#21

I’m in the middle of another podcast that argues that not only should you avoid antiseptic mouthwash, but also fluoride in toothpaste and the water. Perhaps it’s time to install a reverse osmosis water filter…

1 Like
#22

@Dexter_Scott i have done so for myself. It is somewhat controversial but I need strong NO for heart health and more.

1 Like
#23

Maybe I’m not 100% informed, but the use of statins for longevity never made much sense to me, as there is some literature that shows that lower LDL-C levels increase the risk of mortality at the end of life.
LDL-C does not seem to me to be the culprit of cardiovascular disease, in my opinion there are other more important things to prevent atherovascular plaque accumulation, like manage blood preassure, exercise regularly, controling inflamation, managing blood glucose levels, and have good insulin sensitivity.

I almost got on the statin trend some time ago when i read the Attila book, but when i got deep in the studies, it seems to me that they are not a good solution or a preventive mesure to a healthy guy. Maybe to a person with CVD, but still i think there are better ways.

1 Like
#24

Based on observational trials which are not even backed by ITP data.

LDL-C does not seem to me to be the culprit of cardiovascular disease

We have plenty of mechanistical, observational and interventional data proving a direct connection between LDL-C (or rather apoB particles) and heart disease. It’s not the sugar that gets stuck in the cell walls.

#25

I agree with you and the literature, LDL is indeed deposited there, but it is not the main culprit of this happening. In my opinion, it is inflammation, high blood pressure, that causes damage to the endothelium and the LDL that is passing through the bloodstream gets trapped in these gaps that damage the endothelium.

I’m always suspicious of the literature, especially statins, a lot of economic interest. When you think about the functioning of the body, physiology, and we don’t reduce the cause of a problem to 1 factor, lowering LDL doesn’t make sense to me.

If LDL were so harmful, why does it continue to exist in our body? Wouldn’t evolution have eliminated LDL if it were useless and non-essential?

To me it doesn’t make sense that downloading something as much as possible is beneficial, if that were the case why is it still there?

Why are there studies of people with high LDL levels who do not have plaque buildup?

These are all questions I ask myself, and they don’t make sense to me, and that’s why I choose not to take a statin. LDL has a role in the body, a function, and lowering it as much as possible doesn’t seem logical to me.

#26

But I could be wrong, but for me reductionism is something that doesn’t work for us, and LDL is a clear case of that. Medicine is reductionist and our body works as a whole.

Medicine said that the appendix had no function, like other organs, and they removed them left and right. Now we see that they have a function, we just didn’t know it, will the LDL not be the same??

Just questions, food for the brain, we have to transcend what they tell us and think outside the box, beyond the reductionism that medicine is.

It’s my opinion :slight_smile:

1 Like
#27

Yes, yes you are wrong.

This is some mysticism stuff.

1 Like
#28

The PESA study and various mechanistical studies show a direct 1 to 1 relationship between the apoB count and plaque deposits. With sufficiently low enough apoB, plaque formation stops or even reverses. Other risk factors decide how high that threshold is.

I’m always suspicious of the literature, especially statins, a lot of economic interest.

Big Pharma doesn’t make money off of generic drugs, it makes money from patented medicine they sell for thousends to millions of dollars. The only people who do make money off of statins are the youtubers who demonize them.

If LDL were so harmful, why does it continue to exist in our body

Appeal to nature fallacy. If nature is perfect, why do we age, develop disease and die?

Wouldn’t evolution have eliminated LDL if it were useless and non-essential?

High LDL-C usually kills you after you’ve reproduced so there is no selective pressure to get rid of it.

Why are there studies of people with high LDL levels who do not have plaque buildup?

Because their other risk factors are so low that they get away with higher than average LDL-C. There are even people who are obese and eat cakes every day without developing diabetes due to their genetics, but they are not the norm.

LDL has a role in the body

If it does, then why do we never see any negative outcomes in the studies or in populations with genetically low LDL-C?

2 Likes
#29

If your appendix gets infected, would you prefer it gets removed or that you die from sepsis?

Now we see that they have a function, we just didn’t know it, will the LDL not be the same??

We also don’t know whether high blood sugar levels could actually be a good thing so controlling it via diet or medication may be wrong?

Just questions, food for the brain

No, they are mostly logical fallacies.

think outside the box

You thoughts are pretty much mainstream opinion on youtube and online forums who all hate on Big Pharma. It doesn’t make it right though.

2 Likes
#30

Thanks for you responses, i realy dont think you response to my questions, just go arond them. If im mainsteam youtubers opinion you are lab studies reducionist opinion, but i respect your opinion and accept it, i dont say you wrong, but i dont think you right.

Reductionist and absolute thinking has led to many mistakes, which is why I avoid thinking like that, but I respect anyone who does.

Thank you for your time and your answers, I will continue not to take statins, I prefer to control other factors as much as I can, maybe we will talk again in a few years :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#31

Give examples of where I do that?

Reductionist and absolute thinking has led to many mistakes, which is why I avoid thinking like that

I like looking at the evidence for stuff. Clearly the “natural” approach hasn’t worked for anyone those past 300 thousend years so medicine is our best bet.

I prefer to control other factors as much as I can

Which by themselves might be required by your body. Body fat, blood sugar and inflammation are all needed in order to keep yourself alive.

2 Likes
#32

I had the same reaction to statins as you did. Apparently, the science behind the improvement of the epithelial cells in the veins and arteries are not protected with statins however, it seems to have an effect on ATP, which may improve cardiovascular health.

1 Like
#33

Statins are one of the pharmaceutical industries biggest money makers. Unfortunately, scientist are human beings and subject to one of our greatest weaknesses, greed.

#34

I pay 7€ a month for my statin. If that is how Big Pharma is making most of its money while paying hundreds of millions for every clinical trial, they must be in terrible financial shape.

#35

I agree no $$ in this for pharma. Those arguments are dead. Good medical practice drives Rx’s. I can get a year supply for $20.
I personally take Atorvastatin, no noticeable adverse effects, great ApoB improvement.
If there were adverse effects, we have other options. However, I’m not convinced of the anti inflammatory and plaque stabilization effects of other agents.

2 Likes
#36

Here is where I first heard of dihydroberberine

2 Likes
#37

Hello, thanks for responding. I live in the United States if I were to take statins, they would cost me zero because of my insurance. However, my medical carrier pays a healthy amount and honestly, I don’t know what that is. I know that over 100 million Americans have been prescribed this medication. do the math

1 Like
#38

In the United States namebrand statins run between 200 and $500 a month times 100 million guess it’s not much of a moneymaker huh

#39

100m * 7€ = 700m€
Big Pharma combined earnings ~82b€
0.85% of Big Pharma earnings from statins.

In the United States namebrand statins run between 200 and $500 a month times 100 million guess it’s not much of a moneymaker huh

Source? And what % share of all statins prescribed go for that price?

#40

Sorry for the miscalculation. There are only 47 million Americans on statins. Two repeat the pharmaceutical companies are charging your insurance between 200 and 500 for namebrand statins. Do the math.