Put Statins in the Drinking Water? I Think Not.
It is amazing that only after the patent expiration of the best-selling statin drug
of all time (i.e. Lipitor) that the FDA finally admitted that maybe the drug class
that many physicians wanted to put into the drinking water might have some
problems after all (1). In particular, the FDA issued a warning that use of statins
increases the risk of memory loss and diabetes. The FDA said the risk of diabetes
is “small;” however, they were playing fast and loose with the data. This is
because the weaker the statin, the less the side-effect profile. The stronger (and
better selling) the statin, the greater the side effects are (like diabetes and
memory loss). You would think that after having Americans spend more than $50
billion in statin sales that the FDA would have asked these safety questions
How could statins cause memory loss and diabetes? It has been known for nearly
20 years that statins are the only drug that increase the levels of arachidonic acid
(AA) by stimulating the enzyme delta 5-desaturase (2-4). This means greater
cellular inflammation that leads to insulin resistance (thus increasing diabetes)
and disturbances in signaling mechanisms in nerve cells (thus decreasing
memory). I guarantee that no physician knows these facts because the drug
companies had no reason to lose a potential sale to disclose that information.
Apparently the FDA agreed with the drug companies, since that relevant
information was never mentioned in any of the side-effect profiles until now.
The drug industry developed a great marketing pitch for statins: “If your
cholesterol is high, you are going to die”. Unfortunately, the data never supported
that spiffy slogan. Epidemiological studies do indicate that if your cholesterol
levels are high and you are less than 50 years of age, then there is an increased
risk for mortality. After age 50, that risk of increased mortality with high
Furthermore, keep in mind that statins were not the first drugs to lower
cholesterol. There were many other drugs before the statins, but they had the
unfortunate side-effect of increasing mortality. It was only with use of the first
statin drugs, that decreased mortality was finally shown in those having had a
prior heart attack. This is called a secondary prevention trial. Aspirin and fish oil
are also effective in secondary prevention trials, but neither of those interventions
reduces cholesterol (6). However, in primary prevention trials (done with people
with no history of heart attacks), statins aren’t very good. This is estimated by
looking at a number known as “number needed to treat” or NNT. This number
indicates how many people have to take a drug to prevent a single heart attack.
With the newest statins, the NNT is usually 2 percent. That means you have to
treat 100 people to prevent two heart attacks. Unfortunately you have no idea
who those two people are, which means the other 98 people will have a lifetime
of side effects. One of those side effects is developing diabetes, which occurs in
about 1 percent of the patients (forget the other side effects, such as memory
loss, muscle fatigue, etc). Who that one person is out of 100 who will develop
diabetes is also unknown. Therefore, your chances of reducing a heart attack are
significantly cut by the likelihood of increasing your chances of developing
Finally, defenders of statins for the primary prevention of heart disease point to
the recent JUPITER trial (7). This clinical trial used people that had normal levels
of LDL cholesterol, but very high levels of C-reactive protein (CRP). These people
were already inflamed. It should be noted that the drug company that markets
the statin drug used in the study funded this particular study. In fact, the
government had no interest in the trial. Maybe government officials knew from
previous statin trials that, in people with normal LDL cholesterol levels and
normal levels of CRP, statins had absolutely no benefit in reducing future heart
attacks (8). Nonetheless, in this small subsection of the population (more than 80
percent of the screened patients were rejected), there was a reduction in first-
time heart attacks. But since the patients were highly inflamed to begin with, this
means that aspirin or fish oil would probably have given the same result had the
same population been tested (9,10). In fact, the JELIS study in Japan confirmed
this hypothesis (11). Using the same number of patients, with high cholesterol
and lows levels of inflammation (as measured by the AA/EPA ratio), it was
demonstrated that those patients given more EPA to lower the AA/EPA ratio had
significant reduction in future cardiovascular events. I will make a leap of faith
that if the population in the JELIS study was as inflamed as that in the JUPITER
study, the results with omega-3 fatty acids would have been even more dramatic.
