Your post being about BP relates to docs and big pharma. The goal should be to lower your BP if needed. Mine is always low, around 100 or maybe 110, 60. It is that way because I eat few animal products, very very few processed foods. The rants as you call them are trying to benefit you to have better health without unnecessary drugs. But do what you wish. But the rants are relevant. Most people are short of correct nutrition, their body is not short of pills.
The studies I have found used patients with severe heart conditions and not the "normal" population and had so few individuals as to be statistically irrelevant. So often what was found beneficial for those individuals who have experienced a heart attack or stroke is assumed to be no different than for the rest of the population.
Even with a comparable study group the number needed to treat is important. With statins it is 200 so this means that it requires 200 patients to be taking statins for 5 years to have one less "event" (not one less death).
A problem with these is that side effects are ignored completely, including nerve damage and increased risk of a fall. This is particularly true with regard to blood pressure where too little can result in fainting and fainting can result in a fall and going to a hospital.
There is a great deal of pressure on doctors to proscribe medications even in borderline situations. It is up to the patient and their relatives to decide what is appropriate in terms of risk and quality of life (which is ignored completely).
Doctors rightly assume that patients in general will not exercise and so they focus 100% on drugs which is not optimum but a valid approach.
The studies I have found used patients with severe heart conditions and not the "normal" population and had so few individuals as to be statistically irrelevant. So often what was found beneficial for those individuals who have experienced a heart attack or stroke is assumed to be no different than for the rest of the population.
Even with a comparable study group the number needed to treat is important. With statins it is 200 so this means that it requires 200 patients to be taking statins for 5 years to have one less "event" (not one less death).
A problem with these is that side effects are ignored completely, including nerve damage and increased risk of a fall. This is particularly true with regard to blood pressure where too little can result in fainting and fainting can result in a fall and going to a hospital.
There is a great deal of pressure on doctors to proscribe medications even in borderline situations. It is up to the patient and their relatives to decide what is appropriate in terms of risk and quality of life (which is ignored completely).
Doctors rightly assume that patients in general will not exercise and so they focus 100% on drugs which is not optimum but a valid approach.
Weight gain is a proven side-effect of statins. The drug raises serum glucose levels which means the body has to produce more insulin to get it back out again. That extra glucose goes into adipocytes, fat storage cells. Larger and more adipocytes means more of a spare tire and visceral fat. Oh boy! Just what we need when we're trying to lower cholesterol production. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39699704/ https://www.bmj.com/content/381/bmj-2022-071727
The studies I have found used patients with severe heart conditions and not the "normal" population and had so few individuals as to be statistically irrelevant. So often what was found beneficial for those individuals who have experienced a heart attack or stroke is assumed to be no different than for the rest of the population.
Even with a comparable study group the number needed to treat is important. With statins it is 200 so this means that it requires 200 patients to be taking statins for 5 years to have one less "event" (not one less death).
A problem with these is that side effects are ignored completely, including nerve damage and increased risk of a fall. This is particularly true with regard to blood pressure where too little can result in fainting and fainting can result in a fall and going to a hospital.
There is a great deal of pressure on doctors to proscribe medications even in borderline situations. It is up to the patient and their relatives to decide what is appropriate in terms of risk and quality of life (which is ignored completely).
Doctors rightly assume that patients in general will not exercise and so they focus 100% on drugs which is not optimum but a valid approach.
"There is a great deal of pressure on doctors to proscribe medications even in borderline situations. It is up to the patient and their relatives to decide what is appropriate in terms of risk and quality of life (which is ignored completely)."
Excellent comment - it makes me sad when I read many of these comments/concerns that seem as if the patient knows so little about their condition and never questions the treatments. We are, in the end, responsible for educating ourselves and choosing wisely on treatments along with our doctors if possible!
Connect
Connect
Like
Helpful
Hug
Nice BP. Keep up the good work. I don't eat processed foods, but I am a carnivore.
The studies I have found used patients with severe heart conditions and not the "normal" population and had so few individuals as to be statistically irrelevant. So often what was found beneficial for those individuals who have experienced a heart attack or stroke is assumed to be no different than for the rest of the population.
Even with a comparable study group the number needed to treat is important. With statins it is 200 so this means that it requires 200 patients to be taking statins for 5 years to have one less "event" (not one less death).
A problem with these is that side effects are ignored completely, including nerve damage and increased risk of a fall. This is particularly true with regard to blood pressure where too little can result in fainting and fainting can result in a fall and going to a hospital.
There is a great deal of pressure on doctors to proscribe medications even in borderline situations. It is up to the patient and their relatives to decide what is appropriate in terms of risk and quality of life (which is ignored completely).
Doctors rightly assume that patients in general will not exercise and so they focus 100% on drugs which is not optimum but a valid approach.
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
1 ReactionWeight gain is a proven side-effect of statins. The drug raises serum glucose levels which means the body has to produce more insulin to get it back out again. That extra glucose goes into adipocytes, fat storage cells. Larger and more adipocytes means more of a spare tire and visceral fat. Oh boy! Just what we need when we're trying to lower cholesterol production.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39699704/
https://www.bmj.com/content/381/bmj-2022-071727
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
1 Reaction"There is a great deal of pressure on doctors to proscribe medications even in borderline situations. It is up to the patient and their relatives to decide what is appropriate in terms of risk and quality of life (which is ignored completely)."
Excellent comment - it makes me sad when I read many of these comments/concerns that seem as if the patient knows so little about their condition and never questions the treatments. We are, in the end, responsible for educating ourselves and choosing wisely on treatments along with our doctors if possible!