Menopause Matters Forum
Menopause Discussion => Other Health Discussion => Topic started by: Shadyglade on May 02, 2018, 06:15:45 PM
-
Hi all,
Being now 62 I am lucky enough not to take any prescription medication. Twice, in the last few days, this has caused surprise. Firstly when I went in a chemist to buy nurophen. At the till I was asked what medication I took. 'Nothing ', I replied. No blood pressure medication or anything, I was asked. No, I repeated. Then today at the dentist I was asked for an update on my medical records. Again surprise on my no meds status. My dentist said it was really unusual for someone of my age. Personally I find that sad and a little worrying. Are us oldies in general being over medicated, or am I just one of the lucky ones?
-
Sadly, I think the answer is YES - I find it scary that drugs are dished out so readily! I also think that many people feel reassured that being on some sort of drug will not only help their health but lengthen their life!!
The only prescription I get is Vagifem and I don't consider that a drug. DG x
-
Same here shadyglade I'm now on vagifem oestrogel and ViT d3,gp tried unsuccessfully to get me on statins yesterday but after reading your post on them I politely said no chance.lol
-
Same here, 60 and no repeat medication prescribed. I wonder if gp's in the uk get paid for prescribing statins and suchlike to the over 60's? I know they get paid extra for the flu jab and other services....
-
They certainly do get paid for prescribing statins. I believe they also have targets for the overall cholesterol level of their registered patients.
There does not seem many of us med free ladies but that is what I expected.
-
Oh wow, I had no idea that doctors get paid extra for prescribing certain meds?!!! Surely this is a serious conflict of interest that impacts on their advice?
It would explain how angry my aunt's doctor was because she refused to take statins.
-
It was n the news a few years back that they get/got a bonus for AD prescriptions
I have on repeat (well I did at my old surgery) inhaler, amitriptyline low dose for nerve pain and epipens
-
I think you are healthy! My Mum, aged 91, takes Paracetamol as required. When she went to the GP in July because she felt really tired, they couldn't understand why a) they never saw her on a regular basis and b) that she wasn't on regular medication. She needed VitD tablets which she takes daily. She needs a pain relief rub-in gel as she doesn't exercise her hands as often so when she does gardening at the Care Home she gets pain in the thumb joint.
Apart from over the counter pain relief as necessary: Nurofen : a beta-blocka at night to control anxiety, anti-depressants twice a day and an emergency anti-anxiety tablet I have had nowt until my recent well woman check ::) when statins were suggested; and fought against but my usual GP explained really why the ins and outs why I would benefit. So that was added, I'm 64 [I think :-\] ........ and when I remember the VitD capsule that is required.
Add to that VA treatment as necessary and I too, am healthy :bounce:
-
I think you are healthy! My Mum, aged 91, takes Paracetamol as required. When she went to the GP in July because she felt really tired, they couldn't understand why a) they never saw her on a regular basis and b) that she wasn't on regular medication.
She sounds like the mother of a friend of mine. This lady rang her daughter up one lunchtime and started talking about the fact that she 'wasn't long for this world' and thought she was dying. Daughter asked why. "It's because I feel so tired."
"Do you think you might have just overdone it, mum?"
"Oh no, I've hardly done anything this morning. Only my weeks washing and mown the lawn and cleared out the garden shed."
(She was 93, never visited the doctor or took any medication. Oh, and still did her washing by hand and used a mangle to wring it out ;D )
-
That'll be the exercise regime keeping her fit then! ;)
A friend of mine: 3 years younger: already has 1 knee and 2 hips ....... 1 hip done twice already. Not over weight. No genetic history of joint problems. We both owned dogs and walked miles ::).
My paternal grandparents had 'lumbago'. Not many pain relief medications for them. Both were active and ate well. I take Nurofen for pain, we eat healthy, we cycled for years as we didn't have 4 wheels. I'm not aware of any problems on my maternal side, joint wise.
As an aside: another friend's Mum was moved to a care home close to us and her regular medication was left behind. Within 3 days she felt a lot better and on review with our GP here, was found to require 3 of the drugs - it seems that side effects are treated by another drug which then causes more side effects :-\.
