Do Statins even work?! | Relative vs Absolute risk
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 тра 2024
- Do statins really reduce risk of heart disease? By how much? Is absolute risk very low? How do absolute and relative risk compare? A general look at the science on statins and cardiovascular disease.
Statins: efficacy (do statins work), safety (potential side effects), funding concerns etc
emotional views: everybody should be on a statin, add statins to the water supply vs statins are poison
do statins lower cardiovascular risk?
clinical trials: half take a statin, half take a placebo. 22% lower risk of heart attacks, strokes etc. cardiovascular outcomes
The lower the LDL-cholesterol achieved… the lower the risk.
statins lower cholesterol and ApoB lipoproteins, that's why they lower risk. but trials look at LDL-cholesterol
clinical trials where cholesterol is lowered with statins: the longer the larger the benefit
statins help stabilize plaque and may reduce plaque volume but it´s a modest effect
Absolute risk is smaller, does that mean statins don’t work?
Absolute risk reduction heavily determined by the risk in the control group.
Relative risk reduction is more generalizable. Absolute risk reduction is more sensitive to the specific context. Absolute risk reduction tells us more about that specific experiment, Relative risk reduction gives us a general idea of what the drug can do.
Connect with me:
Facebook: / drgilcarvalho
Twitter: / nutritionmades3
Animations: Even Topland @toplandmedia
References:
academic.oup.com/eurheartj/ar...
academic.oup.com/eurheartj/ar...
www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/1...
www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.11...
www.jacc.org/doi/pdf/10.1016/...
jamanetwork.com/journals/jama...
jamanetwork.com/journals/jama...
www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/...
www.sciencedirect.com/science...
jamanetwork.com/journals/jama...
academic.oup.com/jnci/article...
www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.ja...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.jacc.org/doi/pdf/10.1016/...
Disclaimer: The contents of this video are for informational purposes only and are not intended to be medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, nor to replace medical care. The information presented herein is accurate and conforms to the available scientific evidence to the best of the author's knowledge as of the time of posting. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions regarding any medical condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay seeking it because of information contained in Nutrition Made Simple!.
#NutritionMadeSimple #GilCarvalho
0:00 Introduction
0:19 My disclaimer
1:34 Do statins lower risk?
4:52 The effect of time
9:39 Putting it all together
11:01 Statins trials and industry funding
12:12 Absolute vs Relative Risk
18:46 Is it misleading to report relative risk?
20:51 The Bottomline
Wow. Humblingly informative. To have someone take on the criticism of statins in such a credible way is invaluable. Thank you.
This is the best explanatiob i have heard about the dufference between absolute risk and relative risk. Bravo!
One of the best explanations about cholesterol and statins I have ever seen 🙏
Thanks Gil,
The first video of yours was very informative, I felt my nutrition knowledge grew by 20%,i watched iit three times and the benefits increased to 30%. I have watched most of your videos more than once now which has increased my understanding by at least 90%.alas my absolute understanding of nutrition still around 30%.its increasing over the years thanks to you. Love what you are doing mate. Cheers Alan
That's the best explanation of relative and absolute risk I have ever heard. 👏 And a great explanation of how risks manifest over time. Sometimes I get sad at how underestimated well-run long-term prospective cohort studies are, because they do uncover long-term outcomes.
Well, its a nice try but doesnt go up fully i guess. In your example, you drive 1000 rounds in 1 year and you have 10 accidents, you have a 1% risk. But to have a 50% risk after 20 years you need to have a accident 50% of the time you drive around the block? So having higher LDL does compound risk, but within the driving example, you need to get a worse driver through the years? haha
@@coenfirmationbias7117
Your counter example is badly formulated.
If you drive a route 1000 times over 1 year and have 10 accidents, you are a 1% risk driver.
Assuming your driving skills remain the same, as a 1% risk driver, by driving the same route over 20 years you're expected to have 200 accidents.
If the gadget is 100% effective, it will prevent 10 accidents in the first year and 200 accidents over 20 years.
Have you heard of The Jupiter Trials? Look it up. Enough said.
Thank you for doing this series. I'm looking forward to each episode.
