The Biggest Lie in Medicine: The Cholesterol Conspiracy

reply to post by summer5


Sadly enough, there is already a class-action lawsuit for Crestor and Lipitor going on currently. I gave the link earlier to a poster who has been permanently crippled by statins.

www.nolo.com...

It didn't take much time at all for these lawsuits to come up, did it?

Also, I read an article in a financial magazine which stated that the flood of lawsuits against statins was going to become a tidal wave, so if any investors were holding stock in any comany which makes statins, they needed to sell their stock before that tidal wave hits.

Originally posted by KatieVA
Wheat and other grains are also equally as bad as sugar when it comes to inflammation.

As a +20 year sufferer with arthritis, I've run multiple diet iterations where I cut out all sugar, used moderate sugars, or went wild and pigged out on sugars. Every time I take in sugars my arthritis is bad for about a week after. Lots of sugar and I'm hobbling for 2 weeks. No sugar and I'm 18 again. But it takes 2-3 weeks of ZERO sugar to get there. Maybe it's just me but this is how my arthritis rolls.

reply to post by FissionSurplus


My husband has been on Lipitor [Atorvastatin] since his heart attack in 2004.

Now get this, his cholesterol was never high, in fact his doctor [now retired] remarked how he's never seen it that low. Yet, he claimed his "bad" cholesterol was high. Meh....

Any how, now he's going to a new doctor so I'm going to show this thread to my husband and see what he thinks.

The problem is, he takes so many drugs. [sugar, heart, fluid...]

And yes, doctors do get kick backs from pharmaceutical companies for pushing certain drugs.
[pisses me off......]
---------------

As far as my health, the doctor a few years back said mine was high [180] and at first I took Lipitor but finally stopped.

After seeing how the drugs change my husband, I refuse to take any thing, unless my life depended on it of course.

Thanks so much for this info....
S&F

Respectfully~
snarky

Originally posted by tkwasny

Originally posted by KatieVA
Wheat and other grains are also equally as bad as sugar when it comes to inflammation.

As a +20 year sufferer with arthritis, I've run multiple diet iterations where I cut out all sugar, used moderate sugars, or went wild and pigged out on sugars. Every time I take in sugars my arthritis is bad for about a week after. Lots of sugar and I'm hobbling for 2 weeks. No sugar and I'm 18 again. But it takes 2-3 weeks of ZERO sugar to get there. Maybe it's just me but this is how my arthritis rolls.

My arthritis rolls this way as well. This is direct anecdotal evidence that that sugar causes inflammation!

reply to post by snarky412


Perhaps your husband can be switched to niacin and fish oil supplements. Much healtheir with out the nasty side effects. The only side effect of niacin is some "flushing" or reddening of the skin, which goes away the longer you take it.

My mother switched from Lipitor to Niacin and is much happier. Plus her liver's not acting like it's going into failure any more.

OP, thanks for this thread. S/F

Four years ago I had a triple bypass (at the ripe old age of 50). I was put on statins. After a few months I noticed that my hand would shake sometimes when I held my cell phone. Turns out the statins were causing rhabdomyolysis in me. That is a side effect that few people get from statins. Basically my muscle tissue was starting to dissolve. More here at Wikipedia. en.wikipedia.org...

I have had four different cardiologists since then. (And in three different states.) All of them have bemoaned the fact that I can't take statins. The last and current one told me it was sad that the only drug that would stop me from dying, I couldn't take.

As with the news industry, the medical industry would be so much better if it was commercial free.

And to whoever posted the Fathead movie, thanks! Awesome info in it.

reply to post by FissionSurplus

Halleluiah!!!!

My doctor tried to get me to take some cholesterol drug.....even though my level was in the low 200's...we agreed to try Red Yeast Rice and had good results...although I now take only half of what I was taking before...if that.
I don't know about anyone else...but have you also noticed they keep lowering the standard number as to what HIGH is

Since then, I've done some reading....and not only do they lie about cholesterol....but also about how bad sat fats are for you and how good vegetable oils are for you.

reply to post by BeyondTheFold


Muscles dissolving? Holy cow!!!

