logo
Should I be taking statins for my cholesterol? An expert guide

Should I be taking statins for my cholesterol? An expert guide

Telegraph08-04-2025

If you were offered a potentially life-saving drug, free on the NHS, is there any doubt you would refuse it? Experts have been increasingly realising that statins could be the magic bullets to help halt the alarming rise in heart deaths – and new research has shown that they could also play a part in reducing dementia risk.
The research, published in the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, found that people taking the cholesterol-busting drug were less likely to develop dementia, including Alzheimer's disease.
The risk of dementia reduced further among people who already had low cholesterol and were taking the statins compared to those who were not, suggesting the drugs provide 'additional protective effects'.
In 2023, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) watchdog which provides guidelines for the NHS, released a set of new recommendations suggesting that statins should be rolled out on a far wider scale for those at risk of cardiovascular disease.
Around 10 million people in England are currently eligible for the cholesterol-lowering drugs but Nice recommended widening the window of eligibility to encompass those between 25 and 84 who are deemed to have a 10 per cent or higher risk of a cardiovascular event in the next decade.
The new research on dementia risk also raises the prospect of younger people with normal levels of cholesterol being given statins to protect the health of both their heart and brain.
Sir Nilesh Samani, medical director of the British Heart Foundation and a cardiology professor, says it is without question that statins are life-saving drugs for patients with existing heart disease.
'If you had a heart attack or a stroke, or you suffer with coronary heart disease or angina, then the evidence basis is not controversial at all,' he says. 'Everyone would recommend those patients to take them. In terms of people who haven't got an established disease, the statin recommendation is based on an assessment of their risk over the next 10 years.'
So what are statins, and how exactly do they work?
How do statins really work?
Statins are a class of drugs that include atorvastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin and simvastatin. In general, they act to lower the levels of a type of cholesterol known as low-density lipoprotein or LDL cholesterol.
Dr Unnati Desai, national lead for GP services at Nuffield Health, says: 'LDL is often referred to as bad cholesterol because elevated levels of LDL are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.'
Statins reduce LDL cholesterol through two main mechanisms of action. The first is to block the activity of an enzyme called HMG-CoA reductase, which plays an essential role in how cholesterol is produced in the liver. They also increase the number of LDL receptors on the surface of liver cells, enabling the liver to remove LDL cholesterol from the bloodstream more efficiently.
What are the different types?
But while they might work in similar ways, no two statins are the same. They each have distinct chemical structures and vary in potency, dosage and how they are metabolised in the body. High potency statins tend to be offered to patients who have already experienced a serious event such as a stroke or heart attack. 'Some are more effective at lowering cholesterol levels than others,' says Dr Desai. 'For example, rosuvastatin and atorvastatin are considered high-potency statins and can lower cholesterol more effectively at lower doses compared with moderate-potency statins like simvastatin and lovastatin.'
Statins can be classified as being either fat-soluble or water-soluble which affects how well they are absorbed within the body and their side effect profile. 'Fat-soluble statins like atorvastatin and simvastatin, are better absorbed and may have a more substantial effect on cholesterol,' says Dr Desai. 'Water-soluble statins, like pravastatin, are less likely to penetrate cells but may be associated with fewer muscle-related side effects.'
But we are still learning more about the other benefits statins can bring to cardiovascular health. For example, earlier this year, a study from Stanford Medicine discovered that simvastatin can improve blood vessel health, which could be why heart failure patients who take statins are less likely to suffer a second heart attack.
Who could preventative statins be most helpful for?
One group of patients who could particularly stand to benefit from preventative statins is the estimated 250,000 people in the UK who have a condition known as familial hypercholesterolemia, which means they have high cholesterol from birth. A 2019 study that followed 214 patients with the condition for 20 years, after they began receiving statin therapy as children, found that it reduced their cholesterol by an average of 32 per cent and reduced their risk of cardiovascular disease in adulthood.
However, not everyone is able to tolerate the drugs and scientists are still learning more about some rare statin-induced side effects. In 2023, the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) revealed that between 1995 and 2023, there were 10 cases of a neuromuscular disorder known as myasthenia gravis, which may have been triggered by statins.
But Samani points out that given the many millions of people who take statins – 9.5 million people were prescribed them in 2022 – it is hard to draw conclusive links between the drugs and such rare isolated events.
'With very rare things, it's very difficult to attribute them to the drug because so many people are on statins,' he says.
Should I be taking statins for my cholesterol?
Based on the Nice recommendations, NHS doctors will compute a cardiovascular disease risk score for all patients, before offering them the choice of going on statin therapy.
The latest tools used to compute these risk scores are based on AI analysis of the patient's electronic health records and consider a whole variety of factors, not just cholesterol levels.