-
What a star. My mum lived to 90 but had heart problems from her! sixties, so she didn't do bad really. My dad lived until 97 and was pretty well until my mum died, 8 months before him. Both he and my took very little medication and my dad was on on only 2 when he died.
-
That's the trouble with over prescribing CLKD, once it starts it's a downward spiral. :pills:
-
It should be less of an issue now that GPs and more of the public are aware of one med may give more problems that it might solve! It's up to us to take responsibility and ask if we need more, though the GP I saw was insistent about statins >:( - although she didn't know how they work! When we saw our regular GP he was really helpful ......... a bit like when the Financial Advisor comes though, I understood what he said at the time :D
-
CKLD - I'm interested to know whether the GP who took the time to explain why you should take statins also took the time to tell you about the side effects and possible long term harm they can bring? Did he/she explain that you could lower your cholesterol through the right diet and exercise without the need to use drugs? There is still no evidence that statins will actually lengthen your life or indeed improve your quality of life!!!
I do wonder how many doctors take statins???
DG x
-
The GP has up-2-date guidelines which have come into force in the last few months. Yep. DH took 3 months to try to alter his diet but it wasn't working. The GP talked about %, at which point he lost me but Himself, as a Scientist, took it on board. We discussed the possibility of muscle pains which apparently don't occur often. Stroke can ruin peoples' lives. Neither of us has relatives that suffered stroke. But %-wise, we are at risk of stroke within the next 10 years if we don't take the medication.
Any drug may cause harm but that bus might be along far sooner ;-)
-
The trouble is that there is a growing number of mainstream doctors and scientists who would dispute this. You must do whatever feels right for you. I would never try to diswade you from that. However my own research has persuaded me that I will never take statins.
-
If they found way to give every women even a little oestrogen with fewer side effects and risks, then statins might not be necessary - I believe it's only after menopause that we become less able to process cholesterol?? For many it's the retched progesterone that stops us using HRT and it's only the combined HRTs that bring a small risk of breast cancer. If they could find a way of stopping the uterine lining from building up without side effects - I would certainly be a happy bunny as I would still be using a small dose of oestrogen to gain the health benefits.
The general health benefits of a bit of oestrogen (which is basically a supplement, not a drug) is surely a more attractive option - statins only stop the cholesterol whereas oestrogen can prevent bone density loss, urogenital atrophy, protect the heart, maintain the muscles, skin and joints etc. so why are doctors still so anti HRT???? There is only a tiny risk of BC in our 50s. Based on these benefits surely every women aged 50-55 should be advised to use HRT for at least 5 years?
My recent experiences with drugs e.g. PPIs, Amitriptyline and even Ibuprofen or codeine, has made me very wary of ever taking any drug again. For me the side effects and consequences of these drugs far outweigh any benefit.
My mother has just turned 90 and apart from developing vulva cancer aged 79, she is in better health than all her children. Vulva cancer occurs mainly in women over 65 - logic tells me that urogenital atrophy might have something to do with Vulva cancer emerging in our 60s and 70s!!! Should every women be pressured into using local oestrogen once menopause hits? Based on the premise that we should all be taking statins, surely local oestrogen should be routinely prescribed to reduce and prevent bladder and vaginal problems in the long run?
- “is it me†( as Terry Wogan used to say) or are we too obsessed with taking drugs, “just in caseâ€. DG x
-
Just to illustrate my point listen to this interview (only just over 10mins).
http://doctoraseem.com/patients-guinea-pigs-dont-even-know/#more-767
And for anyone who missed this on one of my other threads and might be interested (considerably longer but well worth it)
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2018/04/15/a-talk-by-aseem-malhotra-to-the-european-parliament/#comments
Also, with particular regard to STATINS (only a short one)
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/statin-nation-the-documentary/
-
I was fine until I reached 62, then I had heart surgery for arythmia caused by a UTI, cholecystectomy, pre-barretts oesophagus on 4 yearly surveillance for that, hiatus hernia, epigastric hernia, AV, lichen sclerosis, etc and I'd kept myself fit for years,who knows what's round the corner health-wise but I still workout at the gym several times a week...you just gotta keep going! ; :)
-
The trouble is that there is a growing number of mainstream doctors and scientists who would dispute this. You must do whatever feels right for you. I would never try to diswade you from that. However my own research has persuaded me that I will never take statins.
