.
Not that I blame them, **** doing what they have to do for a job, but personally I'm behind WCA in questioning what he's being told to do, without a decent explanation.
[i] think it’s even close to the point at which they are thought to be worth issuing to all middle-aged men regardless of their health[/i]
This is basically the GPs argument but as ernielynch pointed out, there are about an equal number of professionals (medical, not STWers) who disagree
I've done a bit of work with statins in the cancer settings and they do seem to be protective against cancer too, tho loads more data required.
Anyway there are lots of different statins, the benefits are real but so are the side effects, which can vary greatly.
So its well worth trying different types to see which ones work for you.
We used the cheap off patent ones in the lab to save money, and the different types can have very different effects at a biochemical level, I won't go into the chemistry of it all, unless anyone cares about geranylgeranyl vs farnesyl transferases....
there are about an equal number of professionals (medical, not STWers) who disagree
IIRC its a view but a minority one
Statins are proven lifesavers. Incidence of side effects are very much overstated - this has been proven in proper trials. Having worked in stroke units the number of peiople having catestrophic stokes is hugely reduced - due to statins in main
I am reluctantly on Statins for life due to familial high cholesterol. No side effects
I am currently on statins,and other tablets,following a triple heart bypass last year. I was told the main aim of them is to reduce cholesterol which in turn reduces the risk of a stroke. I take a different drug for blood pressure which has actually worked a bit too well giving me low readings at times.
The statin has caused my blood sugar to rise bringing me into being borderline diabetic. Due to family history i believe i will be on statins for the rest of my life but possibly a different type.
A friend in the cycling club had a routine blood test and was found to have slightly high cholesterol. The first thing the doctor advised was statins. My friend said no,test me in 2 months time after i have looked at my diet.
A medical professor who lives nearby stopped his statins as they were giving him bad muscle inflammation which was detected through a blood test.
My cholesterol level was reduced with the statins but it wasn't ridiculously high before the op.
The drug i am taking which has the worst side effect is a beta blocker.
I had vey high blood pressure with a week in hospital, came out with satins and the full monty.
In truth I felt awful, couldn't bend over and stand up without feeling dizzy.
Doc reviewed my blood results and took me off everything other than blood pressure medication.
I think once you on this stuff your on it for life, change of lifestyle would be my option.
I’ve been told by a doctor friend that whatever changes in lifestyle accounts for a very small percentage change, especially if you have a genetic issue which I have. My high cholesterol was discovered when I was just about in the fittest state in my life.
As I understand it there are two main reasons for elevated cholesterol. The first is genetic disposition as mentioned above and this can go undetected as people seem really fit and healthy. The second if lifestyle and this can normally be detected because they are fat with a poor lifestyle (massive generalisation).
I fitted into the second category and a quick plot of my cholesterol levels appears to show an improvement without medication beyond the first 8 weeks of BP tablets I forgot to mention on the other thread.
I do have the full breakdown of HDL. LDL etc but this shows the overall result dropping from almost 7 to below 5
He’s a medical professional
He is a medical professional who has been trained to quickly diagnose the issue in a 10 minute appointment and then write a prescription for some drugs that may or may not help.
While the NHS can be good for emergency stuff there is no holistic approach at all. Clearly down to time and money but blood pressure can be controlled via diet, weight, exercise etc,. yet most doctors don't even suggest that and just offer tablet after tablet.
OPs blood pressure was ultimately controlled by diet, my wife's blood pressure was totally controlled by diet change (salt reduction) and weight reduction yet GP never even suggested doing anything dietary or even ask about diet and lifestyle.
Good to take what GPs say as a starting point and if you can't be bothered to look into the causes or do anything about it yourself then just take whatever tablets they offer as the best option but keep an open mind that they are generalists with little time to spend on any individual
I've been on Atorvastatin for a few years. No side effects at all and I'm very fit, healthy and active. Alongside a couple of lowish dose BP meds.
While the NHS can be good for emergency stuff there is no holistic approach at all
Literally not true at all.
But don't let the millions spent on 'social prescribers', weight loss programmes, drives to reduce health access inequality, dietary input, literal requirements to involve lifestyle MDTs in certain conditions etc etc get in your already set views!
Also, GPs don't 'push' drugs... we recommend proven methods to improve health.
