# Statins leading to diabetes in women?  Study



## Dawgluver (Jan 9, 2012)

Just saw a major study  (Women's Health Study) of, I believe, 150,000 women who take ANY brand of statins for cholesterol. Around 48% developed Type 2 diabetes.  Smaller studies previously suggested that, but this was the first time a major, long term study was done.  Will do more research.

This is not good.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 9, 2012)

Umm, no it's not, but I am really interested in seeing the article.  I haven't received any notices on that and I'm on all the lists for women's health care, especially heart and diabetes.


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 9, 2012)

It was on NBC Nightly News tonight. 

 They said it didn't matter the dose or how long the women were on it.  DH was blabbing away about something, and I was trying to pay attention to the news, so may have missed some details.


----------



## GLC (Jan 9, 2012)

It was featured on national news programs today. But it's not really news. A slightly older study published in The Lancet in 2011 was a meta analysis of published and unpublished studies from 1994 to 2009. They concluded their analysis shows that patents who took statins had their risk of diabetes increase by 9%. Before going any farther, note that the risk of diabetes in the general population is about 11%. A "9% increase" in that risk is 9% of 11%, or roughly an additional 1% or a total risk of 12%. A 9% increase in risk of almost any disease is a very small increase. It is what a scientists calls "statistically significant," but it's not of much practical significance. And no percent of increase means anything until you know the actual normal risk. Increase my risk of being hit by a meteorite by ten times or 100 times, and I'll still won't worry about it. 

Now, the study in the news today concluded that among the control group of older women who had never taken statins, 6.4% developed diabetes over a period of years. Among those who took statins over the same period, 10% developed diabetes. ATTENTION: That is about a 45% difference in the risk, NOT a 45% risk. Get that clear. 

Before getting too excited about this, remember that the conclusions about statins and diabetes did not consider any number of other factors. One of the most important is the tendency among statin patients to imagine that the drug relieves them of concerns about what they eat. Further, patients who require statins may well have had a history of less then healthy eating. Type 2 diabetes itself is a risk factor for high cholesterol. In other words, there are complex relationships between all these issues. And there may be relationships between factors that increase cholesterol to the point of needing statin therapy and an increase in diabetes. 

One thing it absolutely true. No study suggests that statins cause diabetes. And the MOST important thing to remember is that the purpose of scientific studies is to help define the next studies, NOT to offer conclusive truths. It is extremely rare that any study conclusively reveals practical truths. It's absurd to react to reported medical studies beyond consulting with your physician. Sadly, there will be people who go off their statins because they don't have the slightest understanding of medical studies. 

Of course what is true is that the non-medical steps one can take for heart disease risks happen to also be effective steps in diabetes prevention and moderation.


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 9, 2012)

I don't believe anyone suggested going off statin therapy if you are already on it .  But for low risk women, looking at it as preventative, or those who do not have excessively high cholesterol, but whose doctors want to put them on it anyway, simply because it's there, I wouldn't go for it.  It's overprescribed, IMHO.

I would agree that any drug should not give one license to eat every and anything one wants. 

A very large study, with big implications.  I plan on following it.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 9, 2012)

Like I said, I haven't gotten anything study based in this and I would if there was much to it.


----------



## Claire (Jan 9, 2012)

Interesting.  I, too, noticed this on the news this evening.  I was on Lipitor for a year, then TRICARE declined, out of the blue, to pay for any lab work for me.  In other words, they'd co-op the drugs, but not the tests necessary to stay on it.  Since I my cholesterol was borderline (ever notice that every year the numbers for any condition get lower and lower?  Is it just to sell drugs, or are we really in danger?) I opted out of taking the drug.  I think we all have to look at our family histories and lifestyle.  For now I'm glad I opted out, but that isn't to say I'd not go back on them if the profile looked different.


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 9, 2012)

I find it curious that numbers get lower every year, too, Claire.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 9, 2012)

Dawgluver said:


> I find it curious that numbers get lower every year, too, Claire.



Works the same with diabetes, the "normal" numbers keep getting lower.


----------



## Greg Who Cooks (Jan 9, 2012)

Like GLC said, it's 45% more risk than those who didn't take statins, not like 45% of all those who take statins are going to get diabetes. (Good post GLC!)

My doctor suggested I take statins a few years ago. I knew the statistics (liver disease, etc.) and I balked. I changed my diet and increased my exercise, and I've improved, not enough that my cholesterol is perfect but enough that my doctor agrees now that I don't need statins.

