Hello Guest, Welcome to Apnea Board !
As a guest, you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use.
To post a message, you must create a free account using a valid email address.

or Create an Account


New Posts   Today's Posts

Statins may lower risk of heart disease in people with sleep apnea
#21
(01-07-2016, 02:34 PM)eseedhouse Wrote: I have been taking various "statins" for around 30 years, currently "Rosuvastatin" ("Baycor but now out of patent and available as a fairly cheap generic in various brands).

I've never really noticed any problems.

What does this mean for you? Why nothing at all, of course. Individual anecdotes are meaningless. There are definitely many people who get bad side effects with these drugs, that is well established.

But don't forget that muscle pain has many causes and just because you are taking a statin (or any other medication) that doesn't mean that the statin is causing you that pain. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is still a logical fallacy.

What is also well established, with many studies and papers in peer reviewed journals, is that statins in general do a good deal more good than they do harm.

No one can say that one of these drugs will extend your particular life. What we can say with some assurance is that, overall, if a whole lot of people take them many of those will have their lives extended and a very few will be harmed. And the overall cost to society of heart disease will be reduced.

Whether it is worthwhile for you personally to take it I am not qualified to say. It's up to you to decide if you will follow your doctor's recommendation.

By the way, Baycor was removed from the market for it's fatalities and rosuvastatin is generic for Crestor. Crestor is one they try to tell you is lower in side effects - i let myself be talked into taking it in very low dosage as a trial - but no go for me!

My cholesterol is not all that high - the worrisome number is triglyceride, and the ldl/hdl ratio - and that just goes with being DMII... if i get my blood sugar down the triglyceride number comes down too,

and exercise is the best way of fixing the ratio.

[Image: CU_g4LoWsAAzcbv.jpg]

هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه
Tongue Suck Technique for prevention of mouth breathing:
  • Place your tongue behind your front teeth on the roof of your mouth
  • let your tongue fill the space between the upper molars
  • gently suck to form a light vacuum
Practising during the day can help you to keep it at night

هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه هههههه
Post Reply Post Reply
#22
(01-08-2016, 07:57 AM)49er Wrote: I have to respectfully disagree with your point of view. I think all of us understand that causation doesn't necessarily equal correlation. But at the same time, if I start a drug and get a side effect that I have never had a problem with prior to starting the meds, there are great odds that the drug is the culprit.

Well, that's the natural conclusion most people would arrive at, but it's not necessarily the correct one.

For instance, suppose a certain disease occurs in 1% of the population and there is a test that is 99% perfect. You get tested and you are positive. What's the probability that you have that disease?

Most people would say 99%, right? Well they would be wrong. The actual probability is 50%.
Ed Seedhouse
VA7SDH

The above is my opinion.  It is just possible that I may, occasionally, be mistaken.

I am neither a Doctor, nor any other kind of medical professional.

Everything put together sooner or later falls apart.
Your brain is not the boss.
Our forefathers took drugs.
He's no fun he fell right over.
Post Reply Post Reply
#23
I was put on Zocor (now called simvastatin) many years ago by my cardiologist. At that time it was an established drug and not one of the newer "wonder" statins. His comment was it was one of the many options he had at the time and he had good results with it. I have had good results. We do the full series of labs every year to include liver function and the numbers have always been good. He is real happy with my numbers especially seeing as I don't watch what I eat that closely.

Now, when he tried to put my wife on a statin, she had all sorts of problems, even with simvastatin. After some intensive research, he determined a large part of her issues dealt with the pain and other meds she is on.

The key thing to take away from this is we are all different and their is no one solution for every one.

Homer
Post Reply Post Reply


#24
Earlier in this thread somebody asked why to my never ever again response.

I had been on a minimum dose of one of the more (in)famous statins, and developed rhabdomyolosis. My doctors refused to consider that the medication was causing this, and by the time I did some internet research and figured this out, one of my kidneys ended up very severely scarred and atrophied.

Like I said: Never again.

I believe that debilitating side effects are still more prevalent than most doctors and the companies marketing these meds are ever going to be willing to admit, but that has yet to be proven conclusively. I will say that in my case, the effects were life changing and very lasting.
Post Reply Post Reply
#25
No go for me either, my doctor tried me on 2 different types, one of which was crestor, same result on both....intolerable muscle pain.
Post Reply Post Reply
#26
(01-08-2016, 12:50 PM)eseedhouse Wrote:
(01-08-2016, 07:57 AM)49er Wrote: I have to respectfully disagree with your point of view. I think all of us understand that causation doesn't necessarily equal correlation. But at the same time, if I start a drug and get a side effect that I have never had a problem with prior to starting the meds, there are great odds that the drug is the culprit.

Well, that's the natural conclusion most people would arrive at, but it's not necessarily the correct one.

For instance, suppose a certain disease occurs in 1% of the population and there is a test that is 99% perfect. You get tested and you are positive. What's the probability that you have that disease?

