The cholesterol was lower but there was no difference in heart health; the questionable science behind cholesterol lowering drugs.

  • Share:
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • twitter
pillsThe cholesterol was lower but there was no difference in heart health; the questionable science behind cholesterol lowering drugs. Doctors acknowledge that many patients do not tolerate statin drugs, as they lower cholesterol, leaving a wake of damage to the liver, muscles and brain if not monitored closely. A new class of drugs which are expensive, and do not have the same side effects of statins had been recently studies for their potential of improving cardiovascular health.  CETP inhibitors such as evacetrapib were thought to be a better way to achieve what cardiologists wanted, a safer way to achieve improved cardiovascular function and reduce cardiac risk. What they got instead was other toxic side effects and a drug that improved the numbers but did not fix anything.   According to the NY Times, "evacetrapib acts by siphoning cholesterol out of HDL, a cholesterol-carrying scavenger protein, so the cholesterol can be discarded in bile. Statins, in contrast, pull cholesterol from the other major cholesterol-carrying protein, LDL, into the liver, after which it can be discarded. It seemed logical that evacetrapib, by ridding the body of cholesterol in HDL and lowering the amount of LDL proteins, would work to protect against heart disease." If you think logically about this medicinal approach which works on only one of 18 risk factors for heart disease, while causing many side effects that are often worse than the disease they are trying to prevent, how can a statin or CETB improve heart function by pulling cholesterol out of the heart muscle, when the heart muscle, as like any other muscle requires cholesterol to function. arterial plaque Current theory on plaquing in the arterial walls has more to do with inflammation being the causative factor, since the cholesterol deposits sit under the arterial wall and the fats get there because inflammation allows spaces between the arterial wall cells and causes it to deposit under the muscular layer.   Unlike many illustrations, it is not a plaqueing on the arterial wall as originally thought, it's is plaque that forms underneath it, setting up the possibility for arterial dissection. Perhaps, some of the diet folks are right, and we need to try a non medicinal, inflammation reducing approach which reduces these plaques naturally, while improving the function of other systems in the body that are also contributing to the inflammatory processes that result in the plaques. Isn't it time we thought about a safer, perhaps dietary approach that makes more sense than this? Read more about this in the NY Times. Dashing Hopes, Study Shows a Cholesterol Drug Had No Effect on Heart Health By GINA KOLATAAPRIL 3, 2016 It is a drug that reduces levels of LDL cholesterol, the dangerous kind, as much as statins do. And it more than doubles levels of HDL cholesterol, the good kind, which is linked to protection from heart disease. As a result, heart experts had high hopes for it as an alternative for the many patients who cannot or will not take statins. But these specialists were stunned by the results of a study of 12,000 patients, announced on Sunday at the American College of Cardiology"™s annual meeting: There was no benefit from taking the drug, evacetrapib. The drug"™s maker, Eli Lilly, stopped the study in October, citing futility, but it was not until Sunday"™s meeting that cardiologists first saw the data behind that decision. Read more