Your clarification is distilled into such relevant simplicity that anyone can appreciate....very well done
For your upcoming video on statin side effects please address study "toxicity of statins on rat skeletal muscle mitochondria". Also, investigate the depletion of CoQ10 (important mitochondrial antioxidant) and the claim that pharma companies initially fortified statins with it, but stopped due to expense. Also, people claim taking a CoQ10 supplement does not offset that depletion anyway. Also, note the similarities of statin side effects are similar to mitochondrial dysfunction (fatigue, muscle aches, etc)... But doctors seem to dismiss these statin side effects without really knowing the cause, which very well could be mitochondrial damage based on above study. Also, consumerlab states statins can trigger HMGCR IMNM, an autoimmune condition that causes muscle breakdown. I would love to hear some of these problems addressed as to what exactly the statins are doing to your body that causes these side effects and not just "oh you might have a few muscle aches" like some doctors say.
Coq10 is one of the supplements that I always found had an immediate and significant positive effect. Energy levels, morning wood, mental clarity much better
And in saying all of this MOST ppl forget, the heart is a muscle, the very subject it claims to assist!
My experience was that taking 100mg Ubiquinol had little effect, but when Increased to 200mg/day it became more useful.
Once again a phenomenal video Dr Gil. Great explanation of AR and RR and the importance of time of exposure. Looking forward to the rest of the videos in this series
First here!! Doc please make a separate video about the Diabetes causing effects of statins and if PSK Inhibitors are any better? This is the number 1 thing stopping me from going on statins since I'm only 22 and Diabetic effects are also exposure dependent
yup will be covered in the follow-up on side effects :)
Superlative explanation of a very important concept! I have listened to a few biostat lectures where they bring in the famous Lipitor ad showing a 36% (relative) risk reduction with a disclaimer in small print mentioning the absolute risk reduction to be just 1%. The presenters generally fail to explain this apparent contradiction and some even appeal to the 'evil pharma' theory. Nobody has considered the factor of time of exposure so far, which is why their explanations always seemed incomplete.
Thanks a ton for educating me :)
Absolutely important information. Thank you Dr. Gil 🙏
Side effects of statins "compound" as well, not just overall cardiovascular event risk. The sooner one goes on a medication, without being ill or needing it, the higher the overall risk of adverse effects. No drug is without adverse effects. Pills are not candies. Act on your diet and lifestyle rather than planning to take a medicine for thirty to fifty years.
My grand father and his father died at an early age due to heart attack. My dad gone one too at 45 but luckily survived. I’m at 14 percent body fat, I do cardio and weights 4 days a week. Every meal of mine had veggies and a good source of protein. I don’t smoke and I completely quit booz 2 years back. I have a test 2 days back and my cholesterol and triglycerides are very high 😢 I think it’s genetic
Why would someone take a medication while already being healty and have good lifestyle anyway? Hmmm..
@@Victor33 It is. I'm in the same boat.
That is literally not true.
Side effects of statins for many are also very low to non existent. And those with side effects can try a different statin since there is a choice
A really clearly explained subject. Sadly, I had 3 strokes in 2020 and it was discovered that I have FH & Anti phospholipid Syndrome. Statins weren t suitable for me so now on Ezetimibe which obviously does something similar. I only wish I'd have known all this sooner but as you so wisely said-we can only move forwards. And I do! Thanks again for your help.
Im waiting for part 2 on side effects. I read several books like "The Great Cholesterol Myth" that argued against statins because the all cause mortality was the same with or without statins...suggesting that the side effects negate any benefits
part 2 coming soon! :) hopefully this month
the all cause mortality Q is pretty clear: ua-cam.com/video/CxX51n2Z0vc/v-deo.html
The great cholesterol myth.. is that it doesn't matter. I know I was fooled for a little while but now I know better thanks to Gil and Plant chompers. No more keto for me. Mediterranean sorta whole foods for now on..
I am hoping my blood numbers are better. Going back June 20th for blood work. I change my diet after watching several of your videos. Thanks for bringing facts.
Keep the analogies going because it helps us understand the concept better! Thanks
Thank you for the video. Living up to the name of the channel once again! 🙂
Thank you for a clear and concise explanation. This information is very valuable to those who are interested in understanding subjects thoroughly.
Wow, an impressive tour de force in communication on this hot topic. Thanks for the clear explanation and useful analogies!
This is a brilliant observation! I found my old medical records from when I was in the military (90s) and my cholesterol was always high. I'm in my 50s now with a stent 😔
As a person with FH, browsing doctors and not so much doctors on youtube for more than 10 years I have to say that this is by far the best explanation I've seen regarding statins and how they work. Sadly I have intolerance to them and now I'm on Repatha.
-- I had side-effects with Lipitor. I now take niacin 👌
@@jamescalifornia2964 my TC is 300+....Niacin is not an option
@@dubfire77 - 👌 Stay healthy
@@jamescalifornia2964 thanks, you too!
