I'd like some information about this subject. The medical sites are just full of fear and loathing on this subject. But I know many people have safely gotten off statins. I just don't know any.
I'd like some information about this subject. The medical sites are just full of fear and loathing on this subject. But I know many people have safely gotten off statins. I just don't know any.
Ron
Break the pills in half and take half the dosage for a couple days and then break those 1/2 pills in half and take one and forget about it. Too much bullshit that statin withdrawal is dangerous. It is not. Now getting off beta blockers is another story.
[QUOTE= Now getting off beta blockers is another story.[/QUOTE]
Can you shed any light on this part. I had thought about doing the decresing dosage thing but didn't know about a time table. I have learned that it's good to have something in place to do the statins job minus the Co Q 10 disruption. My limited understanding of the Beta Blocker is that it slows the heart rate. Why is it more dangerous to discontinue?
ron45, if you need a natural substitute for statins, there is nattokinase.
Quote:
Nattokinase is an enzyme isolated from the vegetable cheese Natto; a typical and popular soybean food in the Japanese diet. Nattokinase has been found to have blood clot dissolving abilities and prevents the aggregation of red blood cells. Another enzyme becoming more popular, this one from the silk worm, is serrapeptase. Both nattokinase and serrapeptase should only be used under the guidance of a health care provider. Combining nattokinase and an anticoagulant, such as aspirin, may lead to internal bleeding in some patients.
Nattokinase inactivates plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 and potentiates fibrinolytic activity. In other words, it could dissolve fibrin. Fibrin is a protein involved in the clotting of blood that is polymerised to form a "mesh" that forms a hemostatic plug or clot (in conjunction with platelets). Fibrin is made from fibrinogen, a soluble plasma glycoprotein synthesized by the liver. Nattokinase prevents aggregation of red blood cells.
__________________
-
- Jim
�Look! Out the window! There is a flying cow!� St.Thomas Aquinas looked, and they all burst into laughter. He calmly replied, �I would rather believe that the cow is flying than that my friends would lie to me!�
Nattokinas is a natural blood thinner. What does that have to do with statin drugs? unless you are trying to slip your blood through clogged arteries? Not a good long term strategy. Statins are to reduce cholesterol.
Improved diet will reduce cholesterol. Reduce carbs to under 60 grams a day, making most of your carbs come from fresh vegetables.
So will a course of MMS. I have seen this happen.Seems the liver amps up cholesterol when there is toxic overload. MMS will also clean out arteries for much of the arterial inflamation is caused by a microbe... just ask any Rife expert.
Policosanol will reduce cholesterol... you want a product that has a cane sugar base for best effect. Studies show its more effective than pravachol or zocar.
Eating filbert nuts will reduce cholesterol.
Increase vitamin C to 4 grams a day. 2g in am, 2g in pm
Take a B100 vitamin
Take niacin daily to raise HDL. This is one of the most important things you can do to improve vascular and cardiac health as far as supplements go.
cucurmin will decrease arterial deposits and does so much more for inflamatory responses... which is the baseline cause of clogged arteries.
Nattokinas is a natural blood thinner. What does that have to do with statin drugs? unless you are trying to slip your blood through clogged arteries? Not a good long term strategy. Statins are to reduce cholesterol. /
Nattokinase is not just for blood mobility. When you come off of statins, cholesterol will most likely build back up. The reason you may have started taking a statin was to reduce cholesterol build up. One of the consequences of the buildup is clogging of arteries. So, while you are trying to get off of statins, you need to improve the situation that caused cholesterol buildup in the first place (probably diet) and keep the blood mobile.
This study shows that nattokinase lowers high lipid concentration in serum. It might not be much, but it is there and worth the support of nattokinase while weaning from statins. One could complement it with Red Yeast Rice for better results.
Quote:
For four weeks, four healthy volunteers were orally administered capsules containing nattokinase. Changes in blood mobility and lipid concentration in serum were investigated. Total cholesterol, Neutral fat, HDL cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol levels were measured as to determine the lipid levels. The subject took two capsules each (447 mg capsule) containing 100 mg of fermented soybean essence: Nattoesse(R) containing nattokinase daily after supper over four weeks. Although the blood mobility by the cell hemorheology measurement equipment before the intake was mean 56.5�}19.6 sec. after taking nattokinase extract for four weeks, it measured 42.9�}4.3 sec.
