Amiodarone for heart rhythm

I was told that I am too young for that med. 70? I didn’t ask why

I don't know about that. I started it when I was 70 and have been on and off on it for 4 yrs. It does a great job.

I would challenge that. I was on amiodarone...if that's what we're still discussing...when I was just turned 71. Didn't do me a lick of harm from what I can tell, and I was able to sleep, walk, enjoy company....I mean I was definitely bummed about my failed ablation a week earlier, but that's a whole different issue. My heart went back into NSR, and all was good, mostly because I didn't have to worry continuously about cardiomyopathy, fibrosis, atrial wall enlargement, and eventual cardiac insufficiency.

Hi - as I understand it, amiodarone is a "drug of last resort" because it's toxic - link below - severe toxicity to liver, lungs, thyroid.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8918574/#:~:text=Overall%20incidence%20of%20adverse%20effects,in%20previous%20studies%20(4).

Was good to see this today, I had asked about this previously. This was for my interest as a next step prior to an ablation. Interesting to see the different responses. Yours (woodside) match what I have been told. Worse in my case, one of only two applicable Rx that anyone having a heart attack could/should take if at all. Was prescribed by my cardiologist (major health facility) with no added information such as side effects which I understand are numerous. I met with another cardiologist as a result. He said that he would never advise taking this drug in my situation per the side effects and risks . Further he advised having the ablation as a next step. He doesn't do ablations so very objective. The comments here seem to be another example of nothing being the right Rx for every one. Appreciated all the comments.

I should have added to my comment That I am not on any antiarrhythics. Mayo told me I was too young and that med is last resort. I feel that everyone has a different cardiac diagnosis thus different treatment. As my cardiologist said treatment is individual .
Thanks for the info

Amiodarone is indeed toxic, but not to the extent that it has been shelved or taken off the list of available anti-arrhythmic drugs the way Vioxx was 25 years ago after a few patients developed heart problems. If amiodarone had anywhere near the same number of adverse effects as Vioxx did, and remember that Vioxx was lauded by millions of arthritis suffers who thought it was a God-send while only a handful of patients developed problems on it, then amiodarone would not be in use today. It's effective, it has its drawbacks, and its use must be monitored closely for several weeks to ensure the patient isn't doing poorly on it in ways that are hidden. Meanwhile, their arrhythmia is controlled, remodeling of cardiac substrate is reduced or halted, there's little or no further damage to the patient's mitral valve as a result of it being in NSR, and the patient can count on getting a decent night's sleep for a change.

If the patient refuses amiodarone, then the two choices left are ablation or a pacemaker. There's one other, and that is to simply lump it for as long as you live. See how that goes.

My cardiologist is my age 74 and according to nurses on cardiac floor he is the best in the hospital They have a lot of respect for him. I actually haven't had any major effects from it. My thyroid was high but as soon as I stopped taking it thyroid went to normal I am one of the lucky ones I only have to take it when I have an episode and that is rare. maybe twice a year. It does work but your cardiologist is very important. A lot of them want to prescribe one of the newer high dollar drugs and they get a kickback from it. So ask and research