But it does appear that you are trying to dissuade people from taking statins, given the number of posts you've made about them recently.
I'm hoping to avoid them myself as I had very low LDLs and high HDLs because of the amount of sport I do. However, there is a direct link between menopause and increased cholesterol, and each individual should consider their whole cardiovascular risk profile when making decisions about medication.
-
Absolutely right. Everything should be taken into account. That is why I have tried to put links out there so people can do their own research. Unfortunately our GPs are generalist. As CLKD pointed out one of her doctors did not know how statins work. That's not good. Ultimately we as individuals are responsible for our own health.
-
The thing that set alarm bells ringing for me was despite the fact that when I was on statins a few years ago I had awful side effects and had said this to my gp last week he still offered me statins and tried to persuade me to go on them.why wasn't I offered a dietary sheet with advice on how I could lower my cholesterol and why wasn't it flagged on my medical notes that I had previously had a bad reaction to statins,very worrying.They just seem to be hell bent on prescribing them regardless so I'm not convinced they're doing it in my best interests there's definately ulterior motives.
He then said to me well your good cholesterol is high so I suppose they'll cancel each other out??
-
Some of the more important side effects are not always pointed out to patients. For instance that statins serious deplete Q10 so a supplement should be taken. Also they they can be detrimental to the liver so a liver function test should be done before prescribing and at regular intervals after. I know someone who ended up in hospital with liver damage because this was not done. The byword of doctors is 'do no harm'. Apparently.
-
Another issue with cholesterol is that it's function is largely protective and as we get older it will naturally rise. By bringing it down you could be doing more harm than good, whilst we wait for this information to filter down to the National health service, like the long wait we had re saturated fat being healthy after all. This information was in the domain 20
years ago, if not earlier!
Although the statins companies will obviously make every effort to get that information blocked.
Forums bring together quality research versus the doctrine research so it's really up to us to either not concern ourselves with it, as you may be perfectly fine with what you take and the doctrine may not be so far off, or you question it and go off-road in your quest for optimum health.
-
With the info on here I can go to our GP and ask ........ husband and I saw different GPs the same week; him for the over 65's NHS health check. I went for blood tests as I was really++ tired and it came back low VitD which I had suspected. The high cholesterol freaked out that particular GP ::) even though it 's been 7 for 10+ years. She was cross that my usual GP hadn't raised issues ......... and was insistent. It was when she didn't know how they worked that I went back to my usual GP. Himself decided to go the lose weight and alter diet route for 3 months in which time the GP looked into statistics etc. on our behalf.
So currently I take: 5mg AD and statins by mouth at breakfast; a betablocka at night plus 10mg AD; Nurofen as necessary. Rennies at night when reflux takes over. Otherwise ......... Himself doesn't take much either, other than the statin at breakfast.
I think that initially I would be inclined towards taking medication as prescribed to get rid of the initial problem but to query the whys and how long is this necessary as I improve ;-)
-
Dangermouse, your comments re the protective effects of cholesterol and a natural rise as we get older are the very reasons I decided not to take statins any more. My cholesterol levels were not particularly high and would have fallen within range had I been younger.
You are correct about the length of time it takes for research to filter down to NHS guidelines and the vested interests of the drug companies. We have a responsibility to do our own literature searches before taking any drug that is just doled out in the way that statins are.
JP x
-
Great informative posts ladies thank you xx
-
Whilst I'm not defending statins and I much prefer a healthy lifestyle to drugs every time, I've seen so much misinformation shared on the internet regarding health issues and medication. There is so much stuff out there, including quality science in peer-reviewed medical journals BUT also quackery, articles with no basis in science whatsoever, and yet others trying to sell an “alternative†product by criticising mainstream medicine and doctors.