I generally don't lose a wink of sleep if you choose to/not follow my advice. My remit is to OFFER the advice. As long as I've done that, I've done my job. Yes, it's a bonus if patients follow it, but no one 'pushes' drugs.
Also... we hear time and time again "I'll improve my health/weight etc" by eating better... rarely happens unfortunately... hence why lots of medicinal inputs are offered...
Sadly, it's easier to take a pill than to change x y z about one's life...
DrP
TL/DR Statins really work, but lifestyle really works too has wider benefits but is harder to do. The two are not mutually exclusive and may be mutually beneficial. Have adult conversation with your GP. Go on statins when needed. Based on personal experience
Long version....
Statins,as a medicine, have had one of the biggest positive impacts on health since antibiotics
There was a massive step down in incidence of stroke and heart attack morbidity and mortality rates for under 65,70,75 year olds when widespread use was introduced with relatively limited side effects. Unfortunately I think deteriorating lifestyle factors have been pushing back those gains over last 20 years
On the flip side I had high blood pressure and highish cholesterol, plus family history of heart disease - was early 40s so 10/15 years ago. Doc said he really should have put me on meds but gave me 6 months to sort out lifestyle and weight. I did and BP has been normal ever since, cholesterol just at high end of normal. I think it was exercise rather than weight loss that did it for me for BP, but it's always hard to disaggregate factors
Recently spoke to Doc again about risk and whether I should go on statins - had good discussion and he was happy to keep me off but to continue home monitoring of BP and full set of annual blood tests but would not object to me going into statins if I wanted to/situation changes. Also says in my notes that I am well informed so understanding the issue helped the discussion rather than giving the decision wholly to GP
As Futher context my Dad had a massive stroke in his early 50s - so younger than I am now - which ****ed up his life. So I would go on statins in s heartbeat if the bloods/blood pressure suggested I needed it.
Ultimately it's down to probability - lots of factors affect risk of heart attack and stroke, some of which are controllable (weight, fitness) some of which are not (family history). Statins shifts the probability in your favour - but impact becomes less if risk is already low.
My experience aligns with DrP - my GP interactions were very good - and my GP, and others in the practice are happy to have an informed discussion
My experience of GPs is my local practice are holistic in practice, giving good explanations of the probabilities, of benefits and risks of drugs and medication is the last resort not the first.
He is a medical professional who has been trained to quickly diagnose the issue in a 10 minute appointment and then write a prescription for some drugs that may or may not help."
shows a massive lack of understanding.
I would also agree with DrP regarding Drs not having a hidden agenda and dealing with people promising to change their lifestyle and stopping for a MacD on the way home etc.
My Dr seems unwilling to discuss why he keeps suggesting statins when all of the tests show me improving greatly and within normal or good for pretty much everything. He just say that studies show they cut strokes and have widespread benefits so I should be on them.
I would like to understand what they are benefiting beyond BP and cholesterol or any of the other things that he has measured and why, if everything is showing as normal, he still wants me to take them. This is what he seems unable to articulate which is why I asked for the STW views.
WCA - at a guess ( and of course I do not know your medical history) that in his opinion you are at risk of strokes and other cardivascular disease and statins are proven to massively reduce the risk. You have described having several high risk factors
The upshot is that you were given statins for a clear BP problem, you tolerated them well (unless you had side effects you haven't mentioned), and it's likely they were effective at helping you manage your BP alongside a healthier lifestyle.
Statins don't work for everyone, and some people feel terrible on them, but that isn't the case for you, and I'm struggling to see much of a downside apart from having to take an extra pill a day.
The controversy over statins is that while studies detect clear benefits overall when you give them to thousands of patients, it can be harder to quantify the benefit for every individual patient, so you are potentially medicating a large number of people unnecessarily. However, in your case, there have been measurable benefits, and these are likely to continue.
You have a propensity for weight gain - with an associated rise in BP - so on the balance of probabilities would benefit from a longer-term statin in terms of cardiovascular risk. Even though your blood pressure is currently within normal limits, there will be a portion of cardiovascular risk which is not revealed by a simple measurement of blood pressure and cholesterol levels.
No medical professional will be able to tell you that a statin is 100% likely to be benefiting you - it's a balance of probabilities thing, and from what you've told us, you fall squarely into the category of patient who should perhaps be taking one.
TL;DR Your doc is looking out for you, probably without any chance of get an extra free pen from a drug company.
