Professional athletes & statins: 80% suffer muscle adverse effects

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Sharon Hope" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Interesting, for this particular group 80% suffered adverse
effects of statins:

From Pub Med:

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Apr;57(4):525-8.

Professional athletes suffering from familial
hypercholesterolaemia rarely tolerate statin treatment
because of muscular problems.

Amazing.

First of all, were talking about a significantly, extremely
small portion of the population: top sports performers.

Second: out of another significantly small group, a subgroup
of 22 persons, 14 people could not tolerate statin treatment
without side-effects, over the course of 8 YEARS. (No
mention of underlying issues here but one would think that
those that stretch their muscles to the limit (pun
intended..) moreso than others *might* be more prone to
muscular issues of all kinds.)

Yep. That's a good reason to pull statins off the shelves.

L.

Quoted message said:

Sinzinger H, O'Grady J.

Wilhelm Auerswald Atherosclerosis Research Group
(ASF) Vienna, Institute for Diagnosis and Treatment
of Atherosclerosis and Lipid Disorders (ATHOS),
Vienna, Austria.

Aims Muscular problems are the major group of side-effects
during statin treatment. They are known to occur much more
frequently during and after exercise. Methods and results
For the last 8 years we have monitored 22 professional
athletes in whom, because of familial
hypercholesterolaemia, treatment with different statins was
attempted. Only six out of the 22 finally tolerated at
least one member of this family of drugs. In three of these
six the first statin prescribed allowed training
performance without any limitation. Changing the drug
demonstrated that only two tolerated all the four or five
statins examined (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin,
pravastatin, simvastatin). Cerivastatin was not among the
statins prescribed. Conclusions These findings indicate
that in top sports performers only about 20% tolerate
statin treatment without side-effects. Clinical decision
making as to lipid lowering therapy thus becomes a critical
issue in this small subgroup of patients.

PMID: 15025753 [PubMed - in process]

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15025753

Where did you ever see anything that would lead you to jump
to the absurd conclusion that statins should be pulled off
the shelves?

This reaction is amazingly like that of the statin reps and
incredibly parallel to the industry-funded studies that
'respond' to any negative indications with the opposite widely-
ballyhoo'd in the media and advertising.

The readers of this ng understand that my posts are to
1) bring awareness of the proven adverse effects, so that
for those affected, the damage does not continue while
their physicians are in denial that the very problems
listed in the physician's information are in fact the
ones that the patient is complaining about
2) bring awareness to the topic so that there will be some
research into screening, to prevent those most likely to
suffer life-altering damage from having to go through the
pain, damage, and loss of income
3) bring awareness to the topic so that there will be some
research into treating those disabled by statins. Waiting
to see if they can recover the ability to walk 100 yards
in one day without 4 days of bedrest to recover is not a
treatment. Waiting to see if they can recover the ability
to remember what they had for dinner last night, or
remember seeing a grandchild's first steps, is not a
treatment. Waiting to see if the numbness and burning
that changes after a couple of years to sharp deep
startling painful needle [censored] will eventually mean they
will get feeling back is not a treatment. Waiting to see
if they can see clearly again is not a treatment. Waiting
to see if the pain, so sharp that an injury is forgotten
because it offers a lower level of pain, will ever be
reduced to a bearable level is not a treatment.

For those who benefit, three cheers! (Patients, that is)

For those who would not permit freedom of speech,
particularly when the speech they constantly attempt to
ridicule, discredit, drown out, label with perjorative
nicknames, and otherwise cast aspersions upon is factual
information and constitutes actual health warnings, I have
to wonder. Could this be a paid announcement from one of the
2-per-doctor-per-statin-company Reps whose efforts make
statins a $14 Billion industry?

Who else would expend such energy and time in an effort to
refuse to allow the acknowledgement of what the statin label
clearly states? A few actual human examples of what these
words on the label actually translate to in terms of loss of
job, loss of respect, loss of the ability to function in
public, loss of movement without pain, loss of memory - what
do you find so threatening about that?

