Which ever way you look at it it's not very sensible to use a drug that impairs glucose tolerance or decreases insulin sensitivity.
We've enough people becoming diabetic without adding to their number unnecessarily..

You can read the paper Dr Briffa's article is based on here.

www.dropbox.com/s/m8vncyf2w...

In the same way statins block the mevalonate pathway upstream of the production of CoQ10 it's also upstream of the production of 7 dehydrocholesterol the molecule from which Cholecalciferol (Vitamin D3) is produced.
The amount of vitamin D that can be produced by UVB acting on your skin is directly related to your total cholesterol level. Higher cholesterol more vit d production capacity, lower cholesterol lower vitamin D production possible.

There certainly has been a change in the climate regarding the publication of bad news about statins.
Here are a few recent examples.
Progression of vascular calcification is increased with statin use in the Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial (VADT).
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed...

Statins Linked With Development of Cataracts
www.medscape.com/viewarticl...

Serum total cholesterol: A mortality predictor in elderly hospitalized patients
www.sciencedirect.com/scien...
Specifically, each 1 mg/dl increase in serum total cholesterol reduced risk of death by 0.4%.

Now we know Cholesterol Boosts the Memory of the Immune System
www.sciencedaily.com/releas...

Does it really make sense to reduce the capacity of our immune system?

When we understand the way
Cholesterol Helps Regulate Key Signaling Proteins in the Cell www.nature.com/ncomms/journ...
we have to consider very seriously if it's sensible to disrupt the functioning of every cell in our body?

I like Dr Briffa's blog and read it every week. He makes no secret of the fact that he thinks the benefits of statins for most people are overrated, although I haven't read much from him about inherited conditions.
A lot of bloggers here do take co Q10 and I have read about the increase in heart failure. I also liked the article underneath about a higher BMI being possibly beneficial to people over 65.

Yes the statin debate is confusing for most readers as there are no simple answers. What is great about this website is that it highlights the fact that statins are a debatable drug, and individuals can assess the risks they are dealing with. That puts everyone on this site in a much better position than most other people. For example, our knowledge that statins weaken muscles has been know for many years, and that CoQ10 reduces the risk of such muscle damage. Thats important knowledge for anyone choosing to take statins. So this is a very helpful site.

Because the heart is simply a large muscle, statins do increase the risk of heart failure as the heart becomes weaker over time. In my opinion, any person that takes statins that causes muscle pain and inflammation, should assume that their heart muscle will also weaken although its progression occurs more slowly. What needs to be understood, is that in the journey towards becoming a weaker heart (my experience with patients is that it takes a few months for any weaknesses to start showing and even years) we start to see some early weakening signs and one of them is irregular heartbeat. This may be mild initially and later it becomes more severe. When this occurs in the form of an arrhythmia (like tachycardia which is rapid heartbeat) the patients is often prescribed blood thinners to reduce the risk of a blood clot within the heart, and these drugs have their own side effects. If heart weakness is diagnosed at this stage, then a different drug is prescribed to boost the heart. At this point the patient become very scared and feels that all the medications they are being prescribed are essential to staying alive.

The sad thing is that the initial decision to take the statins were done in the best interest of the patient, but later we see the patient becoming increasing sick from their medications and exhibiting symptoms that no health professional can explain. In short, they have entered into the medical chasm and they are no longer in control of their own health. Its a chasm that is very hard to escape.

So in my opinion, the risk of statins, is not simply related to what damage they can do on their own. It has as much to do with following a risky path where one powerful drug (statins) leads to the need for another, and another, and from which the patient may never be able to return.

Best, Frank Cooper, Nutritionist & Naturopath

I have always had a somewhat jaundiced view of statins from their inception. The way the drug companies and governmental departments on both sides of the Atlantic jumped on the statin revolution has always worried me. It is a cheap fix for those people who are "at risk" with heart disease. There has always been a "take a pill and keep the same lifestyle" attitude in the US that appears to be the norm over here. If we are to improve our lives we have to get rid of our bad habits. To take a pill and keep being overweight, drinking too much and smoking is just a cop out.

I am certainly not getting at those of you with FH. That is a totally different kettle of fish and one that needs to be much more deeply researched and not just seen as another problem that can be fixed with statins alone. I am fortunate not to have to make that kind of choice with either me or my family's health.

I have read and reread all the literature I can get my hands on and I can honestly say that there is no clear evidence from any "professional" scientist that is the definitive answer to heart disease, furring arteries or high blood pressure. To blame cholesterol for it all I think is just another stick to beat it with. If it is so dangerous why does the body produce it? Why is it seen as a "healer" of the body if it needs to be removed from the body or lowered, to my mind, to dangerous levels?

Confused? You bet!!

I also find the statin debate very confusing and have read the article you put on. As far as I am concerned muscle pain has always been a problem and there as many Doctors against statins as for them. Also we are given so many tablets for different things that nobody knows how they will act together and even the same tablets will react in different ways in different people.

I have decided to stpop my simvastin and take my chances when i have taken it i have been moody and my brain does not feel the same so as i am nearly 74 and have stents put in wihich according to cardioligist are fairin up after only 12 months think what is the point and never felt better yes i suppose could drop dead but what the hell better than ending up in a nurseing home by the way friends am still working but at my speed as i am my own boss.

silversurfer4739.
I asked for help about Statins on here about 2 months agp.
I was amazed when people replied and I found what amounted to a huge debate,
I was totally shocked....I had been taking Simvastatin for years¬!
I had no clue..I was at at a point where I blamed my age,for the extra agony..the forgetfulness,muzzy head.total exhaustion every day,even though I had done nothing,
then an Internet friend told me it was all down to the statins..and,said I should research it online......when I stopped reading that day?
I stopped taking statins instantly.went to my GP. the next day.and said I want no more....I was told to come back in a week.

what a week! I felt reborn..pain eased off,clear head emerged.....I was not bone weary..
.
but,when I went back to Surgery,/I was told I must go back onto statins,although I refused those statins I was given different ones,within days I was back to square one.
the next statin was no better..
so,I have been without statins for 2 months now,no after effects..great!
but,this week I do have to have blood tests,Dopplin tests?E.C.G..and several more tests?because I was put on anti-biotics recently and they were affecting my heart?
maybe I will also find out how my Cholosterol has been affected by not taking statins?
I wish some Govt. would ban them....