Excellent video and I'm just subscribed. Like many, I've been mulling over the risk-reward calculus of statins given the concerns over cognitive deterioration vis-vis absolute efficacy. This video provides the much needed clarity. It will be helpful if you could shed further light on any possibility medically of reducing statin dosage or even stopping it for those whose markers including HDL, LDL, Total serum cholesterol and ApoB are optimised and who are on intermittent fasting as well as a low carb (and anything refined or processed) diet. Of course, the decision will need to be made with my doctor ultimately. Thanks!
Great video! Please keep uploading on this topic
Clear explanation about relative and absolute risk. Thanks.
glad to hear it!!! wasn't sure it was clear...
Thank you for your sharing this valuable information with us!
Thank you, best explanation of this difference I’ve ever seen.
Doc. I’m an engineer, lots of background in science and data. I have to tell you, you single handedly rescued me from the rabbit hole of “statins are bad”, along with the other topics about saturated fat, red meat, low carb, etc.. There just is no one else out there that I could find that does what you do, presenting the data and the likely actions based on the preponderance of the data. I’ve devoured all of your videos. At first, I thought they were too simple. But that was because I was caught by the web of mechanistic views (e.g. cell walls being affected by bad fats, mitochondrial disfunction, blah blah). I am sort of the local layperson expert, as it were, in my circle of friends on various topics since I research so much of these topics. You and plant choppers have rescued me from a position that I would have sworn I was not in, which was falling for the spin of what I think now are more like conspiracies theories (I don’t really want to label it that since that is too negative) like those that try and convince one that saturated fat is not harmful. If I had all my research to do over again, I’d start with your channel and plant chompers, and just read Metobolical by Robert Lustig for the details on the real cause of our health crisis (that is being hijacked by some to make cases that don’t exist), which is processed food and sugar. Anyway, I could (and have) go on and on. Just can’t say enough about how great this information is!
thanks!!! thrilled to hear! (and by all means keep fact-checking, and fact-check our info as well!!)
I’m glad that you are not another engineer who prescribes a keto diet!
I appreciate this comment a lot. I, too, consider this channel and plant chompers the best sources and follow both but don’t have the scientific background to validate my choices.
Your comment is interesting, I actually take the view I don't need to know and truth is the scientists don't know either because getting cause and effect of an individual item is impossible. What we know works is low amounts of empty calories and majority of food should be a large variety of whole plant based foods, we don't have a clue really about any individual effects. However whether or not it's a certainty regarding saturated fats, omega 3s etc as in they aren't sure we know taking the conservative approach and following the advice will work regardless if it's required. I don't need to know if the advice makes a difference, using low saturated vegetable oil in relatively low amounts (not too many deep fried things) and a bit of fish and vegetable sources of omega 3 will do the job even if actually it's not a big issue.
@@annoyedaussie3942 I’m very open to as many views as possible. It is interesting that you are saying you don’t need to know and scientists don’t know, but you then draw a conclusion that you think small amounts of veg oil and omega 3s from fish/veg ‘will do the job’. That’s a conclusion based on some evidence, right? As the doc says, there’s no 100% certainty on any of these things, but there is (at least I think there is) a preponderance of evidence on some things, and he helps draw that out from the data, and not from a dogmatic view. That’s at least my conclusion from about 12 months of reading/watching/listening. I think a skeptical view is appropriate, but one still ends up making a choice. As the Rush songs says “if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”. I think you made one, right? That said, like any of them, there is some chance we’re wrong, but we hopefully make a choice eyes wide open to all the data.
Thank you so much for all of your research. This was very helpful.
This guy is one of the best. Thank you.
thank you for this info. Due to all your fantastic presented evidence, I have decided to take statins for my genetically high cholesterol. I was previously scared of taking them. and now i can see that benefits can out weigh risks. I really appreciate this channel.
How are you doing after taking statins? I’m trying to decide whether to take them or not.
Great video and amazing channel.
Thanks for addressing the funding question. Periodically mentioning it with additional info may be good, so that we know the info is being updated. For now this info is sufficient for this viewer. Keep up the good work. Question: are we not able at all to reduce current levels of the CAC score?
There is a lot of controversy over whether CAC scores can be improved or not. Most cardiologists will say you cannot. But there are anecdotal stories of people saying they did lower their scores with vitamins D and K, and magnesium. And of course drastically changing their diet.
Very informative thank you so much you’re awesome and many blessings to you and your family
Thank you for bringing science and knowledge, together with ludicidity and a gift for education to the internet.
It feels good to respect someone. I respect this gent.