Or are you simply perpetuating a paycheck? Do you get paid
per post? Is there a list of people you have been assigned
to tear down, or do you make your own choice of victims? Is
there a cash bonus if the person you attack posts fewer
times about the injury to their family?

Has anyone in Statin marketing ever stopped to think that
the industry would be better served by identifying those
most likely to suffer adverse effects and preventing such
damage? Think of all the posts that would not be made, if
people remained uninjured! How about developing a treatment
to clean up the mess made in some patients? Take those with
statin disabilities, make them better and they will go on to
other things - like a life.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Yep. That's a good reason to pull statins off the shelves.

[email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Sharon Hope said:

Interesting, for this particular group 80% suffered
adverse effects of statins:

From Pub Med:

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Apr;57(4):525-8.

Professional athletes suffering from familial
hypercholesterolaemia rarely tolerate statin treatment
because of muscular problems.

Amazing.

First of all, were talking about a significantly,
extremely small portion of the population: top sports
performers.

You say this about every group of statins sufferers,
something akin to "extremely small portion of the
population."

And for the benefit of anyone else reading--my apologies for
being self-referential--I am one of that category discussed
in this study: a top performer who was disabled by statins.

B'adant

Quoted message said:

Second: out of another significantly small group, a
subgroup of 22 persons, 14 people could not tolerate
statin treatment without side-effects, over the course of
8 YEARS. (No mention of underlying issues here but one
would think that those that stretch their muscles to the
limit (pun intended..) moreso than others *might* be more
prone to muscular issues of all kinds.)

Yep. That's a good reason to pull statins off the shelves.

L.

Quoted message said:

Sinzinger H, O'Grady J.

Wilhelm Auerswald Atherosclerosis Research Group (ASF)
Vienna, Institute for Diagnosis and Treatment of
Atherosclerosis and Lipid Disorders (ATHOS), Vienna,
Austria.

Aims Muscular problems are the major group of side-
effects during statin treatment. They are known to occur
much more frequently during and after exercise. Methods
and results For the last 8 years we have monitored 22
professional athletes in whom, because of familial
hypercholesterolaemia, treatment with different statins
was attempted. Only six out of the 22 finally tolerated
at least one member of this family of drugs. In three of
these six the first statin prescribed allowed training
performance without any limitation. Changing the drug
demonstrated that only two tolerated all the four or five
statins examined (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin,
pravastatin, simvastatin). Cerivastatin was not among the
statins prescribed. Conclusions These findings indicate
that in top sports performers only about 20% tolerate
statin treatment without side-effects. Clinical decision
making as to lipid lowering therapy thus becomes a
critical issue in this small subgroup of patients.

PMID: 15025753 [PubMed - in process]

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
ve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15025753

(Zee) said:

[email hidden] wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Sharon Hope said:

Interesting, for this particular group 80% suffered
adverse effects of statins:

From Pub Med:

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Apr;57(4):525-8.

Professional athletes suffering from familial
hypercholesterolaemia rarely tolerate statin treatment
because of muscular problems.

Amazing.

First of all, were talking about a significantly,
extremely small portion of the population: top sports
performers.

You say this about every group of statins sufferers,
something akin to "extremely small portion of the
population."

Yes, only because it is true. But I do not say it to in any
way mitigate the reality of statin-induced side effects and
I welcome the attention it is getting in the media. Can't
you understand that?

Quoted message said:

And for the benefit of anyone else reading--my apologies
for being self-referential--I am one of that category
discussed in this study: a top performer who was disabled
by statins.

B'adant

Quoted message said:

Second: out of another significantly small group, a
subgroup of 22 persons, 14 people could not tolerate
statin treatment without side-effects, over the course of
8 YEARS. (No mention of underlying issues here but one
would think that those that stretch their muscles to the
limit (pun intended..) moreso than others *might* be more
prone to muscular issues of all kinds.)

Yep. That's a good reason to pull statins off the
shelves.

L.

Quoted message said:

Sinzinger H, O'Grady J.

Wilhelm Auerswald Atherosclerosis Research Group (ASF)
Vienna, Institute for Diagnosis and Treatment of
Atherosclerosis and Lipid Disorders (ATHOS), Vienna,
Austria.