IMO you should always try diet and exercise to address bad cholesterol readings, and should not consider taking your statins as free rein to eat everything you want.

Gluttony is one of the seven mortal sins. Even if God doesn't punish gluttony it appears that Mother Nature does. And there's no appeals board.


----------



## babetoo (Jan 9, 2012)

these drugs caused deterioration in the muscles in my legs. they were mixed by the doctors with another drug which added to the problem. i would never take one again under any circumstance. had to have rehab to be able to walk. also affected my kidneys. be careful out there!


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 9, 2012)

babetoo said:
			
		

> these drugs caused deterioration in the muscles in my legs. they were mixed by the doctors with another drug which added to the problem. i would never take one again under any circumstance. had to have rehab to be able to walk. also affected my kidneys. be careful out there!



That's awful, Babe.  My dad had a severe reaction too, similar to yours.  He was put on statins as a preventative, and had the worst muscle pain of his life.  Supposedly, the reactions are very rare.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 9, 2012)

We watch my liver and kidney function carefully, blood tests every two months since I am on 2 statins.  I'm almost a hypochondriac of odd aches and pains in my muscles.


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 9, 2012)

PrincessFiona60 said:
			
		

> We watch my liver and kidney function carefully, blood tests every two months since I am on 2 statins.  I'm almost a hypochondriac of odd aches and pains in my muscles.



I think you have to be.  My poor dad was in agony, not realizing that it was a very dangerous side effect.


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 23, 2012)

Found this to be interesting:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/756688?src=emailthis

You need a subscription to see the article, but it's free.  Apparently this has some merit, and there probably is a connection.

Doc tried to talk me into a statin at my last visit, even though I'm "borderline".  I said no, and he didn't argue too much.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 23, 2012)

Dawgluver said:


> Found this to be interesting:
> 
> Medscape: Medscape Access
> 
> ...



I would be alarmed if I had not been borderline diabetic for at least 15 years and my parents are both diabetic.  I've always known I would end up over the wrong side of that line, it was just a matter of time. 

As it is, everything is good for me now and I will be more alert for changes in my patients who are using statins but do not have a Diabetes diagnosis.  

I love Medscape, I've been a member for years.


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 23, 2012)

PrincessFiona60 said:
			
		

> I would be alarmed if I had not been borderline diabetic for at least 15 years and my parents are both diabetic.  I've always known I would end up over the wrong side of that line, it was just a matter of time.
> 
> As it is, everything is good for me now and I will be more alert for changes in my patients who are using statins but do not have a Diabetes diagnosis.
> 
> I love Medscape, I've been a member for years.



I love Medscape too.  They cut to the chase, and the research is sound.  Glad you're under control, PF!  With all the statin mentality, I wonder why this isn't getting more press.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 23, 2012)

Mostly because there are people out there who would go off their statins and they do need them...it's what keeps them on the right side of no heart attacks and strokes.  Shrek will continue on his, because I can continue to care for him with what he has going on now, but a heart attack will kill him and a stroke would be the first move into a nursing care facility.  I'm not tired of him yet.


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 23, 2012)

PrincessFiona60 said:
			
		

> Mostly because there are people out there who would go off their statins and they do need them...it's what keeps them on the right side of no heart attacks and strokes.  Shrek will continue on his, because I can continue to care for him with what he has going on now, but a heart attack will kill him and a stroke would be the first move into a nursing care facility.  I'm not tired of him yet.



They didn't study men.  Thought that was interesting.  I think the caution here is not for those currently on statins to go off them, but to not find them a one size fits all for potential new patients.  And to start research for alternatives.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 23, 2012)

Dawgluver said:


> They didn't study men.  Thought that was interesting.  I think the caution here is not for those currently on statins to go off them, but to not find them a one size fits all for potential new patients.  And to start research for alternatives.



I agree, I would like something better than the two I am taking and the blood tests that go along with it.  I really hate needles...


----------



## GLC (Jan 24, 2012)

Dawgluver said:


> They didn't study men.  Thought that was interesting.  I



They reported on women because they were using the dataset created by the Women's Health Initiative, a set of clinical trials running since 1991 "to test the effects of postmenopausal hormone therapy, diet modification, and calcium and vitamin D supplements on heart disease, fractures, and breast and colorectal cancer."

