Skip to comments.Differential effects of simvastatin and pravastatin... (Statins)
Posted on 10/28/2009 7:21:09 PM PDT by TennesseeGirl
Inhibitors of HMG-CoA reductase (statins) are widely used medications for reduction of cholesterol levels. Statin use significantly reduces risk of cardiovascular disease but has also been associated with lower risk of other diseases and conditions, including dementia. However, some reports suggest that statins also have detrimental effects on the brain...
...Our data suggest that simvastatin and pravastatin differentially affect expression of genes involved in neurodegeneration and that statin-dependent gene expression regulation is cell type specific (excerpted)
(Excerpt) Read more at jlr.org ...
Don’t take these drugs. Many other safe ways to lower cholesterol.
Basic reality is that if your blood pressure ever goes to zero, you’ll die. Blood pressure is one of those things I refuse to worry about.
Thank you Dr. Templar.
So, I’m on Simvastin!
When will I die? Is there a better drug?
When will the cosine, of the tangent, of the hypotenuse trigger the sinewave of my anal fart to the significant level of -15.2 to +27.3?
Why post this Sh*t?
You are right.....Niacin and other supplements have been found to lower cholesterol as well....with less side effects....Drug companies are even getting OUT of the biz of the cholesterol drugs now!
Thousands of people, me included, have spent a good portion of their lives working to defend this country from the likes of Communism. I have been taking statins for a long time. I hope this study is saying that my mind will essentially get to the point where I will no longer remember that a bunch of whiney Liberals voted a man into the Presidency that is destroying our Republic.
High blood pressure is what is known as “the silent killer”.
Untreated hypertension, over time, will destroy your kidneys. I had an Aunt that died this way. She ignored her high blood pressure for years. One day she went into complete renal shutdown. Her kidneys had stopped working. She died in a couple of days.
When promulgating your esoteric cognitations or articulating your superficial sentimentalities and amicable philosophical and psychological observations, beware of platitudinous ponderosity. Let your verbal evaporations have lucidity, intelligibility and veracious vivacity without rodomontade or thespian bombast. Sedulously avoid all polysyllabic profundity, pompous propensity and sophomoric vacuity.
Ping to read later.
One reason to post this stuff is that I worry about people who didn't have a counselling background and might not be able to articulate what was happening to them, who would start on statins and end up being misdiagnosed as depressed or even as having Alzheimer's -- which is what I was afraid I was getting the first time I took the medication.
A lot of GP or family practice docs not only don't know much about psychiatric disorders, but don't have a lot of insight and are inclined to think that mood disorders just wouldn't be a problem if people just chose to tough them out. They can be looking right at memory loss and depression and not see them.
It was pretty clear that my former doc resented my for being in the small set of people who have neuro- reactions to the drug. And if I hadn't realized something was up and remained on the drugs another couple of weeks, I probably would have tried to off myself, with unpleasant consequences whether I succeeded or failed.
As you can imagine, I have strong feelings about this.
A close relative of mine is exhibiting Parkinson like symptoms which I believe is from long term use of lipitor (statin). Parkinson’s does not run anywhere in the family, not even in the far extended family. I did some Google searches and it looks like a major investigation is underway to determine if there is a link between statins and Parkinson’s Disease.
The fact that statin drugs are two-edged swords is known to few. It is no wonder doctors are confused about this class of drugs.
When a statin reduces cholesterol, it is, at the same time, reducing synthesis of CoQ10, dolichols, selenoproteins, Rho, glutathione and normal phosphorylation by a similar amount. This, I believe, is the cause of the thousands of side effect reports largely unknown to the medical community.
for more info
<It was pretty clear that my former doc resented my for being in the small set of people who have neuro- reactions to the drug.
I’ve had that feeling too. I was put on a statin maybe 6 years ago. I’m a Type II diabetic and as soon as I went on the drug, my blood glucose shot up to the 400’s and stayed there. I took myself off and the doc tried another statin. This time, the bgs went to about 250. I tried to tell her that my mother can’t take statins, having had the same result. The doc kept telling me there’s no reason diabetics can’t take, indeed, they should all be taking, statins. Apparently my family history, weird as it may be, didn’t mean anything. It was only after the 2nd statin that the doc thought I might know what the eff I was talking about and changed my drugs.