Glad I saw this. It cleared up a few things and I have a few more questions:
(1). There was a statistic I heard on smoking that if a smoker quits for a period of 10 years, their relative risk is similar to a non smoker. Is there a similar analogy for cholesterol?
(2)Although I know there are some people who need statins (I knew of someone whose biology produced a cholesterol of 600) and it’s great for those who absolutely needs them, but are statins more of a crutch for those who can change their diet and reduce or eliminate their risk via diet and exercise? There are other benefits for good diet and exercise that a statin will never give them (an improved heart muscle from exercise, better nutrition and reduced diabetes risk from diet, etc.). When is medication an aid and when does it become a crutch? The answer might be its own video, but I see some who argue against statins argue this very point.
Love the analogies never apologize for a good analogies.
Thanks again for all the hard work and effort you put into these videos.
absolutely a great channel.....thanks for your insights
Awesome Doctor shows up again 🤗
Thank you for explaining it in the most simple way,,, doctors should have a pamphlet like this for their patients. I am fit, eat healthy and sport addict also take Lipitor.
Tremendous analysis. I’m in the ‘add it to the water ‘ camp - but that’s me. Compelling data.
This was amazing explanation of the pitfalls of reading science articles without prior education.
Was watching some of your older videos. Also great content but I am so glad you got rid of that annoying music!
I'm definitely interested in more content going over funding and outcomes of the clinical trials
As well as number needed to treat
This was so helpful - thank you!
Awesome vid! Can you make a video on food and immunity. Which foods to avoid for a weakened immune system and which foods to consume to promote a strong one
Great communication, doctor! Very, very helpful to understand the long term impact of statins as life savers. There are some side effects though, but manageable! I think you'll also tell us how to manage those in a video to follow. 😊🙏
Always interesting, thank you.
Brilliant explanation thank you.
Thank you for giving us the conversion between US & UK levels. 👍
Awesome video, Gil. While you were talking, I kept wondering how I would present this, and which specific issues I would address, and you covered all of them! I have been particularly annoyed recently by content creators who expressed very strong opinions against statins based on the small AR reductions seen in trials, never mentioning (or understanding?) that it would be unethical to run a study long enough to see a large AR reduction. Really good work. Looking forward to your summary of risks and side effects.
This is really interesting and brilliantly disseminated, thank you. I hope you make more on the subject. I watch all your videos several times as they are so jammed with great info
Terrific content
Great explanation of studies. Looking forward to the video on side effects.
This is one of the best explanations I've ever heard. Awesome video!!
I have started watching all your videos, I appreciate how you take science make simple and the clear explanation you give, it has helped me very much. Would you be able to show us your blood work? I am 65 years old and I don't take any medication I would like to compare it to yours. Thanks, Stergios
Best explanation i have seen. Puts it all into perspective, nicely.
Great presentation as usual but I did not hear anything about “positive remodeling” of arterial walls when you’ve lowered cholesterol for a period of time. I had a scan of my arteries 12 years ago when I was 57. My calcium score was 256 and I had a lot of loose plaque. That scared me so I did some research and found Dr. Esselstyn’s book and started an eating regimen from the book. I had another scan of my arteries 1 year later. My calcium score went up to 565 but I had no loose plaque and everything was “positively remodeling - moving to the outside of the arterial wall” (the comment from my cardiac doc). I bring this up because in your video you mentioned that problems caused over time won’t change but positive remodeling does change the result. I may still keep the plaque but it’s been calcified and moved to the outside of the arterial wall allowing for better blood flow and a “healing of the endothelial cells” inside the artery.
As I said, I enjoy your videos so please keep them coming. I truly enjoyed your video with Plant Chompers Chris MacAskill as I follow him as well. I hope your mother is doing well. Bill Krug
yes statins help stabilize existing plaque so as to reduce risk of rupture, it's 1 of the positives
This is what Dr Ford Brewer says as well.
@@NutritionMadeSimple you mentioned in the video that statins help stabilise plaque, but there's "maybe also an effect of reduction with drugs, maybe with diet...". Could you elaborate on that? Are we talking about statins or other kinds of drugs? Great video, thanks!
@@CharlieFader both statins and the newer cholesterol-lowering drugs like PCSK9 inhibitors. if you look into trials like ASTEROID, SATURN, GLAGOV etc it's fairly common to see some reduction in plaque volume with strong lipid reductions
@@NutritionMadeSimple so they can do both, but mostly plaque stabilization. That sounds complicated 😛 Thank you for the response!
Excellent video. Thankfully this is going to be a extended series as there is much to learn about statins.
