As an anecdote - I stopped taking my low-dose statin for 6 months in consultation with my doctor, to try and manage my borderline cholesterol numbers via diet and exercise. The experiment was a failure, as all my numbers went markedly in the wrong direction in spite of my efforts, so I went back on the low-dose statin. I will let the doctors here chime-in, but I believe your cholesterol levels to some extent are baked-in due to genetics, and no matter what you do diet and exercise-wise, your cholesterol is gonna do what it’s gonna do - so the statins make sense to manage that risk.
Yep, in spite of dropping 50 lbs from my highest weight my cholesterol numbers are stubbornly above where my GP would like them in spite of the fact that I’ve been on a statin for the last 15 years.
He’s pointed out that the studies show that being on a statin is a better predictor of outcome than the actual reduction in numbers and is content to not try and get the numbers down further with a higher dose or a drug combination. He is also confident it’s familial and my body just really like to make cholesterol.
Statins are naturally occuring in fungi and mold. It might be better to say, “Better living through nutrition that we’ve lost due to refrigeration, quality control, and cultural dietary norms.”
Here we are a year later and my cholesterol numbers look great. I’ve also been exercising more, and have lost some weight (though my doctor gave me a long lecture on portion control and calorie counting , which gosh, I’ve never heard of before).
(I also posted in the Ozempic thread because cholesterol numbers look good, but A1c not so much)
Anyway, just updating.
Thanks for the update!
My Chol numbers were quite good, but my Doc looks after my health so he prescribes a low level statin and blood pressure pills- and yep- it made my numbers even better- my last blood work was so good my MD sent me a message “excellent bloodwork”.
So, I guess, he is the expert.
I don’t think there is a lot of arguments among cardiologists about whether patients with a lot of cardiac risk factors - diabetes, high blood pressure, smokers, strong family history of stroke or heart attacks, certain elevated types of cholesterol - should be on certain medications.
About 30% of people are able to lower LDL by changing their diet. However in most people, the problem seems to be the liver, and improving the diet will not lower the cholesterol.
It is true a significant number of strokes and heart attacks occur in people with no risk factors, or few risk factors. Exercise is probably protective. There is clearly more we do not yet understand.
The question is whether people at low or intermediate risk should be on statins. The 2016 HOPE-3 trial showed definite benefits. However, these morbidity and mortality benefits are more modest than some would like to believe. LDL was lowered around 25% by adding a statin and there was a modest drop in cardiovascular problems; but risk seemed about 25% lower over the course of the trial. This is significant, but probably does not end the discussion. Summary and full free link below.
One of the things we definitely don’t need as we get older is cramps, pain, and muscle weakness. This would be my main objection to taking statins, but fortunately despite my being a few years older than the OP nobody has yet recommended that I do so.
My numbers are significantly better, but not tremendously so.
^ This.
Statins are one of the reasons why my mother lived to be 77 instead of dying in her mid-40’s like prior generations in her family who chanced to have the hereditary form of high cholesterol she had. Getting an extra 30 years of life is nothing to discount, and up until the very last few those were reasonably good years with a high quality of life.
Like all medications they are not for everyone and can have side effects, but for many they are a very good thing indeed.
Taking medication to manage a long-term health problem is not a moral failing. It’s actually taking care of yourself.
Since this popped up, I suppose I’ll give a follow-up.
Last summer, at age 43, with a history of heart disease on my mother’s side, I had my cholesterol checked.
Total/HDL/LDL/Triglycerides: 300/37/208/267
I went on statins (10mg daily), and after three months those numbers went to.
Total/HDL/LDL/Triglycerides: 194/44/112/190
So, from what I understand, a pretty significant shift into a much less risky zone. And no side effects of any kind.
I’m working on regaining some healthier physical activity habits from my mid 30s that have dropped off for various reasons, but it’s nice to not see my doctor freaking out to my face anymore. And, I’m at least a little less worried about a quadruple bypass in my late 50s like my grandfather had.
In a conversation a little over a month ago, my doctor said she had come in ready to prescribe Metformin or Ozempic but was so surprised at my recent weight loss (which has been intentional, mainly reducing carbs and doing more walking), that she wanted to pause on any prescriptions and delay my blood draw to give the weight loss more time to help. I went in today, and my A1C was down to 5.9. Woot! She hasn’t gotten back to me, but I assume we’ll continue holding off. Thanks to @DSeid by the way, I had already planned to exercise, but his comment about the need to exercise above did stick in my head.
You are very welcome!!
And congratulations! Very impressive!
I’d also focus on raising the average amount of fiber in your diet (if low). Whole wheat bread, more lentils and beans, more vegetables in general.
Had my annual this morning. All of my blood work was rock solid except for the chol, so I caved and told the doc to write the script. He also wants me to have a calcium scan, just to make sure there is nothing going on. At my age (63), I guess that’s not too much to ask.
Didn’t need the prostate exam, as my PSA was so low. Darn!
After one year on statins, total cholesterol is at 166, down from 236. I guess I’ll live forever now. 
One weird aspect of the test results, it showed my cholesterol as “abnormal.” Caused me momentary concern. Then I opened it and it showed LDL abnormally high. Again, concern before I realized that was the “good” cholesterol.
The explanation was something like, “High LDL is a negative indicator for the likelihood of developing heart disease.” Sure, upon reflection I realize that a negative indicator is a good thing. But jeez, they coulda presented that differently for non-medical persons to see.
I’ve run into the same thing more than once. Total cholesterol will get flagged by testing software, and commented in your test results, if it’s “high,” but that’s a meaningless number, and just freaks out patients. What you need to be concerned about (and what your doctor likely cares about) is: (a) is your “bad cholesterol” too high, and (b) is your “good cholesterol” high enough?
I would recheck your results. LDL is the “bad” cholesterol.
Yeah. Appt next Monday. I assume he’ll just say the bloodwork looks great. PSA was under 1. And my weight has been down 5-10#. My wife says I’ve been eating less, but I sure feel like I eat whatever and whenever I want. Just had our 40th anniversary yesterday. Do I have to plan on 40 more?
Right you are. HDL was high. I just never keep this kinda thing straight. Just always try to exercise more and eat more fruit and vegetables and less heavily processed food.
I get 'em confused sometimes, too. A friend of mine taught me a mnemonic:
- HDL is the “happy” one (H=happy)
- LDL is the “lousy” one (L=lousy)