Aims Muscular problems are the major group of side-
effects during statin treatment. They are known to occur
much more frequently during and after exercise. Methods
and results For the last 8 years we have monitored 22
professional athletes in whom, because of familial
hypercholesterolaemia, treatment with different statins
was attempted. Only six out of the 22 finally tolerated
at least one member of this family of drugs. In three of
these six the first statin prescribed allowed training
performance without any limitation. Changing the drug
demonstrated that only two tolerated all the four or
five statins examined (atorvastatin, fluvastatin,
lovastatin, pravastatin, simvastatin). Cerivastatin was
not among the statins prescribed. Conclusions These
findings indicate that in top sports performers only
about 20% tolerate statin treatment without side-
effects. Clinical decision making as to lipid lowering
therapy thus becomes a critical issue in this small
subgroup of patients.

PMID: 15025753 [PubMed - in process]

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
eve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15025753

It seems to me I heard somewhere that Sharon Hope wrote in article
<U5q7c.55800$Cb.867518@attbi_s51>:

Quoted message said:

Interesting, for this particular group 80% suffered adverse
effects of statins:

Quoted message said:

From Pub Med:

Quoted message said:

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Apr;57(4):525-8.

Quoted message said:

Professional athletes suffering from familial
hypercholesterolaemia rarely tolerate statin treatment
because of muscular problems.

Quoted message said:

Sinzinger H, O'Grady J.

Quoted message said:

Wilhelm Auerswald Atherosclerosis Research Group
(ASF) Vienna, Institute for Diagnosis and Treatment
of Atherosclerosis and Lipid Disorders (ATHOS),
Vienna, Austria.

Quoted message said:

Aims Muscular problems are the major group of side-effects
during statin treatment. They are known to occur much more
frequently during and after exercise. Methods and results
For the last 8 years we have monitored 22 professional
athletes in whom, because of familial
hypercholesterolaemia, treatment with different statins was
attempted. Only six out of the 22 finally tolerated at
least one member of this family of drugs. In three of these
six the first statin prescribed allowed training
performance without any limitation. Changing the drug
demonstrated that only two tolerated all the four or five
statins examined (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin,
pravastatin, simvastatin). Cerivastatin was not among the
statins prescribed. Conclusions These findings indicate
that in top sports performers only about 20% tolerate
statin treatment without side-effects. Clinical decision
making as to lipid lowering therapy thus becomes a critical
issue in this small subgroup of patients.

Quoted message said:

PMID: 15025753 [PubMed - in process]

Quoted message said:

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15025753

This summary raises so many questions it seems unwise
to draw any conclusions. Maybe when the study is
finished . . . .

Some questions:

What sports were involved? Nordic skiers might be expected
to have quite different skeletomuscular problems from
golfers or swimmers, as well as very different training
modalities and intensities.

How large a pool were the 22 drawn from?

How were they chosen? Did they self-present with
perceived problems, or was there a random process or were
they referred?

If they self-presented or were referred, what were the
patent complaints?

How long did each subject use each statin, and at what
dosage?

How soon were effects noticed?

Did treatment continue the entire eight years, or was it
ended earlier?

After at least three tolerated the first statin they were
treated with and six tolerated at least one of the five,
what was the object of testing all subjects for tolerance to
all five statins?

Why these five statins and no others? Why was
cerivastatin excluded?

The implication is that some subjects experienced inability
to continue their athletic training. What is the
correspondence between inability to do athletic training at
an elite level and patients whose daily physical activity is
less demanding?

The 22 subjects were a "small subgroup" of patients. Who
were the other patients, were they being treated, or did
they constitute a control group?

Do adverse effects in a small subgroup justify the subject:
"Professional athletes suffering from familial
hypercholesterolaemia *rarely* [my emphasis] tolerate statin
treatment because of muscular problems."
--
Don [email hidden]

Excellent questions. How about you purchase the full text
article and report back to all of us?