How can they say that statins are the only thing that will save your life?? Surely there are other things...but those are natural things, so you wouldn't be supporting big pharma by taking them. Niacin, fish oil,and red yeast rice were all named as good alternatives. Perhaps you can do the research, and then educate your doctor.

reply to post by DontTreadOnMe


Yes, they lowered the "acceptable' numbers in 2004. I'm glad that you decided on red yeast rice, rather than statins.

And yeah, I still maintain that we're not being told the truth about cholesterol. It is a soft-kill conspiracy, I tells ya!

reply to post by MsAphrodite


I read an article a while back about the start of bleaching flour. It started a couple hundred years ago, in England if I remember right. There was a fungus that was growing on the flour and people were getting sick from it. They found that by bleaching the flour it got rid of this fungus. The article speculated that some people may have acquired an allergy from the whole wheat and the allergy was passed down through the generations. That explains the reason for the bleaching, the bromating is a different story Iodine was added instead of bromate at first and was removed in about the sixties I think. Bromate is better for settling people because it hogs the receptors that Iodine uses. This way people don't have the energy to uprise I bet. Most of the other countries that tried this stopped bromating even though they still bleach their flour, except of course the USA. There was an intermediate chemical between the Iodine and the bromide but it got a bad name and was discontinued.

Some people today have an allergy to whole wheat. Whether it was caused from the above problem I do not know but there are more people of English descent that have it. For those people the unbleached/unbromated flour is better. My question is though, what did the government require the food companies quietly do to get the desired effects of calming the population. Maybe the fluoride in the water is adequate as it also ties to these receptors. Chloride also ties to these receptors and can be removed from them easier than bromide or fluoride. They have been requiring stuff to be stuck in our food "for safety reasons" for a long time.

reply to post by FissionSurplus


I'll suggest it to him and see....as far as his skin goes, can't figure which one(s) but his skin stays dry and itchy. Some times a rash on the back/stomach. Now I can only use Cheer laundry detergent....and keep tons of cortisone cream on hand. And a gallon of lotion. It just makes him miserable.

Personally, I would like to see him get off of some of the meds.
I'm hoping this new doctor isn't such a pill doctor as the old one.
He did take him off the controversial Actos [sugar] and put him on Janumet. Not sure if it's any better but he sure acted like he was against Actos.

Thanks again....
snarky

reply to post by DontTreadOnMe

I don't know about anyone else...but have you also noticed they keep lowering the standard number as to what HIGH is

YES..... they are doing the same thing with the sugar too.

It's maddening how the pharmaceutical companies are manipulating the charts as well as the doctors.

reply to post by DontTreadOnMe


That's interesting. I just read about that(after reading your post), a natural statin drug. Old knowledge that comes from before 800 AD. seems the pharma companies want the supplements classified as a drug so their industry can control the use.

I sincerely thank you friend for making this thread and assembling all of this information. I am a nurse who started to look into the whole lipid hypothesis about two years ago, and was quite disturbed at what I found. I've been on the paleolithic diet ever since: minimal carbs (30 or less/day) with high fat intake as my main source of energy. No insane amounts of sugars floating around causing damage to my blood vessels, and thus no rush of plaques and cholesterol to repair the damage. I feel great and have amazingly lost weight (which shocked me, I wasn't exactly a heavy man to begin with), have more level energy throughout the day, no longer feeling starving if I miss a meal, and my doctor couldn't be happier with my lab work. Cholesterol is supposed to be our friend, something we need in just about every cell in our body. Excessive amount of carbs causing excessive damage to our body that makes cholesterol work inefficiently, causing plaque build-up. Take away the damage, take away the plaque, and cholesterol can actually regulate itself properly

My mother has been suffering big time because of achy muscles/bones and I know it has to do with the medication she takes. Tis thread is leading me to believe that her cholesterol medicine may be part of the blame.Appreciate all the info..Keep it coming.

reply to post by DudeCuda


Thanks, Cuda (awesome avatar, BTW!). You're the third nurse who has come on this thread and agreed whole-heartedly with my hypothesis.