Most people would say 99%, right? Well they would be wrong. The actual probability is 50%.

Hmm, the issue is if someone develops an issue that they have never had before and the drug has been recently added, that the first logical step would be to make sure this isn't the culprit. For example, when I started rinsing with listerine several years ago, all of a sudden, l lost my sense of taste which had never been a problem. As soon as I stopped using it, the problem was resolved.

I looked up this side effect and it was a rare one reported in a dental journal. Thankfully, unlike many doctors, the dentist believed me and made sure it was put in my chart so it was never suggested again.

I am perplexed as to why you are resistant to what seems like a logical first step to me. You're right, something else could be going on but to not look first at the drug seems criminal to me.

49er

Post Reply Post Reply


#27
(01-08-2016, 11:21 PM)Duckdog58 Wrote: Earlier in this thread somebody asked why to my never ever again response.

I had been on a minimum dose of one of the more (in)famous statins, and developed rhabdomyolosis. My doctors refused to consider that the medication was causing this, and by the time I did some internet research and figured this out, one of my kidneys ended up very severely scarred and atrophied.

Like I said: Never again.

I believe that debilitating side effects are still more prevalent than most doctors and the companies marketing these meds are ever going to be willing to admit, but that has yet to be proven conclusively. I will say that in my case, the effects were life changing and very lasting.

The problem is that doctors generally don't want to admit that something they have prescribed may be causing harm. What they don't understand as evidenced in your case is my denying drug side effects, they end up doing more damage to a patient's health.

I am so sorry for what happened to you.

49er

Post Reply Post Reply
#28
(01-09-2016, 03:59 AM)49er Wrote: The problem is that doctors generally don't want to admit that something they have prescribed may be causing harm. What they don't understand as evidenced in your case is my denying drug side effects, they end up doing more damage to a patient's health.

My GP must be a saint, then. He's admitted error on several occasions without being asked to.

Ed Seedhouse
VA7SDH

The above is my opinion.  It is just possible that I may, occasionally, be mistaken.

I am neither a Doctor, nor any other kind of medical professional.

Everything put together sooner or later falls apart.
Your brain is not the boss.
Our forefathers took drugs.
He's no fun he fell right over.
Post Reply Post Reply
#29
(01-09-2016, 03:59 AM)49er Wrote:
(01-08-2016, 11:21 PM)Duckdog58 Wrote: Earlier in this thread somebody asked why to my never ever again response.

I had been on a minimum dose of one of the more (in)famous statins, and developed rhabdomyolosis. My doctors refused to consider that the medication was causing this, and by the time I did some internet research and figured this out, one of my kidneys ended up very severely scarred and atrophied.

Like I said: Never again.

I believe that debilitating side effects are still more prevalent than most doctors and the companies marketing these meds are ever going to be willing to admit, but that has yet to be proven conclusively. I will say that in my case, the effects were life changing and very lasting.

The problem is that doctors generally don't want to admit that something they have prescribed may be causing harm. What they don't understand as evidenced in your case is my denying drug side effects, they end up doing more damage to a patient's health.

I am so sorry for what happened to you.

49er

Water under the bridge. I'm still here and getting along just fine. Just have to be a bit careful with alcohol and some foods.
Post Reply Post Reply


#30
Quote: What is also well established, with many studies and papers in peer reviewed journals, is that statins in general do a good deal more good than they do harm.

Sure, maybe, if you are a guy. There are only 2 large studies that involve women and both showed an increase in heart attacks for women taking statins. Until people started complaining LOUDLY about injuries from statins, the medical community either ridiculed or denied their complications. They are NOT RARE. In addition, some experienced permanent damage. It took my mom 2 years to recover from 3 years of statin use. Some of the muscle damage appears to be permanent.
Post Reply Post Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Sleep Apnea And Bad Dreams? harmon k 9 245 49 minutes ago
Last Post: stanleydean
  mouth guard and sleep apnea Novello1234 6 155 Yesterday, 03:32 PM
Last Post: Novello1234
  Sleep Apnea can kill you (or at least contribute) PsychoMike 3 271 06-20-2017, 06:38 PM
Last Post: srlevine1
  Fitbit going after the sleep apnea market. DavePaulson 1 168 06-20-2017, 06:24 PM
Last Post: srlevine1
  Carrie Fisher died from 'sleep apnea and other causes' dwd1249 15 655 06-20-2017, 01:48 PM
Last Post: personal111
  I just got my sleep results back and I dont have Sleep Apnea??? Navi 6 384 06-16-2017, 06:43 PM
Last Post: MikeV99
  Sleep Apnea Machine - How many years of use? macheta 3 191 06-15-2017, 10:30 PM
Last Post: PollCat

Forum Jump:

New Posts   Today's Posts




About Apnea Board

Apnea Board is an educational web site designed to empower Sleep Apnea patients.

For any more information, please use our contact form.