I'm not defending all doctors, but just giving some words of caution about taking random advice off the internet. I've been called every imaginable insult on numerous occasions when I've challenged people who spread complete nonsense about cancer and its treatment.
-
One needs to take into account who is funding research too ;) - "Sugar is good for you" - in the 1970s, yep, funded by British Sugar Corporation. Who was I to argue ;D
-
Wilks I know what you mean. However all my links are kosher and from NHS doctors. One is a well respected London cardiologist.
-
Bugga ........ spoke too soon ;D. Sciatica required 2 Nurofen :-\
-
nice ... good one
-
:-\
-
A couple of years ago when I had my gallbladder issues the gastro guy was surprised that I wasn't on any regular meds! Really???, I was in my early-mid 50's then!
I agree with DG on a few posts back, if only they could find something else as an alternative to progesterone then sooooo many ladies would benefit from an oestrogen supplement. We take all our vitamins etc quite happily but so many ladies are put off from the benefits of hrt because of the cancer risk.
I was told to take COQ10 as hrt can deplete this as well.
I had a cholesterol spike when my flushes were at their worst, I was convinced it was connected but my doc dismissed it. I managed to bring it down again naturally and went on to the hrt (so maybe that helped?) as no way did I want to go on statins!
-
well done wombat62!
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5719731/Doctor-says-doling-pills-explain-fall-life-expectancy.html
The payments part is in the last part of the article. I always thought the NHS GPs were taking a financial hit compared to private GPs but, no, their pay was doubled and the public were never told.
-
Absolutely spot on. This article really exposes the truth of the situation of how a social policy, supposedly created for our benefit, is actually doing us harm.
I ignored the request to have a full health check, when I was 60, for the very reasons given in the article. If I'm ill I will see the doctor. Otherwise, leave me alone,, I don't want your pills until they are really need.
-
I'm bumping this tread because I have just found and interesting book, on a similar topic.
It is:- Too Many Pills by James Le fanu.
And is about:- How too much medicine is endangering our health and what we can do about it.
For those who are interested.
Apparently the rot set in in 2004 when GP contracts were change and they became 'performance led' . That meant they get paid for reductions in average levels in their patients of such things as Blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar etc.,
The upshot is that prescriptions have increased 3 fold in the last 15 years. Interestingly prescriptions for antibiotics have remain about the same, despite the worry of over prescribing.
-
I only take 600mg ibruprofen at breakfast to get my back in gear and other than that unless I have a real flare up I don't take any extra. I use a lidocaine patch on my neck when it is really sore. My friend went to our GP surgery last week for test results on cholesterol etc. All were clear and in the good range but he wanted her to take statins because she is in her seventies. She politely declined
-
Yes it's the new idea of medicating the whole population, to bring down average levels, rather than treat the patient as an individual.
My sisters GP told her that her high, untreated, cholesterol level was messing up the surgery's statistics. In other words it was costing them money. >:(
-
Depends what cholesterol measurment they are using for their stats. As discussed elsewhere - total Ch on its own is not what matters - but HDL and LDL should also be measured and the ratio of Total to HDL is the important one so I understand.
Also if they use that alone as a criterion re their stats that's absurd because eg despite high Ch ( but OK ratio) statins are not suggested to me because they do the Q risk thingy and that determines whether or not you should be offered them anyway (according to NICE).
Anyone who wants to lower their stroke risk and has high Ch can change this through losing weight, better diet, more exercise etc and anything that can reduce blood pressure - even so some have genetic pre-disposition to high CH which doesn't necessarily increase risk of stroke for everyone so I gather ( from my doc).
I agree about the unnecessary meds - I don't take any other than normal painkillers (sparingly) if I can possibly help it (the occasional migraine pill) - but of course HRT if bio-identical is not counted as a med as such - not in my book anyway! However I am so far blessed with good health (and take steps to stay that way) so some don;t have the luxury of avoding certain meds - but we should all be informed and resist attempts to force us onto meds against our will.