During one of this series I hope you will cover what statins can do for our existing 40% or greater "vulnerable" volatile plaque areas, Possibly transforming those fatty plaques into safer fibrous natures with greater cap thickness.,
Making them much less likely to rupture, thereby setting up a thrombosis (clot) leading to a full heart attack.
My understanding is that, aside from slowing progression of plaque, that changing the makeup of existing plaque may be the key factor in preventing deadly events.
Great job! Thank you.
this video is so underrated!
Also Doc, try to explain why there is such a huge discrepancy in the quantum and severity of side effects reported in the trials vs the side effects that people you meet everyday or the reviews on online drug websites tell you. Almost everyone you meet in life other than the 65 years+ population tells you that statin side effects are very bad.
Could it be that people without side effects (like me) don't go onto online websites to report that?
This is a good question because so many people rely on anecdotal evidence. It feels like it hits closer to home compared to line graphs or pie charts. This is a form of self-selection bias where the data you see is purely from the choice of the participants. There's been no criteria set to make sure that the collection of data has been controlled for factors that would skew what you're trying to measure. Just like the other commenter here said, people often comment when they feel emotionally compelled to. If you have a bad reaction to a drug, you might feel compelled to report this on a video that's contrary to your experience. If you're someone that had no adverse reactions, you might not feel the same motivation to comment. This is why looking at studies is so important because they actually tell you how they conducted their study and collected their data. You can decide for yourself the validity of the data but you can't do the same on a comment section of a public forum.
@@chandebrec5856 To add to the (low value) anecdotal evidence, no side effects for me either.
I am 41 and totally no side effects from statins at all. Be careful what you read on the internet
@@RideTheTrack I had to stop statins because I’m a bodybuilder and after starting statins I was unable to pickup my 3 year old son due to the bad muscle pain from the statins. A week after stopping the statins the side effects slowly went away. I can lift very heavy weight but after starting statins I couldn’t even lift my 3 year old.
These videos are very much appreciated, Gil. I was put on a statin even though I am relatively young and thin. My ApoB was elevated, despite an excellent diet, and there is a history of early heart disease on my mother’s side of the family. I will take this medication for the rest of my life. My mother has averted major heart disease, and I plan to as well.
You should do a video PCSK9 inhibitors and the benefit of blood sugar control (and, no, I don’t mean keto or loading up on saturated fats.)
🙏 Thank you.
What is your “excellent diet”?
@@timm285 I eat a lot of sashimi - all wild varieties- on an almost daily basis. I also eat a lot of vegetables and particularly like seaweed salads. I always have a glass of wine of some sake with a meal - and that’s the foundation of my diet.
@@arielmalanga Were there any symptoms and then you decided to test your ApoB?
Or given your family history you tested your ApoB, but no symptoms?
@@arielmalanga you need to add more fiber
@@frankmedrisch7451 I eat lots of vegetables. How much more fiber?
Hi Gil - I was wondering if you were able to do a video on seed oils like canola, rice bran, and sunflower. It is something I see a lot of people talking about. On the cons sides there are a lot of conspiracy pushers who seem to claim these are to blame for the emergence of diabetes/heart disease and cancers (saying the uptick in these diseases is strongly correlated with an increase of seed oils in our diet) whilst proponents seem to say 'they can be bad, but aren't generally terrible for you'.
I love watching your videos because I'm a statistician and economist by education but am interested in learning more about health/nutrition and biology from as critical a lens as possible. Having someone walk through peer-reviewed papers and their findings really hits the spot for me, because I simply do not have the time to educate myself on the fundamentals of biology and nutrition at present.
yup it's in the works :)
Can you make a video on dairy similar to the one you made on red meat? A whole series even would be great. Keep up the amazing work.
Yes, please, a video on NNT!
Same issues. Look up Number Needed to Mislead from Stephen Senn.
My doctor wanted to put me on a statin even though my LDL was very low, triglycerides even lower. She didn't give me a convincing explanation, so I told her I'd have to do my research on the topic . Hey, presto! along comes your excellent presentation on Statins. Please keep them coming, I value your perspective and insight. Thank you.
why would the doctor want to put you on statins when you have low ldl?
@@jerppazz4525 $$$
Get your apoB checked.
Hi Chris, did you check your ApoB?
AWESOME! Thank you doc. Now...i will go and watch ALL your episode...so there....THAT will teach you somethin'..somethin'...
Yes, please talk about NNT, my mom brought that up to say statins are overprescribed so I'd love to hear your thoughts.
NNT will not include the issue of time of risk exposure.