I went off the cholesterol drugs when I went vegan. Everything is fine now and I don’t have to worry about side effects from 20+ years of using these powerful drugs.
Thanks for the link. I will check it out. I am really interested in this because it’s affecting me on a personal/family level.
I have low BP and have always had, but my Dr. says my high Cholesterol is genetic and has been pushing me forever to take the Statins. I have steadfastly refused. I have tried all of the promised natural methods to lower it to no avail. Finally, common sense tells me that if it is genetic then I got it from my forebears. My mother, father, both grandmothers, both grandfathers, and greatgrandmothers all lived past 90 without considerable problems. I should worry? I’m healthy, hardly ever catch colds, am hyperactive and still working at 76. I’ll pass on the drugs.
Sounds like a case of old age to me. I’ve seen what statins do to people and will happily take my chances with old age...
I have the same background. I keep telling my doctor that if my forebears lived into their 90’s without statins, then I won’t fix what’s not broken.
I totally agree!
Well, you know, I am interested, but there were too many unfamiliar words in there to catch my interest. Can you summarize it for a layman? tx
Must be that you understand your post, yet the unwashed have no idea what its about!
So I'll repost your article and hope that you can tell me:
1. What it means, and,
2. What it means"
Thanks! - a Simvastin client!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Journal of Lipid Research, Vol. 50, 2095-2102, October 2009 Copyright © 2009 by American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Differential effects of simvastatin and pravastatin on expression of Alzheimers disease-related genes in human astrocytes and neuronal cells Weijiang Dong1,*,, Simona Vuletic1,* and John J. Albers2,* * Northwest Lipid Metabolism and Diabetes Research Laboratories, University of Washington, Department of Medicine, Seattle 98109, WA Xian Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Department of Human Anatomy and Histology and Embryology, Xian 710061, Peoples Republic of China
2 To whom correspondence should be addressed. e-mail: email@example.com
Inhibitors of HMG-CoA reductase (statins) are widely used medications for reduction of cholesterol levels. Statin use significantly reduces risk of cardiovascular disease but has also been associated with lower risk of other diseases and conditions, including dementia. However, some reports suggest that statins also have detrimental effects on the brain. We provide evidence that simvastatin and pravastatin have significantly different effects on expression of genes related to neurodegeneration in astrocytes and neuroblastoma (SK-N-SH) cells in culture. Simvastatin significantly reduced expression of ABCA1 in astrocytes and neuroblastoma cells (by 79% and 97%, respectively; both P < 0.001). Pravastatin had a similar but attenuated effect on ABCA1 in astrocytes (54%, P < 0.001) and neuroblastoma cells (70%, P < 0.001). Simvastatin reduced expression of apolipoprotein E in astrocytes (P < 0.01). Furthermore, both statins reduced expression of microtubule-associated protein tau in astrocytes (P < 0.01), while both statins increased its expression in neuroblastoma cells (P < 0.01). In SK-N-SH cells, simvastatin significantly increased cyclin-dependent kinase 5 and glycogen synthase kinase 3β expression, while pravastatin increased amyloid precursor protein expression. Our data suggest that simvastatin and pravastatin differentially affect expression of genes involved in neurodegeneration and that statin-dependent gene expression regulation is cell type specific.Dong, W., S. Vuletic, and J. J. Albers. Differential effects of simvastatin and pravastatin on expression of Alzheimers disease-related genes in human astrocytes and neuronal cells.
Supplementary key words gene expression ATP binding cassette transporter A1 apolipoprotein E phospholipid transfer protein microtubule-associated protein tau amyloid precursor protein
Abbreviations: AD, Alzheimer's disease; apoE/APOE, apolipoprotein E; APP, amyloid precursor protein; BBB, blood-brain barrier; CDK5, cyclin-dependent kinase 5; CSF, cerebrospinal fluid; DAB1, Disabled 1; FPP, farnesyl pyrophosphate; GGPP, geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate; GSK3β, glycogen synthase kinase 3β; MAPT, microtubule-associated protein tau; PLTP, phospholipid transfer protein
Yeah. 65 is ancient.