No idea if I've already responded on this thread in the past ::) . Apols if I have and already said all of that!!!
Hurdity x
-
:-\ why not read it Hurdity :-\
I love James, he talks a lot of sense in the Monday Telegraphy :-* and raised awareness of the problems that omiprazole can cause ;-).
-
The book is more about the over treatment of high blood pressure, cholesterol and blood sugar. These are the conditions for which polypharmacy can cause iatrogenic harm.
It's not an anti medication book but anti over medication. The author is a UK doctor.
-
He's very good ;)
I have to take my ADs etc. otherwise I wouldn't get out of bed in the morning and after 5 days would be dragging myself to the edge of a cliff. I never want to feel that ill again. When poorly I take Nurofen as Paracetamol does nowt for me. Sciatica or headaches usually.
Statins I accepted as it was easier :-\ and our GP did a good explanation. My lasted associated blood tests showed that my blood sugars are low, plus other conditions that I wasn't aware were checked R fine too. That's it, repeat prescription for another 12 months.
When our GP arrived in the village I told him to never tell me that I had 'what was going round' - if I turned up at Surgery then I was ill ;)
-
My only long term ones are those which I have been taking since a baby (genetic hypothyroidism) and epilepsy medication since I was about 14. I may get to drop the epilepsy medication eventually. It is being gradually reduced. I had surgery for the condition many years back. Vagifem has just been added but I don't count that as it is a replacement. My cholesterol is a bit high but all the other factors combined with it are ok.
-
You can't argue with that. Essential meds are just that.
How many people are put on, for example, blood pressure meds when they only come into the lower end of the scale and are not high risk. This is done just to lower the surgery's average. This can result in older patients taking multiple unnecessary pills resulting in side effects that make them feel unwell.
I'm not explaining it very well. You will all have to buy the book ;D
-
According to one of the worlds leading heart surgeons it's mostly genetic ( Sunday Time 2 weeks ago) Some people with very high ch have smooth arteries and some who have very low levels can have damaged ones. So from that we can conclude the statins which statistically will only buy you at most a month extra in life are unlikely to help. It's stated they are only of use to people who have had a heart attack but suspect those improved health statistics come from embracing a healthier life style after a scare . The surgeon said that giving up smoking and excercising would stop arteries from stiffening .
The highest concentration of cholesterol is found in the brain and it needs large amounts to function properly. Statins cross the brain blood barrier and enter brain cells and reduces the brains ability to make the cholesterol it needs. I for one as I age wouldn't want to mess with anything that might affect my cognitive functions .
-
According to one of the worlds leading heart surgeons it's mostly genetic ( Sunday Time 2 weeks ago) Some people with very high ch have smooth arteries and some who have very low levels can have damaged ones. So from that we can conclude the statins which statistically will only buy you at most a month extra in life are unlikely to help. It's stated they are only of use to people who have had a heart attack but suspect those improved health statistics come from embracing a healthier life style after a scare . The surgeon said that giving up smoking and excercising would stop arteries from stiffening .
The highest concentration of cholesterol is found in the brain and it needs large amounts to function properly. Statins cross the brain blood barrier and enter brain cells and reduces the brains ability to make the cholesterol it needs. I for one as I age wouldn't want to mess with anything that might affect my cognitive functions .
It's funny you should say that.
My FILs memory went down hill fast when he start taking statins.
-
Hello Ladies.
About a year ago my elderly neighbour had a heart problem following a bout of the flu. She was offered various tests but was selective about the ones she agreed to. She was also prescribed Statins but when the first lot made her feel unwell she told her GP that she would change her diet instead. At a recent appointment with her cardiologist she discovered that her heart health has improved and she has now been discharged from his care. She is slim, eats real food and walks a lot every day and believes this is why her heart has improved from one third capacity to two thirds in less than a year. All this at eighty, gives us all hope I think ladies.
Wishing everyone well.
K.
-
That's really encouraging Kathleen. Thank you.