You have a propensity for weight gain
I love that!
Don't let anyone tell you that you are a greedy bastard!
tj - I kind of agree but if those risks all appear to associated with previous lifestyle which has changed to the new lifestyle where all of these risk factors have either gone completely or reduced significantly, and continue to drop, is the original opinion still valid?
It seems strange to go onto a medication regime from which there is no planned exit strategy and no way to measure any improvements or otherwise that it provides. I accept that statistically statins reduce risks of strokes etc across a population and that the associated risks are often overstated but when you reduce that population to one - me - you should be able to give a more accurate and specific set of expected results.
The medical averages are great as guidelines but need to be recognised for what they are. I seem to remember DrP quoting "90% of Americans at any one time are dehydrated" as a silly statistic that might be true which would mean, using the logic applied to statins, that I should drink more water, regardless of whether I am dehydrated or not. It is true that lots of people are dehydrated. It is true that if I drink lots of water I am less likely to be dehydrated. It is true that there will probably be few side effects from drinking more water. Therefor I should drink another XX litres of water a day despite having no signs or test results showing dehydration.
[i]You have a propensity for weight gain
I love that!
Don’t let anyone tell you that you are a greedy bastard![/i]
I resent that!
🙂
Mind you, cutting out a couple of bottles of wine a night seemed to do no harm...
The OP also has a potential for sudden weight loss due to mechanical interaction, if that helps balance things out. 🙂
... booze is a big risk factor for stroke.
While the NHS can be good for emergency stuff there is no holistic approach at all. Clearly down to time and money but blood pressure can be controlled via diet, weight, exercise etc,. yet most doctors don’t even suggest that and just offer tablet after tablet.
I love patients like this. Absolutely convinced that they know how it all works...I'm pretty certain all my GPs nurses, dieticians, physiotherapists, midwives, social prescribers and link workers (cops, prisons, social services) that come to my practice to help out our patients deal with often crushing circumstances would be chuffed to just hand out tablet after tablet. Some of the prescriptions are for creams y'know?
is the original opinion still valid?
Yes. Its still a risk. Reduced but not eliminated
It seems strange to go onto a medication regime from which there is no planned exit strategy
Statins are for life. Risks increase with age
The white finger you showed the other day is to me ( and I am well outside my areas of expertise) is a really worrying symptom to me. That would have me rushing to the GP
you should be able to give a more accurate and specific set of expected results.
Thats not how medicine works especially preventative medicine. Its about probabilities and risk / benefit ratios. Its not an exact science
Google "q risk" to figure out if you'll benefit from statins...
Basically, even if you're super healthy, a man over 65ish has a risk suggesting he'd benefit...
DrP
There is a reason why the focus in medicine has moved from infectious diseases to cardiovascular, then to cancer and eventually to Neurodegeneration. We are living longer. Statins have had a huge and evidence-based effect on cardiovascular health at the population level. However doctors treat patients not populations, and what might be very suitable for one, might not be for another (that’s part of my day job).
Of course lifestyle changes may help, but you can’t outrun bad genetics. It’s why we use genetic validation as a means of identifying possible targets for new drugs. That hasn’t always played out (LpPLA2 was one target), but it has shown advances (PCSK9 was another). We are however clear that high cholesterol and high blood pressure predicts a poorer outcome and modulation of these is a good thing.
Exercise and diet has such a big impact on wider health it's a no-brainer. But it's hard and loads of people would genuinely sooner be given a pill. But the two aren't mutually exclusive exclusive
On one of those health TV programmes - so big pinch of salt with the "results" - a group of older middle aged people with pre-diabetes were made to walk briskly for 30 minutes a day. Something like 75% moved out of pre-diabetic range into normal. 6 months after programme and despite the results they had pretty much all stopped exercising and gone back to pre-diabetic blood sugar levels. When asked why there was a lot of shoulder shrugging and foot shuffling - but basically too hard.
Basically - it's really hard to get people to improve lifestyles and statins really work to address one risk factor so widely used and as I said before should be used alongside lifestyle improvement. But the issue may be that people think, consciously or subconsciously. I've got some medicine do I don't need to worry anymore with that hard diet and exercise stuff
The only hard endpoint you can measure with this is incidence of heart attack/stroke. Accurately predicting your individual cardiovascular risk with and without statins is virtually impossible. Sure, there are markers such as BP and cholesterol, but they are not a foolproof predictor of cardiovascular risk.
