What does pill popping do to you psychologically?
Are you a pill popper or a pill avoider? That is the question almost six million people must now face in the UK, after the latest guidelines from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) on preventing heart disease, published today. They say that GPs should be routinely assessing their patients aged 40 to 75 for their risk of heart disease and prescribing cholesterol lowering pills to anyone with a 20 per cent increased risk of a heart attack or stroke in the next ten years. Just over 4 million people are currently taking them and NICE estimates another 1.5 million should be. Risk is assessed on factors including smoking, weight, blood pressure, kidney function etc.
Clinically you cannot argue with NICE's logic. Cholesterol lowering drugs - called statins - reduce the risk of a heart attack by a third. They are so miraculously effective that the Government's Heart Tsar, Roger Boyle, who takes a daily statin himself, suggested last year that all men over 50 and all women over 60 should be taking them, regardless of their risk.
But what does it do to you psychologically? Many people resist taking drugs, because they do not want to be labelled sick, or because they have some vague sense that they are "not natural".
I have a lot of sympathy with this view. I think there are real dangers in medicalising everyday life and putting people who feel perfectly well and have no symptoms on drugs. I wouldn't want to take drugs myself if I could avoid it. NICE hedges its bets too, by insisting patients should be told of the risks and the options to change their lifestyle - diet, smoking, exercise - as an alternative drugs.
But the truth is when it comes to cholesterol, nothing is anywhere near as effective as the drugs. Moreover, whatever your cholesterol level, even if its not high, reducing it still cuts your risk. So the question i ask myself is: is it my attitude to drug treatment that is wrong? Why should I resist giving my ageing body a little chemical assistance?
This is the 21st century and medicine has come a long way. The elderly swallow handfuls of pills and the boundary between what is natural and unnatural is becoming blurred. Perhaps we should just get over it and accept that drugs are increasingly going to feature in all our futures - as they already do.
People are naturally wary of taking prescribed medication as the side effects are often underplayed or not mentioned when they are being prescribed.
The benefits may very well far outweigh the risks but given recent allegations of certain drug companies not disclosing full research on their drugs coupled with a large body of negative anecdotal evidence of side effects now available online for most drugs, you can understand why people resist them.
I'd be interested to read of anybody's experiences of side effects while taking Statins.
Posted by: Martin Brunswick | Wednesday, 28 May 2008 at 07:41 PM
The human population is growing to unprecedented levels, which raises the question of how far we should go to prolong life. Is it worth propping up the ageing "haves" with pills while allowing the "have nots" to starve to death at a young age?
Posted by: Mark_IV | Wednesday, 28 May 2008 at 07:56 PM
I would be interested to know how old Mark is.......GG
Posted by: Geriatric George | Wednesday, 28 May 2008 at 09:14 PM
Martin Brunswick:
The side effects of statins are well documented and are hardly hidden. GPs (or the ones worth their salt) are quite aware of what they are, and if they're not they need only pick up the BNF (British National Formulary). All medication has the potential for side effects, but the issue is whether or not the benefit of taking the drugs outweighs the negatives. For those at risk of heart disease and stroke, there is a very clear benefit, and that should be made clear to the people who need them
Mark_IV:
Take your logic to its conclusion. Its a scary place.
Posted by: James Davies | Wednesday, 28 May 2008 at 10:46 PM
I think its doing NOTHING..
Posted by: Celso | Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 12:58 AM
I think people who put anything in their mouth are taking big risk.
Posted by: Hohu Fong (Miss) | Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 01:32 AM
I agree with the writer. I'm in with the sick if I start popping pills, aren't I? I find that depressing. I would rather live with the delusion of being young and eternally healthy.
Posted by: susan | Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 01:40 AM
Take a look at this...
http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2007nl/may/statins.htm
Posted by: RICH | Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 04:00 AM
Be wary of the side effects of statins.
My joints started slowly to cease up. I was worried about arthrtis even had test for these. Until watched a progamme on the Dutch tv about statins. I stopped taking the statins and my joints are now fine. There are 2 different components to the cholesterol. Have both levels tested, high cholesterol level does not necessarily mean that you have to popp the pills
Posted by: ark | Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 09:51 AM
What a very male discussion. Like many women, I've taken a daily contraceptive pill for years. Now I'm trying for a baby, I'm taking daily folic acid. None of this has made me feel ill or medicalised. It's just a decision to exert some control over nature using the tools medicine has provided. If I had heart disease and a pill helped me delay a heart attack, I'd take that too, unless the side effects were too troublesome. What's the big deal?
Posted by: AnnaL | Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 10:14 AM
I am 59 years old. I have been taking simvastatin for three years. I had a quadruple by pass after suffering chest pains when cycling. My arteries were 61,90 and 99% blocked. I have always been fit, not over weight, eat very sensibly and am now retired with no stress in my life. I asked the doctor if I could come off the tablets. I did a three month trial and took more hard exercise and reduced my fatty food intake even more. My cholesterol level nearly doubled to 6.9. I went back on the drugs and reduced my level to 4.2 in three months. I naturally make cholesterol and need the statin. I now seem to suffer stomach and muscle problems which the doctors cannot find a reason for. If I take more exercise the problems seem to go away. My exercise consists of gardening, long walks and cycling 30 miles three times a week. I have two brothers with the same problems and both have had by passes. My mother had a heart condition which seems to have become hereditary. I have managed to reduce my tablets to 1.25mg by trial to maintain my cholesterol level. I seem to have proved to myself that I need the drug.
Posted by: Philip Koniotes | Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 11:08 AM
the logical truth is that mass medication must be dangerous because although the chances of anything being wrong may be small, the blanket medication of whole populations is highly dangerous.
You cannot take even the tiniest of risks if the stakes are so high. The risk is not personal it is global. If you do not take this pill and everyone else does and then they find it causes cancer, the effect is as profoound on you as anyone else.
Posted by: Austin | Thursday, 29 May 2008 at 11:52 AM
itz bad
Posted by: mely | Thursday, 21 May 2009 at 04:49 PM
bad for ur braiin brehhh..
Posted by: dray | Thursday, 21 May 2009 at 04:51 PM