I just found this channel and really appreciate the balanced discussion. Perhaps you've covered it elsewhere, but do you plan on doing a video on LDL-C v. particle size? That is, since LDL is calculated, what are the benefits of particle size measures?
we've made a couple. there's 1 from ~1 year ago specifically on particle size, and the Eric berg video goes into it in more detail
@@NutritionMadeSimple Great, thanks! How about Lipoprotein(a)? I know you talk about Apo-B, but I haven't seen much on the former.
@@reasonsformoving coming :)
I’ve been on stains 20 yrs and my scans show zero plaque. My dad and his 2 brothers all died in their mid 70 s from heart attacks I’ve been watching so many videos on UA-cam that say don’t take statins it’s only 1 percent effective that I was getting anxiety , but now you’ve explained what I’ve always thought; they do work for a lot of high risk people , but getting yearly blood tests on lipids and liver enzymes is an absolute must because there is a risk to the liver , but it does seem to be small from my research
Not that one person’s results proves that much, but I wish you would go on where there are people calling, statins poison, and tell them your experience.
Interesting but you don't mention if you have had a cardiac episode nor why you were put on statins in the first place?
Great that you're getting your bloods done regularly if you are happy on them then that is all good for you 👍
Thanks for zooming in on the estamated cholesterol risk of 10 - 50 %. Nice to know ! It seems Braggs apple cider vinegar dropped my LDL cholesterol like a rock !
If a clinical trial is stopped early for ethical reasons, how do they extrapolate numbers out to age 70 and beyond?
You should explain survival statistics for cancer treatments. For example, a pharma company says they have an 80% increase in overall survival so they charge $200,000 for treatment and run ads all day long on TV. In the end the poor patient gets to live an extra 4-6 months (with side effects) because the time window as described here is so short.
My comment got removed: was it because I put in a link to a research study on stains and the elderly? Links not allowed in the comment section?
I'll try again. I've been taking statins since 1997. I still do. However a study in a journal BMC Geriatrics. (Dec 28, 2017) title "Serum total cholesterol and risk of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality in old age: The study conclusion was LESS mortality in elderly with HIGHER cholesterol! 'Inverse" I was stunned.
"The inverse association between high total cholesterol and reduced all-cause mortality in older adults is primarily due to non-cardiovascular mortality, especially among those who are not treated with cholesterol-lowering medications."
So non statin users amongst the elderly - had lower mortality with higher cholesterol - then those with lower cholesterol - or those elderly taking statins (like me)
Statins are so heavily prescribed - that those not taking - are they just showing better overall health - so they were not proscribed? Can't figure this one out
What do you think?
yes sometimes YT removes external links, although not always, still haven't figured this one out :(
otherwise links to studies always welcome, yes include the title as you did, that way people can find it easily
we addressed the mortality Q at length here, it's an artifact of chronic diseases: ua-cam.com/video/CxX51n2Z0vc/v-deo.html
Thanks for the link to your video that addresses this issue - I had not seen it. Will watch now.
very helpful. thank you
The problem is that even a statement about risk reduction is hard to comprehend for most. Tell patients the amount of expected years gained if they take the said drug from now on every day, and weigh that up against risks and or side effects of taking said drug.
Both numbers are important. For example you could have an absolute risk reduction from 90% to 70% that is sizeable bigger than the relative risk reduction and more meaningful for that situation.
Great content
Great video
I remember a time when scientific meant truth based upon scientific facts and research.....
Unfortunately nowadays even that statement is skewed from truth and facts because of politics.....
At least Dr's like this are trying to get the best clinical medical information out to people so their not bullied by their Dr's cuz of corporate influence....
But ultimately the choice will be yours so educate yourself hopefully you'll find your optimum path for good health ❤
Hi doc, my story:
I actually discovered your channel when at age 41 I was diagnosed with extremely high cholesterol (4.8 mmol) despite being very healthy with BMI 21 and about 12% bodyfat. In discussions with my specialist and finding out that I had family history (my granddad died at 72 of a heart attack which i suspect had something to do with this, and my dad has elevated LDL and has been on statins for more than 30 years) I was prescribed statins (rosuvastatin 10mg per day) to control my cholesterol.