The proof is in the pudding. When I tried eating the way I was told by the "experts", I had blood sugar problems, wheat belly (despite exercising daily, such as walking 6 miles, lifting weights, etc), and was always feeling like I was starving. I also didn't lose much weight.

When I go low carb, my blood sugar is under control, I'm not hungry all the time, the wheat belly is gone, and I feel so much better.

reply to post by jam321


Yes, it probably is the meds. If somebody has never had achy muscles and bones before, and then it suddenly appears as soon as a new medicine is introduced, it is logical to place the blame on the medication.

These symptoms should be explained to her doctor, ASAP!

reply to post by FissionSurplus

You can eat pretty much anything you want and as much as you want, as long as you burn it off, cholesterol shemsterol, pffft. In fact like you said cholesterol is a pretty important part of our bodies function, and even calories which people seem to have a craze going on about now a days also serves an important purpose in our bodies and more so in our brain function. I think they even did study were the results came out that you burn more calories if you were sitting around reading a book then if you were doing you normal physical activities or even exercising.

So ya things are not so closed system as our friendly drug companies like to advertise, and really if its not broke don't fix it, we seem to cause and create problems to which were oh so confidently offered the solution, off course there is always the fine print on those solutions, or in this case the side effects. It seems like for every pill you may have to take, there is a side effect which another pill will cure but that pill may have its own side effects, which miraculously may require another pill, etc, etc its getting silly now a days. Really our lifestyles and our pill popping drug for every symptom culture is more our problem then anything else.

i think people need to look at salt intake more than anything else....salt raises the blood pressure..increasing the risk of strokes and heart attacks..a single slice of bread contains 0.4 grams of salt.. half a tin of beans contains up to 40% your recommended salt intake ....a simple meal like beans on toast will send your blood pressure through the roof..

in this day and age we really need to watch every thing we eat.....i normally eat a high protein low carb diet having 6 small portions a day rather than 3 larger meals...i lost 2 stones with in 6 weeks using this diet...even though im eating more

Admittedly, I didn't read all the comments, but here is my 2 cents.

Statins are inhibitors of an enzyme called HMG CoA reductase. This is an enzyme in the Mevalonate pathway. This pathway synthesizes Cholesterol amongs other molecules including the Ubiquinones (CoQ10).
A poster on page two I think mentioned that Cholesterol does not appear from nowhere, and to be specific it is manufactured from Acetyl CoA in the liver. So, not all Cholesterol in the body is dietary.

So, that is why you need to take CoQ10 when taking a statin drug because the enzyme that produces it is inhibited when taking statins. However, I would add that even though it's more expensive than CoQ10 I would suggest you take Ubiquinol (Kaneka QH) as this is the active bioavailable form of Ubiquinone (CoQ10) so you can take less of it.

There is also a relationships showing that if your cholesterol is too low you are at an increased risk for early death.

If you want a more natural approach to statins, look into Red Yeast Rice which is standardized for Monacolins. The Monacolins are the ingredients that have the HMG CoA reductase inhibitor effect. In fact, I think it was Lovastatin which was developed by Merck by isolating Monacolin K from a fungus and synthesizing it, concentrating it and putting it in a pill. So, it's probably much too strong and doesn't have the balanced effect of the Red Yeast Rice. Also oyster mushrooms contains Monacolins as well.

The same potential side effects are still present, but potentially to a lesser degree. One of the big ones to watch out for is the rhabdomyolysis, where the muscle tissue breaks down. This is often noted by pain in the larger muscles of the body such as the quadriceps.

I am a huge fan of Dr. Hyman, Dr. Fuhrman, Dr. Amen, Dr. Oz and others who are getting more Americans to wake up to a new paradigm (or a return to the old paradigm) in health: getting back to how what we eat and our lifestyle affects our health for better or worse.