After taking nattokinase, the total cholesterol, neutral fat, and LDL cholesterol decreased from 265.5�}44.0 mg/dl to 215.3�}46.8 mg/dl, from 1050.8�}1030.4 mg/dl to 457.5�}409.6 mg/dl, and from 115.5�}37.0 mg/dl to 91.0�}38.3 mg/dl, respectively. Moreover, HDL cholesterol ranges from 32.5�}10.5 mg/dl to 34.3�}8.8 mg/dl at the normal reference interval. When nattokinase is taken, a high lipid concentration in serum decreases, and cell hemorheology is improved. This suggested that blood mobility was recovered.
Something you might want to consider. I assume you are taking the statins because you were told that your cholesterol was too high and you needed to lower it. But have you ever looked into what is now considered to be a safe level and how was this level determined? Quite sometime ago I wrote the following but since then we have added lots of new members so maybe it is be worth repeating.
Is cholesterol really the evil villain that it is made out to be?
Is high cholesterol really a problem? We keep hearing how we must keep our cholesterol low, but how low is low enough? A few years back anything below 300 was OK, this was then reduced to anything below 250, now it suppose to be below 200. How were these numbers determined? Is this really as serious a health problem as we are lead to believe? I do not think so. This is my story and how I arrived at this conclusion.
About two years ago I went to my family witch doctor for a general physical exam. He preformed the usual tests and determined that my blood pressure was too high and my cholesterol was 220, gave me some pills for the BP and told me to come back in 6 months. I go back after the 6 months get more tests, BP is down, and a couple days latter his nurse calls and tells me my cholesterol is now 190, and I’m thinking gee that’s good, but she then says the doctor wants me to take some pills to get it lower. At this point the only thing I know about cholesterol is what little I have heard and read, basically high bad, low good.
OK so I go get my new pills ($100 for one month, ouch!) anyway come back home tear open the bag and read the label. It instructs me to take two pills at night before bed. However a half-hour before I take them I am suppose to take an aspirin! What is this? Why do I need to take an aspirin? This does not make sense. So I then read the little info sheet that came with the pills, I guess you’re not really suppose to do that, but I did anyway. Well it seems that the aspirin is used to counteract the undesirable “side effects” of the cholesterol pills. Question. If these pills are such a good medicine why should I need an aspirin to counter act their “bad side effects”? Logically this just seemed wrong!
I needed more information. So I go to the internet visit a bunch of sites and read all I can about these pills and the more I learned the more I questioned them and the less I liked them. But realizing that this is a cholesterol-lowering drug and that I knew virtually nothing about cholesterol again I went on-line, and looked at numerous sites to see what I could learn about high cholesterol levels. Gee wiz guess what? There are two schools of thought out there, but one would never know that by listening to the usual outlets that keep repeating high cholesterol bad, low cholesterol good. Yet there is data that contradicts this conventional view.
There were tests done that showed when a group of individuals with high cholesterol were given cholesterol lower drugs they did in fact lower their cholesterol and there were fewer fatalities from heart problems. On the surface this of course was news good and it “was” the information that was quoted on the drug companies web sites to show how great their pills worked. But when citing this information a point that the drug companies failed to mention (I’m sure it was just an oversight on their part ) was that while these drugs did prevent a few individuals from dieing of heart problems this was simply because the side effects of taking their pills was killing them before they could die of heart problems. This from a pill that was to make them healthier and live longer.
Also there are statistics that show that those individuals who have managed to live into their 80’s & 90’s typically have high cholesterol numbers, while for the most part all their friends with low numbers had already past on.
A team of U.S. and Swedish researchers also found that “elevated” levels of total cholesterol recorded while subjects were in their early 70s was linked with reduced dementia risk in their later 70s. Furthermore, elevated total cholesterol throughout their 70s was associated with reduced dementia risk throughout their 80s.
According to a 2004 study conducted at the State University of New York and reported in the Journal of the AmericanCollege of Nutrition, healthy, non-exercising adults who followed an ultra low-fat diet saw their levels of the "good" cholesterol, “drop significantly”. When these “same” subjects were then placed on 3 weeks worth of a “high-fat diet”, their healthy HDL zoomed upward but WITHOUT raising LDL beyond levels they maintained on their normal diets.
However the statistic I found most interesting was for those individuals with “normal” cholesterol numbers, surely this group of “healthy” individuals must be living longer, it’s just a logical assumption. But unfortunately no, they are for all practical purposes they were having just as many heart problems as those with high numbers.