The dataset is a collection of a large number of variable of several different types, which helps analyze results. When you have that kind of data, the studies are actually reports of statistical studies, rather than a single researcher carrying out a study to collect data independently. Because of the number of variable recorded in the Initiative, statistical analysis is very complicated but potentially very informative and reliable, because it considers so many factors that might otherwise be suspected of being involved in the effects. The analysis tells you which variable actually correlate to the effects. In other words, you don't necessarily have to guess correctly and then do a study to test your guess. The numbers tell you what's significant, even if you didn't suspect that outcome. That's very powerful. It can tell you things you literally would never have guessed.


----------



## Addie (Jan 24, 2012)

I unwittiling got my cholesterol down to normal by myself. All my numbers are down to normal. I don't know what I did for that to happed, but as a result a lot of my meds were discontinued. Including the Lipitor. But I still have my blood work done every three months. So now I have only my heart probles to worry about. I can live with that.


----------



## 4meandthem (Jan 24, 2012)

I was automatically put on them when i was diagnosed T2 diabetic. I took them for 2 years. I am a powerlifter (goes to max weight often) and started having severe cramping issues after workouts.I could have ten muscles throughout my body cramp at the same time (so painful). One of the first things I did was stop the statins since I don't really have any cholestorol problems and they are notorious. Things cleared up but I made several changes as well. I have been back on the statins for about 2 months and the cramping thing is slowing coming back it seems. I may stop them again and see what happens. My BS was also high during that time and I have some other issues but it is worth a shot for while.


----------



## GLC (Jan 24, 2012)

Muscle cramps is a known side effect, and there are lots of reports from statin patients about cramps they associate with the drug. 

One doctor says:
I am often asked by my patients what can be done, short of discontinuation of the medication, for cholesterol lowering statin drug induced muscle cramps. The cause seems to be related to impaired fat oxidation within the muscle’s mitochondria (the cell’s “furnace” for making energy for contraction).
I would suggest considering the following plan for my patients:
1. Try a fat restricted diet with a higher focus on high carbohydrate diet due to the problems with fatty acid oxidation
2. Fish oils improve fatty acid oxidation. Therefore, try 2,000 to 5,000 mgm a day of combined EPA/DHA capsules.
3. Magnesium may be of help.  Basically, the goal is about 1,200 to 1,800 mgm a day of magnesium. Diarrhea or loose stools may determine your ability to tolerate this element.
4. L-Carnitine 1 Gm three times a day for a 4-6 week trial may help. Take with meals.
5. CoQ-10 is occasionally helpful. It must be highly bio-available in its formulation. The dose to consider is between 300-600 mgm a day.

And, of course, he reminds that patient should see their physician before trying any of these things.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 24, 2012)

What's important is making the best decision for you and knowing all the risks and benefits.  You don't know what YOUR reaction will be to any medication until you have tried it.  You are making the best step in doing your own research and discovering the answers to your questions yourself.

I am all for treating conditions with diet and exercise first, however, if/when those don't work, it's probably time to turn to medications.


----------



## Greg Who Cooks (Jan 24, 2012)

GLC said:


> 1. Try a fat restricted diet with a higher focus on high carbohydrate diet due to the problems with fatty acid oxidation
> 2. Fish oils improve fatty acid oxidation. Therefore, try 2,000 to 5,000 mgm a day of combined EPA/DHA capsules.



This makes me appreciate how different many of our situations are.

What's working for me is a lower carbohydrate diet and not all that concerned about how much fat I eat, within reason.

I've been taking an EPA/DHA (Omega 3 fatty acid) supplement for years. I'm convinced it has something to do with preventing internal inflammation (as in blood vessels). Perhaps I don't have the right explanation but I believe I have the right idea. Either take lots of supplements or eat a lot of salmon...



PrincessFiona60 said:


> I am all for treating conditions with  diet and exercise first, however, if/when those don't work, it's  probably time to turn to medications.



Me too. So far I'm lucky that for me it's working, diet and exercise.


----------



## Dawgluver (Jan 24, 2012)

PrincessFiona60 said:
			
		

> What's important is making the best decision for you and knowing all the risks and benefits.  You don't know what YOUR reaction will be to any medication until you have tried it.  You are making the best step in doing your own research and discovering the answers to your questions yourself.
> 
> I am all for treating conditions with diet and exercise first, however, if/when those don't work, it's probably time to turn to medications.



Very true.


----------



## PrincessFiona60 (Jan 24, 2012)

Dawgluver said:


> Very true.



Heh!  You KNOW I wanted a heart attack at the age of fifty...


----------