I have high cholesterol and my pharmacist son told me that about half of those dying from heart attack or stroke don’t have high cholesterol, the other half do.
I chose not to take the statin drugs.
And that’s only if stroke doesn’t get you first.
I hope you read the other comments on this thread, doc.
Albers and colleagues looked at the expression of genes related to neurodegeneration, and found that indeed, despite using biologically equivalent drug concentrations, differences were seen both between cells, and between drugs; for example, simvastatin reduced the expression of the cholesterol transporter ABCA1 by approximately 80% in astrocytes, while pravastatin lowered expression by only around 50%. Another interesting difference was that while both statins decreased expression of the Tau protein -associated with Alzheimer's disease -- in astrocytes, they increased Tau expression in neurons; pravastatin also increased the expression of another Alzheimer's hallmark, amyloid precursor protein (APP). While increased levels of these two proteins may account for potential risks of disease, Albers and colleagues also note that large decreases in cholesterol proteins like ABCA1 should be considered. Brain cholesterol levels tend to be reduced in elderly people, and in such individuals the long-term effects of statin therapy could lead to transient or permanent cognitive impairment.
Arrrggghhh — the important fact to me in all of this: “Brain cholesterol tends to reduce in older people.” I am going to ADD sausages to my diet, then. Brain trumps hiney. hahah.
Thanks for clarifying the research.
I am resisting statins too. And you are right — if it’s inherited, then look at the gene pool.
"This result could also have important implications for understanding recent data indicating that low cholesterol in brain cells has harmful effects on memory, concentration and mood. Twenty-five percent of cholesterol within the body is found in brain cells, where it seems to perform many important roles. Most of the theories for how cholesterol improves the function of brain cells have focused on its effect on the membranes that enclose these cells, but this work suggests that cholesterol may play a much more direct role by burying itself within some of the proteins that are necessary for cells to communicate." http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/123346.php
(The study was performed by Brannigan, Henin and Michael L. Klein of the Center for Molecular Modeling in the Department of Chemistry at Penn as well as Richard Law of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Roderic Eckenhoff of the Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care at the Penn School of Medicine. It was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Funding for this research was provided by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, with TeraGrid resources provided by the National Center for Supercomputing Applications. Source: Jordan Reese University of Pennsylvania)
I read the entire thread.
My response is that most doctors resort to cholesterol medicines because their patients won’t do the hard things to fix the problem themselves.
Most people refuse to take enough niacin to make a difference.
Most people refuse to work up a sweat for 45 minutes every day.
Most people refuse to swap out a few portions of dietary crap for vegetables.
Most people will not skip a few portions per day.
Most people won’t buy and take fish oil.
Most people want an easy fix for their problem.
For a small group, doing all of the right things doesn’t help enough and medication may be helpful and worth the risk of side effects.
For the largest group, they are taking the medicine because they don’t want to change their lifestyle and that largest group is placing themselves at risk of side effects which could be avoided.
65 Would be ancient for a user of statins....
And yet half the people who die of heart attacks have normal cholesterol. I would rather live with high cholesterol than blow my liver up with statin drugs.
And amen to that.
All true. But the assumption is statins are reducing the effects of other risky behaior. Not proven to my knowledge.
There are many studies showing benefit from the use of statins. The group that recieved the largest benefit are those that have already had an MI. Adding a statin decreased their subsequent death rate by 25%
Treating people before MI, there was always an ongoing argument about benefit, but 3 or 4 years ago, there was a big meta analysis released which showed decreased mortality from MI in those treated before their first MI, a couple of cancers and some other unexpected disease, I can’t recall at this time.
The meta analysis would cover a broad spectrum of people, so yes, there would appear to be benefit for people across a broad spectrum of behaviors. Especially since the number of people that will change their lifestyles without a major life changing event like an MI is extraordinarily small, the benefit would seem to cover those who are not making good choices.
I’m familar with the studies. I don’t trust them. These studies are influenced by similar drug companies that are not reporting MRSA infections in H1N1 cases, and over- reporting hotline calls as definite H1N1, to jack up support for the vaccine.
I think only about 10% of drugs on the market are necessary and worth the risk. Check out research on changes in the epigenome with ANY drug use.