So what about those individuals with extremely low numbers, now here surely there must be a relation to heart problems, and there is. It would seem that these individuals are the more likely to have heart problems then all others.
So form this and similar reports, and contrary to what is universally accepted, I have concluded that high cholesterol numbers by themselves do not constitute a health threat and are probably beneficial.
Consequently what we need to know is where did these numbers for cholesterol come from and how were they determined? Will it seems they were determined by a group of distinguished doctors who sat down and carefully reviewed all of the data and then decided that this is what was needed to protect the heath of society.
The fact that the majority of these distinguished doctors just happened to either be directly or indirectly receiving money from the every drug companies that were making these pills was just a coincidence. Of course these distinguished doctors undoubtedly realized that in order to protect their income and grant money that meant these new lowers standards must be approved.
While the drug companies claim no pressure was ever applied to the doctors for their opinions, still every time the standards where lower this meant that a whole group of people who were previously considered health were now suddenly considered to be sick. But that’s Ok because the drug companies just happened to have the pills to make them better (provided they didn’t kill them first) and of course it was just an unintended consequence that the lower numbers also meant that the drug companies were now able to make million of dollars in new sales.
It was at this point that I took my $100 bottle of unopened pills and threw them in the garbage.
Can you shed any light on this part. I had thought about doing the decresing dosage thing but didn't know about a time table. I have learned that it's good to have something in place to do the statins job minus the Co Q 10 disruption. My limited understanding of the Beta Blocker is that it slows the heart rate. Why is it more dangerous to discontinue?
Ron
A couple issues:
1) If you just get off a beta blocker (unless you are on a low dose), there might be rebound effect where the heart can go into an arrythmia.
2) If you are taking a beta blocker for an arrythmia based condition, you can go into an arrythmia.
I'd like to thank everyone for the help. I have ordered the all the nutrients mentione minus the mms, and will add them to my daily regimen for a while before begining the withdrawal of the big pharm drugs. I already take large amounts of turmeric and curcuminoids for minor osteoarthritis in my shoulders. It is working well. 18 caps a day of turmeric one of ginger and each of Devils Claw and Boswellia Serrata. The discomfort that brought on the trip to the Dr. and a CAT scan [ who knew?] was quite sharp in certain arm positions. In a few weeks I was symptomless. Here's the thing. I'd been taking turmeric 2 caps a day for years before the onset of the pain in my shoulders. I had to ramp it up that high to see the radical dissapearance of the pain. I have occasional discomfort now but for the most part I don't hurt at all. Turmeric is not well absorbed in the system. The curcuminoids are supposed to be much better but I haven't experimented with discontinuing the plain old turmeric. This stuff is so cheap organic less than 8 dollars a pound. But a plastic cap machine and caps and got busy.
Boswellia is an excellent anti-inflammatory. But be aware that it contains a resin that can be hard on the kidneys. So, long duration is not good. When I took boswellia, I would only take it during the week, and give my body a rest on the weekend.
BTW, one of the boswellia species is used to make frankincense.
18 caps of turmeric. You might want to look into a turmeric extract. I use jarrow formulas 95 Turmeric and for anti-inflamatory conditions it does work somewhat (one capsule). next time I need it I might try 3-4.
Boswellia is an excellent anti-inflammatory. But be aware that it contains a resin that can be hard on the kidneys. So, long duration is not good. When I took boswellia, I would only take it during the week, and give my body a rest on the weekend.
BTW, one of the boswellia species is used to make frankincense.
Didn't know that. I will start alternating. I got that one and devil's claw from a formula for a cocktail of herb extracts, curcuminoids in particular, that was too expensive to purchase regularly and when I took it I didn't notice any difference from just the 18 caps of turmeric. I only get that many [turmeric ] when I'm home for all three meals. A fair amount of time it is 12 and sometimes only six. But it averages out to almost no discomfort. I backed off during a course of accupunture treatments and started noticing elbow discomfort so I went back to 18. The acupuncture seemed to help too. But it's not something I can do all the time.
The very best product I have found for inflammation is serrapeptase. It is like a miracle. I think I rather die than take 18 capsules of anything. Serrapeptase only requires 2 caps 2 or 3 times a day.
Wobenzyme is also another excellent product but I have seen faster results with serrapeptase. www.serrapeptase.info
protocol for discontinuing statins
) was that while these drugs did prevent a few individuals from dieing of heart problems this was simply because the side effects of taking their pills was killing them before they could die of heart problems. This from a pill that was to make them healthier and live longer. 
Linear Mode