"Don Kirkman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

It seems to me I heard somewhere that Sharon Hope wrote in
article <U5q7c.55800$Cb.867518@attbi_s51>:

Quoted message said:

Interesting, for this particular group 80% suffered
adverse effects of statins:

Quoted message said:

From Pub Med:

Quoted message said:

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Apr;57(4):525-8.

Quoted message said:

Professional athletes suffering from familial
hypercholesterolaemia

rarely

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

tolerate statin treatment because of muscular problems.

Quoted message said:

Sinzinger H, O'Grady J.

Quoted message said:

Wilhelm Auerswald Atherosclerosis Research Group (ASF)
Vienna, Institute

for

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Diagnosis and Treatment of Atherosclerosis and Lipid
Disorders (ATHOS), Vienna, Austria.

Quoted message said:

Aims Muscular problems are the major group of side-
effects during statin treatment. They are known to occur
much more frequently during and after exercise. Methods
and results For the last 8 years we have monitored 22
professional athletes in whom, because of familial
hypercholesterolaemia, treatment with different statins
was attempted. Only six out of the 22 finally tolerated
at least one member of this family of drugs. In three

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

these six the first statin prescribed allowed training
performance

without

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

any limitation. Changing the drug demonstrated that only
two tolerated

all

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the four or five statins examined (atorvastatin,
fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, simvastatin).
Cerivastatin was not among the statins prescribed.
Conclusions These findings indicate that in top sports
performers only about 20% tolerate statin treatment
without side-effects. Clinical decision making as to
lipid lowering therapy thus becomes a critical issue in
this small subgroup of patients.

Quoted message said:

PMID: 15025753 [PubMed - in process]

ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
&db=pubmed&dopt=A

bstract&list_uids=15025753

Quoted message said:

This summary raises so many questions it seems unwise
to draw any conclusions. Maybe when the study is
finished . . . .

Some questions:

What sports were involved? Nordic skiers might be expected
to have quite different skeletomuscular problems from
golfers or swimmers, as well as very different training
modalities and intensities.

How large a pool were the 22 drawn from?

How were they chosen? Did they self-present with perceived
problems, or was there a random process or were they
referred?

If they self-presented or were referred, what were the
patent complaints?

How long did each subject use each statin, and at
what dosage?

How soon were effects noticed?

Did treatment continue the entire eight years, or was it
ended earlier?

After at least three tolerated the first statin they were
treated with and six tolerated at least one of the five,
what was the object of testing all subjects for tolerance
to all five statins?

Why these five statins and no others? Why was cerivastatin
excluded?

The implication is that some subjects experienced
inability to continue their athletic training. What is the
correspondence between inability to do athletic training
at an elite level and patients whose daily physical
activity is less demanding?

The 22 subjects were a "small subgroup" of patients. Who
were the other patients, were they being treated, or did
they constitute a control group?

Do adverse effects in a small subgroup justify the
subject: "Professional athletes suffering from familial
hypercholesterolaemia *rarely* [my emphasis] tolerate
statin treatment because of muscular problems."
--
Don [email hidden]

It seems to me I heard somewhere that Sharon Hope wrote in article
<X4P7c.64152$po.606093@attbi_s52>:

Quoted message said:

Excellent questions. How about you purchase the full text
article and report back to all of us?

Quoted message said:

"Don Kirkman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

It seems to me I heard somewhere that Sharon Hope wrote
in article <U5q7c.55800$Cb.867518@attbi_s51>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Interesting, for this particular group 80% suffered
adverse effects of statins:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

From Pub Med:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 Apr;57(4):525-8.

[...]

Because:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

PMID: 15025753 [PubMed - in process]

--
Don [email hidden]

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:06:12 GMT, "Sharon Hope" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

These findings indicate that in top sports performers only
about 20% tolerate statin treatment without side-effects.

IME, that ia an accurate percentage.

antwrp.gsfc.nasa.govap960222.htmlOpen ↗ Lift well,
Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

(Zee) said:

And for the benefit of anyone else reading--my apologies
for being self-referential--I am one of that category
discussed in this study: a top performer who was disabled
by statins.

What is your sport?

antwrp.gsfc.nasa.govap960222.htmlOpen ↗ Lift well,
Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.