Required? Are you serious?
It’s just the words from one person.
But here’s the Sam Harris podcast if you’re curious:
https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/waking-up-conversations/health-longevity
It’s a fairly long podcast so unfortunately I can’t pinpoint where the topic actually begins
I wonder if the statins actually lower cholesterol, or are designed simply to fool the cholesterol tests.
I’m currently taking a 20mg tablet daily, but I could probably cut down to every other day. My cholesterol is not in the killing range.
I dunno, but statins are associated with a reduced all-cause mortality, so if you are in the population that has been tested (those who had high cholesterol that appears to be reduced by statins) and you tolerate them well, you should probably take them.
My question is how high did the cholesterol (or triglycerides? — my cholesterol is only borderline high) have to be before it caused a problem?
I’m also pretty sure that my lack of exercise is contributing to high triglycerides. Hopefully I’ll get this sciatica under control so I can walk more than 15 min at a time.
Short read, opinion piece.
That question is (probably) probablistic. Perhaps better phrased “how high does it need to be for me to have a 50% chance of having a stroke/hearth attack in the next X months)?”
I don’t have the answer to that either 
Alcohol/sugar is probably the biggest threat to triglycerides.
I think if you’re relatively active and it makes no change to your indices, then more exercise probably won’t help either.
Oh man we have gone really far off topic here
Anyways, I highly recommend everyone get a cheapo $50 scale that also measures body fat. Not super accurate but close enough (1-2% vs bod pod)
This will help you ascertain if your weight loss/gain is muscle or fat
In general less body fat is related to healthier life outcomes. Obviously starving yourself is another disease.
BMI is inferior measure because it penalizes overly muscular individuals
I’ll pass. I know I’m fat.
Yes we have and it’s my fault.
1 Like
I dunno, is that something you trust your doctor to be able to advise you on? I kinda agree with Yoyo’s point, that if your overall risk is already low, there is little benefit to a statin. But if your underlying risk is high, the benefits of statins seem more striking. And of course, some people pop a cheap pill and don’t notice any side effects. Others have muscle aches or other statin side effects. Statins are a much better bet if you are in the first category.
Oh the other hand, artery disease is progressive, and just because your risk in the next 5 years is low doesn’t mean that better cholesterol isn’t helping you.
But I’m not really on top of statins, because my cholesterol is pretty good despite my diet high in red meat and whole milk. (Genetics really are a huge part of the story.) I used to kinda follow it because my father had a professional interest in it and talked about it (he was a liver doctor who taught physiology) but I’m pretty out-of-date.
The one time I got a high triglycerides reading, it was shortly after Halloween, and half my calories in the 3 days prior to that blood test came from baby milky way bars. I sort of assumed the issue was the trans fats in milky ways, but my doctor attributed it to the sugar, and that’s certainly plausible. We both agreed that I didn’t need to start treatment based on that one test, and every year since my blood lipids have been normal.
- It’s yoyo, not Yoyo
(just having a little fun). - Risk calculators appear to grossly overestimate. See Epic article above.
Cholesterol may not be the demon it’s been made out to be. Competing hypotheses exist (inflammation). Cholesterol is necessary for human life and we have evolved systems capable of regulating it. But cholesterol is measurable, and circulating cholesterol can be lowered by buying and taking a drug every day for the rest of your life.
A doctor I had long ago told me this too. My total # hovers just above or below 200. My Tri to HDL ratio is under 2. Every year I kindly decline the statin offer from my current doctor, but he’s beholding to the large corporate group to which he belongs and I’m a Medicare patient, so he kinda has to ask and nudge. He’s a nice enough guy, but the visit feels very checklist driven.
I wish I could find and independent doctor taking new patients.
1 Like
Sounds like we have similar numbers, although i guess my total cholesterol is usually closer to 180. But fwiw, my doctor has never mentioned statins and didn’t even bother to do a lipid profile this year.
And i apologize for the capitalization. I confess that I’m lazy, and tend not to correct whatever my phone picks. Thus, my tendency to use lower case “i” a lot of the time for the first person pronoun.
1 Like
Just remember that he is a yoyo.
Just not The Yoyo.
1 Like
Did you read my post? My phone picked the capitalization, not me.
1 Like
Seeing a doctor is also associated with reduced all-cause mortality.
I’m sure they help the people who need them to control their cholesterol, but there could be a lot of correlation that results from the borderline group being thrown in with the actual driver being they see a doctor.
And making time to go to the doctor is all sorts of correlated with things like healthcare, income, and healthier lifestyles.
1 Like
Yeah over 200 isn’t a statin death sentence anymore
As long as your LDL levels aren’t through the roof and you have a good amount of HDL
Over 300 or even 250 total cholesterol is a different story though
My post wasn’t necessarily for you. Information for all.
Also people have a PCP and visit regularly tend to want to live a “healthier” life
As opposed to veterans who only show up begrudgingly to the hospital because of the stabbing chest pains their wife dragged them in for (this is the fix it group of patients as opposed to prevent it group)