'Factors considered also include age, family history of heart disease, smoking status, blood pressure level, and whether they have diabetes or not,' says Dr Gosia Wamil, a cardiologist at Mayo Clinic Healthcare in London. 'These newer calculators can improve prediction of who needs to be treated or not.'
How long do statins take to work?
Statins will start to reduce LDL cholesterol within weeks, but it can take several months before their full benefits are apparent. According to Dr Wamil, long-term data indicate that the efficacy of statins remains largely stable over time. 'There have been no indications of waning effectiveness observed even after prolonged use over many years, provided that they are consistently and appropriately administered,' she says. 'LDL should be monitored, and the statin dose may need to be adjusted occasionally to achieve a good effect.'
Are statins causing my aches and pains?
The most widely cited complaint from taking statins is muscle aches, and having prescribed the drugs for more than 30 years, Sir Nilesh says there is no question that statins are linked to a slightly increased risk of aches and pains.
However, he believes that the degree of media coverage surrounding statin-induced muscle aches has contributed to a medical phenomenon known as the nocebo effect (the opposite of the placebo effect), where the belief that a drug will cause harm ends up triggering negative symptoms.
In one British Heart Foundation study, participants were given a dummy pill or a placebo, which they believed was a statin, and yet they still complained of muscle aches. Last year, a large analysis published in The Lancet estimated that 90 per cent of the time, muscle aches were not related to statins.
'There's evidence that people have now been conditioned in some way to expect muscle aches with statins,' says Samani. 'So anytime they get aches, they think it's the medicine.'
Are there any other side effects?
In some very rare cases, statins can cause a condition called rhabdomyolysis in which muscle cells break down, releasing a protein called myoglobin into the bloodstream which can clog up the kidneys, resulting in acute kidney failure and other complications.
The early signs of rhabdomyolysis tend to be muscle inflammation, and so people experiencing particularly severe muscle pain after starting on a course of statins should consult their doctor. However, rhabdomyolysis affects only 1.5 in every 100,000 people who take statins.
'Long-term statin use is considered safe and associated with significant benefits in reducing cardiovascular events,' says Dr Wamil. 'Regular monitoring and reporting of any unusual symptoms to a healthcare provider are essential but the benefits of long-term statin use in preventing heart attacks, strokes, and mortality often outweighs potential risks, especially for individuals at high risk of cardiovascular disease.'
How much alcohol can I drink with statins?
There are no guidelines against drinking alcohol while taking statins, but Dr Desai suggests discussing your typical weekly alcohol consumption with a health professional before starting on the drugs.
'There's no absolute contraindication to drinking alcohol when taking a statin, however it is important to drink within the recommended limit of 14 units per week, ensuring alcohol-free days by spreading the drinks over three or more days during the week,' she says.
However, you do have to be slightly careful about grapefruit juice or eating these fruits. This may seem unusual but grapefruit can actually react with certain statins, inducing severe muscle or joint pain. You should avoid them completely if taking simvastatin, while consumption should be minimised when on atorvastatin. Other statins are not known to react with grapefruit.
Is there an alternative to statins?
For those concerned about whether they will be able to tolerate statins, there is a far wider range of cholesterol-lowering alternatives than ever before.
The most widely used alternatives are PCSK9 inhibitors, a class of drugs which includes medications like inclisiran, alirocumab and evolocumab, and have been shown to be capable of reducing LDL cholesterol by around 50 to 60 per cent or more.
PCSK9 inhibitors reduce the activity of a protein called PCSK9 that normally blocks the liver's cholesterol receptors. By inhibiting this protein, the receptors are able to keep extracting cholesterol from the blood.
'These drugs are usually used as an additive treatment for people whose cholesterol doesn't come down sufficiently with statins or are statin-intolerant,' says Sir Nilesh.
Dr Wamil says that while they tend to be well-tolerated by patients, the disadvantages are that not everyone likes having to receive regular injections and they come at a higher cost for healthcare providers. 'Whether they are better than statins depends on an individual's specific health circumstances,' she says.
Should I take statins?
Ultimately the question of whether someone should begin taking statins, depends very much on their individual health circumstances.
'For anyone, their risk is a third lower with a statin,' says Dr Iqbal Malik, a consultant cardiologist and medical director of One Welbeck Heart Health in London. 'If your risk is near zero, it is not worth it, but if your risk is very high, it is definitely worth it.'
Sir Nilesh Samani says that statin therapy should always be the result of a shared decision-making process between the cardiologist and the patient, and a two-way conversation about their risk of disease and the relative benefits which the drug might be able to offer them.
'There's always the balance between trying to reduce the total number of heart attacks and strokes, and the issue of medicalising more of the population,' he says. 'So it is very much an individual, shared decision-making process. If the patient is a frail 85 year old with multiple other health problems, then a statin might not be the right thing. But if they have a family history of disease, and a 10 per cent risk of having a stroke in the next decade, most doctors would feel that the benefits are probably there.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: A serious outbreak of old-fashioned class war hits the NHS
MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: A serious outbreak of old-fashioned class war hits the NHS