But if we had a stadium full of similar individuals, we could be fairly certain that a statistically significant number of heart attacks/strokes would be prevented by statins. Whether you would be one of them is far harder to predict.
Put it another way, if you were in a stadium full of blokes and someone told you that a handful of them were definitely going to be smashed over the head with a baseball bat in the next six hours, it's unlikely to be you, but would you like this helmet to wear just in case anyway?
If you are confident you can maintain your healthy lifestyle, just say no to the statins.
If you keep an eye on your BP you can always go back and ask for them later.
I'm on statins for cholesterol. BP is fine and I'm reasonaby fit and healthy, just seem to get high cholesterol. Two young kids and several years of poor sleep haven't helped!
I would like to thank all contributors to this thread.
I think on balance I have been edged towards trying statins, mainly TJ & DrP to thank, but am still not sure how I will tell if they are working other than still waking up alive in the morning as there appear to be no measurable effects if you basic blood tests come back as normal.
This means that I am not really 'trying' statins, I am committing to a life forever on them which does not sit easily with me.
Your results
Your risk of having a heart attack or stroke within the next 10 years is:
3.6%
still not sure how I will tell if they are working other than still waking up alive in the morning as there appear to be no measurable effects if you basic blood tests come back as normal.
Yup
its about probabilities which of course do not really apply to individuals
( made up numbers for explanation) 1000 people with your medical history . None take statins then 50 will have catastrophic cardiovascular events in ten years. If all take statins only 10 have catestrophic cardivascular events.
with individuals you can only say the probability is reduced. there is no way of actually measuring this.
My advice - go back to the GP - I would be doing this after the white finger episode anyway and ask him to explain his reasoning for the statins.
My dad has suffered a few TIA's and a minor stroke (last one 14 months ago), and has been put on statins, which make him confused, tired and not confident in his balance. He's also on some anti-seizure medication that seem to have similar side effects. He had a seizure just before xmas and another a month ago, apparently seizures are common after TIA's / strokes.
His blood pressure and cholesterol levels seem fine, but he is beoming weaker and his lifestyle (previously very active for his age) is regressing. Its not possible to know whether this is due to the strokes / seizures / medication or something else in the family history, but he's been better off when he's not taking the statins.
So it seems to be a balance between having someone that isn't themself vs. minor strokes / seizures.
My mum is pressing the neurologist on which drugs he could / should be taking, but I'm not sure if she's being patient enough - anecdotal evidence from someone she knows is that the anti-seizure drug he's on can take a few weeks to adapt to.
When asked why there was a lot of shoulder shrugging and foot shuffling – but basically too hard.
I think it's easy to dismiss folks with a claim of "a lack of willpower" but there's literally endless studies about why people regain the weight they've lost and bunch more besides, and why it's almost impossible to chuck addictions. We all of us live in a world that is engineered to make you fat and unhealth because; profit. I think pushing the blame onto folks lots of whom are struggling with life, bills, work, and an endless parade of obstacles, is mostly un-helpful.
[i]My advice – go back to the GP – I would be doing this after the white finger episode anyway and ask him to explain his reasoning for the statins.[/i]
I will book another appointment but the last two times it was discussed were not very productive
1)
Dr) You need to go on statins.
WCA) Why?
Dr) Blood pressure, cholesterol and statistics.
WCA) Let me look into them and see if I can address the BP and cholesterol at the same time
2)
Dr) You need to go on statins.
WCA) Why?
Dr) Blood pressure, cholesterol and statistics.
WCA) But BPO and Cholesterol are normal now
Dr) Statistics
Your results
Your risk of having a heart attack or stroke within the next 10 years is:3.6%
How's that? I got 6.2 and answered "no" to all the negative health indicator/risk factor questions, have a BMI bang in the middle of the range, have always had blood pressure in the middle of the healthy range, and am aged (narrowly) under 60.
but am still not sure how I will tell if they are working other than still waking up alive in the morning as there appear to be no measurable effects
Agreed.. and this is the issue I often face in discussions! It's not like you get a letter through the door saying "you WOULD have had a stroke today, but the statin stopped it!"
Good luck in whatever you do...