I was initially full of hesitation and reluctance to get on the medication. All my lifestyle factors were under control (I dont drink or smoke, extremely healthy, low bodyfat, clean diet etc) and I have heard so many horrible anecdotes over the years of the high chance of being addicted to big pharma drugs and having all sorts of horrible side effects from being on lifetime medication like statins. So i set out to find the truth for myself and thankfully found your channel, which did so much to help me understand cholesterol, LDL, Apo B, and of course statins without all the unsubstantiated BS or fearmongering
I have been on statins for about 6 months now and my LDL has dropped to 2.4. Zero side effects. Both my specialist, my dad, and I are very happy with the result. Incidentally my dad is now older than my grandad was when he died and is fit as a fiddle, thanks probably in no small part to making the decision to get on medication all those decades ago. Hopefully the same will also apply to me. Thank you for helping the average guy understand, it is saving lives...mine at least! Please dont stop!
thanks for the kind words, Kevin, happy to hear you found something that worked for you and your family!
I had my mom not be on statins and she is now 80. Both her parents didnt make it pass 65 and both died of heart attacks. my mom's brain is quite sharp as well. She eats and exercise moderately. Has a slight elevated blood pressure but feels great in her day to day life. The important supplements I have her on is Vitamim D3 30,000 IU (based on The Optimal Dose of Dr Judson Sommerville) when there us not much available sun but during summer, natural sunlight is her friend. Magnesium 400 to 600 mg, Vitamin K2 300mcg and Vitamin C. she has a green smoothie with B superfood powder everyday and eats the fish, meat and eggs she can have. Not obssessed with lab numbers. Her life now revolves on helping others and praying. She has outlived her dad and mom by 2 decades. She is living in borrowed time. She survived breast cancer in 2001. People should stop obsessing with numbers and studies and try to manage chronic diseases without too many synthetic drugs. Emergency drugs are a different story and for that they are awesome in saving lives.
@@NutritionMadeSimple Love your work. Can you dive into the Framingham study that showed that HDL was more important than LDL. By default someone with high native HDL has low Triglycerides so this would be consistent with the low TG:HDL ratio being cardioprotective. (is this theory wrong?) I heard you dismiss HDL as being cardioprotective on another video, however I don't mean an artificially derived HDL creating a non native particle so as that of Niacin or some drugs , i mean a native HDL such as that derived from genetics or exercise. Thank you.
I love actual people science experiments. I can only do me however since I am not a doctor. You say you are healthy. I don't doubt you, but could you reveal HDL/Triglycerides/Fasting glucose/BP? These are missing in your description of your health to se about your metabolic health. Also fasting insulin would be awesome.
@@andrewj4426 All trials that attempted to raise HDL with pharmaceuticals failed to improve outcomes.
More content on statins 🙏 please!
Gil, good video, I know the video isn’t about risk factors but I really wish you had mentioned particle size/quantity (LDL-P) and the dangers of genetically high LP(a) - as if you have large fluffy LDL particles rather than lots of small ones or do not have a lot of LP(a) then your personal risk is vastly lower too. Also, if you have high LP(a) then the benefits of statins will be far, far lower (barring the reduction of inflammation) - as the statin will lower your good (large) non-problematic LDL but do nothing about your potentially problematic smaller LP(a) particles.
Excellent video. Is there evidence to show that triglyceride to cholesterol ratio is just as important if not more so than LDL alone?
Fantastic video Doc any thoughts about the level of apoB which may be most beneficial in general to slow or reduce risk? 90? The lower the better? If a person is at 90 without a statin could taking the statin drive risk down significantly from this lower level? Thank you
Apo B below 50 is usually considered safe level. But without statin it is seldom attained. Mine is 47 with 10mg Atorvastatin, vegetarian diet & Magnesium supplement. BTW Mg is a natural statin.
IYou’re wonderful. Thank you Doc.
What drives me nuts about these discussions is using terms like lower and higher. Example, those with lower cholesterol had fewer heart attacks. What is "lower"? What is "higher"? If you have a total cholesterol of 200 what is your absolute risk compared to the general population of men in America? If 200 is your total level and you take a statin that lowers it to 180 what is your absolute risk now? And numbers to treat needs to be discussed along with risk. How good is a drug if you need to treat 10,000 men in order to see a reduction of one heart attack?
yup there's a TON more detail that can be added to the discussion. context is very important as it determines absolute risk. we can definitely touch on NNT in future content (it's basically the same as ARR which is why we didn't go into more detail here)
play with the AHA risk calculator and you can see how the different risk factors play off each other
Hi doc carvalho. Could u make a list/video of tips for an average person to live a long life?(diet and exercise)
As clear as it could be for the average Joe (or Linda) like me.