Lost in all this marketing hype is what actually causes LDL cholesterol to increase
in the first place. The answer was known in the 1970s. It’s high levels of insulin
(12). This is because insulin activates the same enzyme that statins inhibit. Call
me crazy, but it seems to make more sense to lower insulin by the diet rather
than taking statins for a lifetime if your goal is to live longer. The best way to
lower insulin is the anti-inflammatory Zone Diet coupled with enough fish oil to
reduce the AA/EPA ratio to that in the Japanese population range. That’s just
Harris G. “Safety alerts cite cholesterol drugs’ side effects.” New York Times,
Hrboticky N, Tang L, Zimmer B, Lux I, Weber PC. “Lovastatin increases
arachidonic acid levels and stimulates thromboxane synthesis in human
liver and monocytic cell lines. J Clin Invest 93: 195-203 (1994)
Rise P, Pazzucconi F, Sirtori CR, and Galli C. “Statins enhance arachidonic acid
synthesis in hypercholesterolemic patients.”
Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 11:88-94 (2001)
Rise P, Ghezzi S, and Galli C. “Relative potencies of statins in reducing
cholesterol synthesis and enhancing linoleic acid metabolism.” Eur J
Anderson KM, Castelli WP, and Levy D. “Cholesterol and mortality. 30 years of
follow-up from the Framingham study.” JAMA 1987 257:2176-2180 (1987)
Baigent C, Blackwell L, Collins R, Emberson J, Godwin J, Peto R, Buring J,
Hennekens C, Kearney P, Meade T, Patrono C, Roncaglioni MC, and
Zanchetti A. “Aspirin in the primary and secondary prevention of vascular
disease: collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from
randomised trials.” Lancet 373:1849-1860 (2009)
Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto miocardico.
“Dietary supplementation with n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and vitamin
E after myocardial infarction: results of the GISSI-Prevenzione trial.”
Wang C, Harris WS, Chung M, Lichtenstein AH, Balk EM, Kupelnick B, Jordan
HS, and Lau J. “n-3 Fatty acids from fish or fish-oil supplements, but not
alpha-linolenic acid, benefit cardiovascular disease outcomes in primary-
and secondary-prevention studies: a systematic review.” Am J Clin Nutr
Ridker PM, Danielson E, Fonseca FA, Genest J, Gotto AM, Kastelein JJ, Koenig
W, Libby P, Lorenzatti AJ, MacFadyen JG, Nordestgaard BG, Shepherd J,
Willerson JT, and Glynn RJ. “Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in
men and women with elevated C-reactive protein.” N Engl J Med
Ridker PM, Rifai N, Clearfield M, Downs JR, Weis SE, Miles JS, and Gotto AM.
“Measurement of C-reactive protein for the targeting of statin therapy in
the primary prevention of acute coronary events.” N Engl J Med 344:1959-
Yokoyama M, Origasa H, Matsuzaki M, Matsuzawa Y, Saito Y, Ishikawa Y,
Oikawa S, Sasaki J, Hishida H, Itakura H, Kita T, Kitabatake A, Nakaya N,
Sakata T, Shimada K, and Shirato K. “Effects of eicosapentaenoic acid on
major coronary events in hypercholesterolaemic patients (JELIS): a
randomised open-label, blinded endpoint analysis.” Lancet 369:1090-1098
Lakshmanan MR, Nepokroeff CM, Ness GC, Dugan RE, and; Porter JW.
“Stimulation by insulin of rat liver hydroxy-β-methylglutaryl coenzyme A
reductase and cholesterol-synthesizing activities.” Biochem Biophys Res
molecular interaction with an affordable A simple and flexible system that’s easy foryou to configure and modify with off-the-shelfSPR is a highly specific and sensitive technique based on a surface designed formolecular interaction between a ligand and analyte of interest. This figurerepresents a typical planar surface based on a self-assembled monolayer ofpolyethylene glycol (PEG) and ca