DrP
Details of my concerned emailed to GP and will request an appointment next Friday when I have some time available.
johnX - The numbers I used were
53 age
Nothing wrong
Cholesterol 3.9
BP 95
Std Dev left blank as I don't have it
height 180
weight 97kg
I was playing around with the Q-risk calculator and found that I can reduce my risk by a factor of 6 simply by becoming 20 years younger! Why don't the doctors tell you that instead of just prescribing statins eh? Makes you think.
Q-Risk calculator
Interesting. I have long wondered, based on what is occurring, whether suffering from migraines increased the likelihood of strokes in later life. That is the first time that I have seen a stated possible connection.
My mum is pressing the neurologist on which drugs he could / should be taking, but I’m not sure if she’s being patient enough – anecdotal evidence from someone she knows is that the anti-seizure drug he’s on can take a few weeks to adapt to.
This is true, anti-seizure meds can take a while to get used to.
Also, serious events such as strokes and seizures in themselves are likely to make someone feel relatively more knackered and shit in the medium term.
However, if she feels that any medication is not working well in terms of side-effects, it's always worth a direct conversation. There are plenty of different types of statins (and anticonvulsive meds for that matter), one of which may work better for him. Doctors don't want prevention at the cost of an active lifestyle, as the second is just as important, probably more.
I was playing around with the Q-risk calculator and found that I can reduce my risk by a factor of 6 simply by becoming 20 years younger!
Getting old is rubbish, it's official.
Same answers at 64 and my risk goes up to 8.5%
Just a thought WCA your systolic reading is close to the low pressure end, could this be causing your white fingers?
I’ve been told by a doctor friend that whatever changes in lifestyle accounts for a very small percentage change, especially if you have a genetic issue which I have. My high cholesterol was discovered when I was just about in the fittest state in my life.
Same here, got detected after my dad had his triple Bypass, his lifestyle wasn't bad and neither was mine, probably also my fittest ever and there wasn't really much on the diet that would change as I wasn't really eating fry-ups every day.
Genetic dispositions can suck, I'd rather have to suffer the indignity of an elephant sized **** than flat feet and high cholesterol 🙂
I’d rather have to suffer the indignity of an elephant sized ****
This doesn't sound like the worst thing in the world.
Oddly as an aside Granny DoD lived to about 95 on a diet of Lard slathered on white bread and bacon and chips cooked in fat,whilst the male line seemed to die with Heart attacks etc, for me taking them is a bit of a no brainer, I suppose you should also take into account the family health history and weigh that up.
Whenever I hear about white finger it always reminds me of Vibration White Finger from a life and pension system I worked on waay back, it was a well grim system tbh.
No family history of heart disease. Mothers side women all lived to almost 100 and men died of lung cancer, possibly because they smoked 60 a day all their lives. Dad side the all seem to die of various different cancers or trucks.
Getting old is rubbish, it’s official
I know. And that 6.2% risk of heart attack/stroke in the next 10 years is salutory, with zero familial risk (bar my dad having a stroke at 85. You don't want to have a stroke btw so take the bloody statins) and no risk factors of my own. It's almost like the older you get the closer you get to death. Ha well.
I refused statins about 6 months ago, my GP surgery said that as I was over 60, and a diabetic in remission , my chance of a heart attack had gone up to 10%.
Oddly when I was 59 and 354 days old it was only 5%.
I blood pressure is good ( if not a little low) , my resting heart rate in low 50s.
But my cholesterol is 0.5 higher than where it should be (which is most likely genetic).
I said I would consider statins once a Dr discussed why they work and why I needed them. The first consultation was hopeless with a GP who knew less about them than I did. The next GP I had a phon consultation with talk about to pros/ cons, how they "might" work, and NHS stats that were driving the NHS to get me to take them.
She suggested we talked about it when I was 65.
My issue is statins is that I get shocking cramp - esp if I ride in the evenings. I take in salt, potassium, magnesium and drink loads. I try to stretch out and use a Theragun as well.
One side of statins is cramps - and she could not guarantee that any of the current option would not do this.
One side of statins is cramps
Very rare - as above the incidence of side effects with statins is vastly overstated - the nocebo effect
My thoughts are that at the moment I am relatively fit, healthy and have no unexpected pains so if I start taking statins and develop cramps and pains I can be fairly sure they are caused by the statins and either change them or stop.
