CSN Login
Members Online: 13

Statin Use

Scottie22
Posts: 26
Joined: Apr 2013

Hi all

Anyone have any input on the effect of statins on the solitary kidney.  A little background, I had a radical nephrectomy of left kidney on May 1st last year.  November check up all was well and kidney function was great. Couple of months ago primary care insisted on low dose statin for moderately high cholesterol, trigs. etc.  I was very reluctant as I take no medications whatsoever but agreed to give it a try.  First lab results in yesterday and all within normal range, quite a drop.  However results were sent by recorded message and as an afterthought nurse said doc wants kidney function test in June.  I have been trying since yesterday to get a 'real person' on the line to tell me if this just routine or if kidney function has deteriorated in the couple of months since last test prior to starting meds and this is why she wants to have it rechecked. I take COQ10 with statin as that is supposed to help but intend to stop medication if I think kidney is being harmed. I am low risk for cardio problems aside from cholesterol.  Thoughts please anybody.

NanoSecond's picture
NanoSecond
Posts: 643
Joined: Oct 2012

Scottie.  I do not know if your issues are due to taking a statin or not.

However, unless you are a middle-aged man who has already suffered an actual heart attack there is no reason at all to be taking any statins.  And even in that case it probably is not justified either.

Don't take my word for it.  Do some research.  You can start with the excellent book by Dr. Malcolm Kendrick called, "The Great Cholesterol Con".  Here is his blog:

http://drmalcolmkendrick.org/

Then go here:

http://www.drbriffa.com/

Just look for peer-reviewed research by independent scientists who are not influenced by big pharma and you will discover that a sham has been perpetrated on the public for decades.

dhs1963's picture
dhs1963
Posts: 418
Joined: May 2012

There is a clear relationship between cholestoeral and cornary artery disease.  Now, there are absolutely people on statins that do not need it....most people with total cholesterol under 225 are fine.

What matters is the Total and the HDL.  If the HDL is good/high, you can handle a higher total cholesterol (or LDL).  Unfortunately for me, that is not always the case.  I run very very low HDL (18) and very high LDL (200) because of genetics.  Without the statins, I most certainly would have had a heart attack/heart issues 10 years ago.  Instead, I had my stent put in last summer.

 

Scottie22
Posts: 26
Joined: Apr 2013

My total cholesterol was around 230 but good stuff is always high (in the 70's) so I thought I was fine without meds.  I have a bit of atherosclerosis and my trigs are always high which is not a good thing.  Anyway the jury is still out for me and I was be raising this with my surgeon/urologist at my one year follow up next month.  Thanks for your input, much appreciated.

NanoSecond's picture
NanoSecond
Posts: 643
Joined: Oct 2012

Well we can agree to disagree on this one.  Genetic issues like FH certainly do call for the use of statins.  But I doubt that is the case here.

There may be a "relationship" between cholesterol and cardiovascular disease but it is certainly not clear.  There are plenty of cases of people with low and even ultra-low LDL (and total cholesterol) who have suffered heart attacks.

In fact, as we age, cholesterol levels naturally go up.  And this is a good thing for most of us.  If you care to look at the actual numbers you may be surprised to note that overall mortality (what really counts) goes up with lower LDL.

Finally, I do have to point out that total cholesterol is not the important number.

It is the ratio of triglycerides to HDL that is most important.  The closer to 1:1 it is, the better.  Or, put another way, the lower the triglycerides the better;  The higher the HDL number the better.

If this ratio is close to 1:1 then you need not be overly concerned about a high LDL (if you have that).  This is because LDL is a calculated number based on an imperfect algorithm.  In this case (only) a high LDL would likely mean that your LDL particles are large and "fluffy" and hence unable to penetrate the endothelium to cause any inflammation (which might lead to plaque formation).

But if you really want to be precise you need to do those tests that show the size and amount of LDL particles actually circulating in your system.  Total cholesterol is pretty meaningless without knowing this.

 

dhs1963's picture
dhs1963
Posts: 418
Joined: May 2012

I agree with what you are saying....I am shocked when I meet people on statins when they report the cholesterol numbers. On the other hand, the side effects are related to the dose -> low dose means less side effects.

In my case, I am on the maximum dose.  I am on an appropriate diet, and here are my numbers...

Cholesterol 318 125 - 200 MG/DL
Triglycerides 394 <150 MG/DL
 
HDL 19 > or = 40 MG/DL
LDL Calculated 220 <130 MG/DL
 
CHOL/HDL Ratio 16.7 0.0 - 5.0  
Non HDL Chol. (LDL+VLDL) 299   mg/dL

 

This was from my last lipid panel.  I had one drawn this week. 