I'd like to see you address the other effects of statins... sure they can make you live longer, but in many people they create muscle weakness and pains, there are some reports of cognitive side effects... statins may improve heart health, but at what cost to everything else? I'm not demonizing statins, but looking perhaps for a balance - - for trying to find the sweet spot that maximizes effectiveness but minimizes side effects. Perhaps some statins are better than others..? Perhaps a low, but still moderately effective dose may be better at preserving quality, as well as quantity of life?
side effects will be covered at length in the followups :)
@@NutritionMadeSimple Looking forward to this
Thank You...I used to think Statins in conjunction with the Ldl aspects were more propaganda than anything else...I paid the price for that faulty thinking; having a Heart Attack after turning 57...Granted there other factors notably decades of often tough to manage blood pressure...BP managed with Nifedipine since tho tho side effects can be rough but it's really the only BP med that works okay steady basis...And yea of course 40 mgs Lipitor every morning
Thanks so much for this video. This is super on-point for me.
It would be great if you could address some of the below arguments that are made by the statin naysayers.
Naysayers say that statins reduce cardiovascular events per studies, but they DO NOT reduce mortality, which is what really matters. They argue that the reason for this is that while you do ward of cardiovascular events to some extent, you expose yourself to a bunch of other health problems at the same time. (I am not sure which studies are used, but the argument has been stated in multiple places, I believe.)
In addition, naysayers say that LDL particles are NOT BAD, and in fact are critical to proper body function. They say that doctors have become overly focused on LDL particles as a cause for CVD. However, in fact, the LDL particles carry critical cholesterol needed to repair tissues, including tissues needing repair inside our arteries. Essentially, LDL particles are the “police” that show up at a crime, but that doesn’t mean they caused the crime or contributed to it. Thus, if you artificially change your LDL with a statin, you are making changes in this critical function of the body, which can have all kind of negative side effects that we don’t understand well. A statin-induced malfunctioning lipid and cholesterol-carrying system causes problems like diabetes, dementia and muscle-aches. LDL also carries lipids which are an energy source, so if you artificially muck with the LDL you are changing the way the body is metabolizing energy sources…which is probably not good.
Summarizing, Naysayers will often admit that taking a statin can have a small positive impact on the degree atherosclerotic activity in the arteries, but say that reduction is not worth it because of all the other things that you will have destabilized in the body (this dovetails to the “no-reduction-in-mortality” argument). They also may admit that statins can make sense for secondary prevention (i.e., after a first cardiovascular event), as those people need an intervention urgently…. but they are not appropriate for the vast majority of people that never had a cardiovascular event, especially if they have a calcification score of zero.
A couple more separate questions follow.
How should my LP(a) levels impact my decision to take a statin? If my LP(a) is high, does that mean I should “work” harder to reduce LDL (possibly with a statin), even though statins don’t impact LP(a)?
Which statins are best? Are hydrophilic statins better/safer because they carry less risk of dementia? There was an article in Nature that said “Subgroup analysis showed the use of hydrophilic statins were associated reduced risk of all-caused dementia.”
Finally, I have this question, which is probably subject for an entire video. What impact should my DNA testing have on my decision to take a statin? In my case, I am in the 100th percentile for risk of stroke. Both my grandfathers died of stroke. This makes me worry more that I need to get my cholesterol down to safe levels. Should it? (My DNA analysis is from Nebula.org.).
THANKS!!
I am also very curious to hear comments on the Lp(a) questions! Would you consider @Lpa_Doc as a guest? Would be a wonderful video!
Mortality cannot be reduced, death cannot be prevented, only delayed. The only sure things in life - death and taxes.
Absolutely helped me
I have been exposed to the argument that reporting relative risk is misleading, and always intuitively felt the argument was silly. If my risk is 1% and something lowers it to 0.33%, then it seems fair to say that my risk was lowered by 67%. What I didn't understand was why we were making a big deal about CVD if the risk was so low. This video made it very clear that the risk can be much higher in certain contexts, and that relative risk reduction is a value whose meaning is transferable between contexts, making it more meaningful than absolute risk reduction.
I'm also interested in plant sterols. This is often advised as a way to conteract cholesterol, but I've also heard that depending on your body, these can just be replacing one problem with another. I find it rather confusing!
Please do one about alcohol dose/years and absolute / relative risk reduction for cancers?
you are brave Doctor...some Doctors I know they are avoiding publicly of talking about statins!
By watching few videos of you vs other two claimed-doctor Eric and Sten ,,,,I know why their video have more views...people like infographic expression, demonstration even they are given inaccurate info about science & health!
Doc question: might be difficult to answer but here goes. Is repatha save to use to lower LDL in a person that has LGL Leukemia ?
I've seen that monocyte/HDL ratio is emerging as a new marker for CVD. I noticed that my mother has it elevated(0.014), can you please consider talking about it?