Low dose statins here - genetics unfortunately. Absolutely no side effects. Atorvastatin 20mg
If you're prescribed a statin, you may be able to continue drinking alcohol. However, you should not drink more than 14 units of alcohol a week.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/statins/considerations/
I'm out then.
14 units is the recommended amount for everyone
My thoughts are that at the moment I am relatively fit, healthy and have no unexpected pains so if I start taking statins and develop cramps and pains I can be fairly sure they are caused by the statins and either change them or stop.
seems reasonable
14 units is the recommended amount for everyone
Shit, I'm under that most weeks. Better get back on the gin....
I love patients like this
I bet you do. For all those of you getting a holistic view then you are lucky as that has not been my experience with at all with wife or sister who have both used health "services" a lot.
I just take what the doctor tells me. Bit old fashioned but I tend to believe they want me to feel better and live longer so I’ll go with their professional opinion.
For all those of you getting a holistic view then you are lucky as that has not been my experience with at all with wife or sister who have both used health “services” a lot.
Would suggest that you accompany your wife to any medical appointments, a male witness can be useful.
I refused statins about 6 months ago, my GP surgery said that as I was over 60, and a diabetic in remission , my chance of a heart attack had gone up to 10%.
Oddly when I was 59 and 354 days old it was only 5%.
Obviously those things don't go up overnight but scales in line with your increasing age. I don't know precisely how QRisk works (CBA looking it up) but I'm assuming it puts people in age 'bins' E.g. 55-59 and 60-64. Your calculated risk probably compares an average 57.5 year old to a 62.5 year old. But you knew this.
I blood pressure is good ( if not a little low) , my resting heart rate in low 50s.
But my cholesterol is 0.5 higher than where it should be (which is most likely genetic).
I said I would consider statins once a Dr discussed why they work and why I needed them. The first consultation was hopeless with a GP who knew less about them than I did. The next GP I had a phon consultation with talk about to pros/ cons, how they “might” work, and NHS stats that were driving the NHS to get me to take them.
As DrP says, your GP is offering advice and won't lose sleep if you decline to follow that advice. There's no grand conspiracy where the man wants you to take mind-bending drugs. There's just some very good population data that says risk = w, and the cost of statins for people at risk = x. Meanwhile the cost of treatment and care for heart attack and stroke and lost earnings etc = y and the risk reduction of statins is z.
w * x < y * z
Obviously it's probably slightly more complex than that, but you get the gist.
She suggested we talked about it when I was 65.
She was fed up with the conversation, ticked the box on the form for QOF to say 'statin recommended', and moved on with her life 😉
As a doctor I'm always bemused by people that think they're doing me a favour by taking my advice. It's a weird culture that we seem to have developed in the UK - I'm not sure if it happens elsewhere (E.g. when people have to pay for advice / treatment). Conversely, I don't usually mind when people ignore my advice, either.
The problem with statins, I think, is that decision-making is clouded by a sense of youthful invincibility. People don't like being told they're no longer young, particularly if they've never been ill before. They don't like being forced to think about their mortality or nasty things like strokes, immediately after their big 60th birthday party (or whatever). So they make what are probably slightly irrational decisions to ignore the problem, or do some mental backflips until it no longer applies to them. All the while, their GP is nudging them to confront the issue and I guess it seems adversarial. I'd be interested to hear any strategies for dealing with this.
RE the Q risk..as you all spotted it gives a 10 year risk.. which can be skewed LOW if you're young...
Can ALSO play around with the LIFETIME risk, as opposed to 10 year risk...
I often talk about cholesterol and BP like a pension... "it's not the next weeks or months that matter greatly...it's the years and years away where it REALLY makes a difference.."
Thus a midly high BP for a short time isn't immediately catastrophic, but left like that it'll do long term damage eventually..
Statins and BP control aim to reduce this. But the benefit is years away...
DrP
A couple of people on here have said that getting old is rubbish. Be as it may, but it's the only thing keeping you alive.
Take the meds you've been prescribed and if you don't feel worse as a result keep on keeping on.
I'm quite enjoying getting old. 69th birthday this week which I marked by going out for a 69 mile ride (although a Strava error meant I only ended up doing 67) I felt fine next day so did a Pilates session in the morning and as it was breezy went windsurfing to use my birthday present - a big 7.8m triple cam sail. I enjoyed it so much I went again yesterday (even breezier).
Seems to be some debate about the value of statins for those at low risk.