 

The only thing this has in connection with RCC is that, if I had not been on the Statins, I would have not known I had RCC as I would have died of a heart attack before the RCC was discovered.

 

It would really suck

to be declared Ned

then suddenly drop dead

--

 

Scottie22
Posts: 26
Joined: Apr 2013

As always wise counsel. Some time ago I requested your .pdf file with your research into various aspects of lifestyle changes, diet etc.  I found it to be incredibly helpful and have been trying hard to follow advice. I will check out your links on cholesterol findings.  I have done some research online but it is very difficult to find unbiased reports.

Quick update from my first post.  Heard from nurse and it appears that there has been a slight dip in function but doc feels nothing to worry about.  She is just being conscientious in following up.  Seems it could just have been a bit of dehydration.  I was fasting and had been drinking water but failed to take into account my rigorous workout just prior to blood draw.

adman's picture
adman
Posts: 272
Joined: Jul 2012

 

My doc [ internist - not Onc ] has recommended a very light dose of Lipitor [ 5mg/ day ]

Cholesterol is 206 - HDL 40 / LDL 123, but Triglicerides are 215 ........a little afraid of taking these. 

 

Love this community feedback :)

 

NanoSecond's picture
NanoSecond
Posts: 643
Joined: Oct 2012

You can bring your HDL up and your Trigs down by cutting back on high glycemic carbohydrates and added sugar(s) in your diet.

Statins have side effects.  They can cause muscle aches and pains.  They can raise blood glucose (even, in some cases, leading to Type II Diabetes).  In rare occasions they can cause amnesia and other neurological adverse effects:

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/heartofthematter/

sblairc's picture
sblairc
Posts: 296
Joined: Feb 2014

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/804192

"Statin use is independently associated with improved survival in patients undergoing surgery for renal cell carcinoma," said Samuel Kaffenberger, MD, a researcher at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee"

I thought you might find this interesting and related to the discussion. I saw it the other day, what are your thoughts?

NanoSecond's picture
NanoSecond
Posts: 643
Joined: Oct 2012

Yes, I saw it.

Correlation ("association") is NOT causation.

I don't think it means much at all.  There are plenty of other ways to interfere with the secondary pathways that statins disrupt with impunity.  Moreover, it is likely that it is just statins ablility to lower inflammation that may account for the association.

GSRon's picture
GSRon
Posts: 1306
Joined: Jan 2013

Neil, I think I got a photo of the one study showing that Statin improved the results of one of the Cancer drugs... have to find it...  I was shocked to see it, and want to learn more...  

Ron

NanoSecond's picture
NanoSecond
Posts: 643
Joined: Oct 2012

Ron.  You have to take these with a grain of salt and skeptical mind.

In the latest issue of Science, which is dedicated to Breast Cancer, there is a short article titled, "Cholesterol and Cancer, in the Balance".

"Mammalian cells synthesize cholesterol through a series of 21 enzymatic steps, generating numerous metabolites that are involved in the control of physiological and developmental processes. Cholesterol itself is the precursor of steroid hormones and sterols, the latter of which can be further modified into molecules that induce specific biological responses..."

Please re-read the above and think about what it might mean to disrupt these processes.  The answer is that they still DON'T KNOW.

Continuing...

"...Epidemiological studies have investigated the role of cholesterol in breast cancer risk, with contradictory findings...Statin use is associated with both an increased and decreased risk of breast cancer, and other studies report no association at all.  A recent study has found that long-term (10 years) treatment with statins doubled the risk of invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma among post-menopausal women - a disconcerting finding given that statins are commonly taken for chronic, long-term use."

I realize this forum is about renal cancer but I can assure you that, in time, you will see contradictory findings published about the role of statins in renal and all other cancers.  I am all for participating in clinical trials (thank God I got in one) but not those that are conducted without consent.

Statins are a huge science project perpetrated on an unsuspecting public.  Just read the work of independent scientists.  Also read the personal accounts of the hundreds if not thousands of patients who have reported adverse side effects while taking them.

And always, always, look closely to discover the industry ties behind many of those that promote even more "statinization" of the public.

Subscribe with RSS
About Cancer Society

The content on this site is for informational purposes only. It is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Do not use this information to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease without consulting with a qualified healthcare provider. Please consult your healthcare provider with any questions or concerns you may have regarding your condition. Use of this online service is subject to the disclaimer and the terms and conditions.

Copyright 2000-2015 © Cancer Survivors Network