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: A serious outbreak of old-fashioned class war hits the NHS

When a child needs medical help in an advanced wealthy country with a comprehensive health service, it ought to be a simple matter. The help will be provided. The child will be treated. So how can it be that the parent of such a child in a London suburb was told by her GP that the boy is not eligible for important therapy – because he does not attend a state school? Despite the rather ridiculous wriggling of the local NHS authorities, when confronted with this fact, we know beyond doubt that this was the reason given. Surely this is the most blatant discrimination against a social group, the significant minority, many of them far from rich, who pay school fees? Why should they not qualify for the NHS? They pay the same taxes as everyone else, and indeed reduce the burden on the state by allowing it to maintain fewer school places. After all, we are always told that the NHS is our proudest achievement, open to all, free at the point of use. It now has a 'constitution' in England, a document which proclaims that the service 'has a duty every individual that it serves and must respect their human rights'. Similarly, a Charter of Patient Rights in Scotland pledges that all will be 'treated fairly and equally and will not be discriminated against'. Look carefully at these documents and you will find them especially concerned with the 'protected rights' which preoccupy modern Left-wingers, listed in England as 'gender, race, disability, age, sexual orientation, religion, belief, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity or marital or civil partnership status' – though the pledge about age is perhaps less honoured than the others. The original sin of British discrimination, social class, does not even get a mention. Perhaps it is time it was included, even though the old-fashioned sort, top-down snobbery, is now very much in retreat. For we are seeing a growth in anti-private-school sentiment across the public and charitable sector. This begins to look very much like an outbreak of old-fashioned class war, especially since the VAT raid on private schools. This is quite obviously aimed at hurting the fee-paying classes. The large numbers of children who have since switched to state schools will surely have wiped out any notional gain. The class war goes wider and deeper. Few now seriously doubt that private school students face discrimination at the hands of Oxford and Cambridge Universities. Not long ago, the anti-bullying charity named after Princess Diana amazed fee-paying schools when it told them that it would no longer allow them to take part in events or host them – because of 'newly defined funding priorities'. Even more recently, sick children who attended private schools, including cancer patients, were refused a free education on the wards of one of Scotland's leading children's hospitals. Their parents were told to pay for the tutoring that state-school children received free. The authorities were quite unashamed and replied bossily to protests, telling one family 'as you have chosen to privately educate your son, he cannot be supported by this team, you have effectively opted out of state-funded education and supports'. Why would that be so? It is not as if parents who go private are given back the taxes they have paid, which support state schools. What we are seeing here is a revival of the anti-middle-class loathing and discrimination that used to be practised by Communist states in eastern Europe. It has no place in a free country and the Government should put a stop to it, now.

EXCLUSIVE Boy, 8, turned away by NHS because he is a private school pupil, amid claims by MPs that Labour's raid on fee-paying schools has triggered 'class war' and 'discrimination' in our public services
EXCLUSIVE Boy, 8, turned away by NHS because he is a private school pupil, amid claims by MPs that Labour's raid on fee-paying schools has triggered 'class war' and 'discrimination' in our public services

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

EXCLUSIVE Boy, 8, turned away by NHS because he is a private school pupil, amid claims by MPs that Labour's raid on fee-paying schools has triggered 'class war' and 'discrimination' in our public services