“New study questions effectiveness of popular cholesterol drugs”
Should I contiinue eating a pecan waffle and a glass of milk?
having been born with a malformed heart they important to me.
a few folks have bad side effects and folks think that means everyone it doesnt
i have seen folks get quick muscle weakness but many studies show that they are easily tolerated by the vast majority of those who take them...men more than women
niacin is nice but it aint pravachol or crestor etc results wise...nor is red yeast etc...
and then some here get on this Drug companies are the enemy rant and sound like Dem talking points...ridiculous for a conservative site
i dont doubt for a second you did not tolerate them but most do...most folks tolerate Red Bull, I dont.
most folks tolerate cold meds.....I dont.
and so forth
that does not mean its bad for everyone
this same sort of hysteria killed NSAIDs, DDT, paregoric, second hand smoke epidemics and so on....h.
How convenient...where is your evidence...post it and then tell us your personal experience with how statins turned you into a monster while the drug companies got rich off your insanity or liver failure
Zetia and Vytorin are cholesterol absorption blockers working primarily in the intestines.
Zetia is proven very much so to improve lipids ( i can explain what that means precisely if you need me to) but it HAS BEEN DISAPPOINTING (which is what your link is about) in studies to reduce atherosclerosis of the cardiac muscle arteries...NOT THAT THEY DO NOT REDUCE CHOLESTRAL...they are quite proven to do just that.
and they are tolerated well by folks who need to take them...very few folks cannot tolerate them.
maybe you should ring up Harry Reid and vent all your drug company angst to a sympathetic ear.
I and my large family are grateful God has provided them to help keep me alive. I would disagree with Doc a bit. My cardiologist at Vandy who btw is extremely conservative does not believe that diet and exercise alone can reduce more than mild hyperlipidemia...they advise that as well though.
The Scottish study on pravachol is pretty sound and I can tell you my lipids are incredible...and they need to be...two open hearts in 13 months to correct an intraseptal LAD is not for sissies.
If I recall correctly:
The study compared Vytorin with a combination of Niacin and Statin. Niacin and statin were found effective in lowering cardio vascular diseaase (CVD) whereas the Vytorin was not.
The question that this study brings us is, what are statins doing to prevent CVD other than just lowering cholesterol? Vytorin lowers cholesterol just fine, but is not lowering (CVD). Answering this question will lead to the development of better drugs with lower side effects in the future.
Only if you are sharing =)
My favorite thing about the waffle house is when the waitress stands 5 feet away from the cook and shouts the order to him.
On the flipahdeedoodah side, some of us have REALLY AWFUL results with them. I would say various physicians' insistence that I try 4 different statins has cost me a year of compromised productivity, relationships, sleep, etc. And one, now my FORMER GP, was obviously angry at me for my failure to respond as desired to his treatment.
Further, I don't know. It stands to reason that crud building up inside blood vessels would be a bad thing. And reducing that amount of crud to build up certainly seems like a reasonable approach. But there seem to be many unanswered questions, and some people seem impatient with even the asking of the questions. Why do people have such differing responses to cholesterol and cholesterol meds? What are the relationships of cholesterol, inflammation, mood, mental functioning, neurological functioning generally?
We seem to have a very good hammer. It drives nails well in many cases. In other cases it fails, and the failures are of the kind that a lot of physicians would not notice them or would tend to attribute them to other causes.
I cannot convey the fear I still feel when I remember how deeply into trouble I got with my first go 'round with these drugs. I was very close to committing myself to a mental hospital. I was making a cup of coffee and I was going to sit down with the phone book and figure out which hospital would work with my insurance. And that was because suicide was beginning to seem attractive and reasonable.
I invite you to wonder what would have happened had I committed myself. There goes the exercise of my right to keep and bear arms. There goes my credibility in many things.
Also, please think what my wife and child would have gone through had I killed myself. And then wonder with me if ANYONE would have considered that I had been poisoned inadvertently by my physician.
I'm not advocating hysteria, but I think that with the data about bad reactions to statins, the teaching of patients and pharmacists is criminally insufficient. Some kind of caution needs to be provided. And shaking your head and saying, as my doc did, that, I was one of the very few, extremely few, people who have neuro-reactions to these medications doesn't really do the trick for me.