An outraged mother has accused the NHS of 'shocking discrimination' after her eight-year-old son was denied vital treatment – just because he goes to private school. Tory MPs described the move as 'morally indefensible' and a symptom of Labour's 'vile class war', while the parent attacked the unfair 'two-tier' decision as a blatant breach of the health service ethos of offering equal treatment for all. Yet her case is just one example of private pupils being refused access to NHS services unearthed by The Mail on Sunday. The mother of the eight-year-old blamed Labour's war on private schools for emboldening NHS managers to deny her child help with his crippling joint condition. 'If you discriminate against children because of the school they went to, where does it end?,' she asked. Her son was referred to a paediatrician at Kingston Hospital in south-west London after she noticed he was 'struggling to hold the pen well enough to write properly', along with other mobility issues. At the hospital appointment she was asked to fill in a form which asked: 'Where does your child go to school?' And days later, she received a text message saying the child had been 'declined' the crucial next appointment with occupational health therapists. She then discovered that the specialist unit had written a letter to her GP saying: 'We are unable to see this child as we do not provide a service to school age children who attend an independent schools [sic]. We are only commissioned to provide a service to the mainstream schools.' The boy's older brother – who has the same condition, hypermobility syndrome – had been treated without issue several years earlier. Their mother, who wishes to remain anonymous while her son's case is 'in limbo', said: 'I have never been refused treatment for my children – until now. There is clearly a two-tier system at play. 'I have complained bitterly and asked who created these eligibility criteria and where it says in the NHS constitution that it's OK to discriminate against independent schoolchildren.' The mother of an autistic girl in Somerset told this newspaper her daughter was denied access to NHS mental health services, and was told: 'If you can afford the school fees, you should pay privately. If you had kept your child at the local authority primary school, she would have been supported.' It is understood that in Norfolk a child was refused a much-needed standing frame by the NHS because he went to private school. And last month we revealed how young cancer patients from private schools had to pay £115 an hour for tutoring in an Edinburgh hospital's wards, while it is provided free to state school pupils by the city council. Shadow schools minister Neil O'Brien said last night that the cases 'seem like incredibly unfair discrimination'. Citing Chancellor Rachel Reeves' decision to slap VAT on school fees, he said: 'Labour are already piling extra taxes on independent school parents. For their children to then be denied vital NHS services, which parents already paid for through their taxes, seems completely unfair. How can it be right that children with disabilities are denied services by the NHS because they attend a certain school?' Shadow equalities minister Saqib Bhatti said: 'This is shocking. No child should be penalised based on what school they go to. 'Ultimately, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson's vindictive attack on independent schools has legitimised this kind of pernicious discrimination and triggered a class war against our children. 'Now it falls to the Health Secretary to urgently review NHS policies to ensure nobody is denied access to healthcare, no matter what their background. 'We must not allow this quasi-Marxist class war to take root in our public institutions and certainly not in our NHS.' Shadow paymaster general Richard Holden added: 'The effect of front-rank Labour politicians targeting their vile class war on children who attend independent schools is brought into sharp relief by actions like this – where kids who need help are denied local NHS services. 'This culture of hate that Labour stoke out of perverse class envy has profound consequences for those in both state and independent schools but it'll always be the most vulnerable who suffer the most.' And Tory MP Greg Stafford, a member of the Commons' health and social care committee, said: 'Denying NHS treatment to a child because of the school they attend is morally indefensible and completely at odds with the founding principles of the health service. Care should be based on clinical need, not a postcode or a parent's school choice. This decision must be reversed – and fast!' The Mail on Sunday understands that other NHS trusts have also refused occupational therapy treatment to children because they attend independent schools. The eight-year-old, who attends a prep school in Kew, was denied an appointment with Richmond children's occupational therapy service that would have been the 'most important stage' of his assessment. It would have pinpointed the severity of symptoms – which include painful and easily dislocated joints and even problems with internal organs – and determined his future care. At its most debilitating, hypermobility syndrome can be classed as a disability, and experts say a specialist assessment is vital for children with the condition to prevent more serious issues. Physiotherapist Deepa Subramaniyan, a specialist in hypermobility at Adelaide Children's Physio clinic in London said long-term effects 'can include such severe mobility issues that a child can end up in a wheelchair. 'It's precisely for this reason that they need specialist assessment to determine how they should be treated. The earlier therapy starts, the better it will be in the long run.' When the mother received the notice that her son would not be seen by therapists at the unit – based at Ham Clinic and part of Kingston and Richmond NHS Foundation Trust – she said: 'I knew straight away something wasn't right because we have used this service before. 'At the hospital I was asked "Where does your child go to school?" I've never been asked that before. It was never relevant so why is it relevant now? The only thing that has changed is a new government. It is Orwellian.' The woman, who runs a small business with her husband, says the denial of an appointment was part of an 'anti-private school zeitgeist'. Branding her son's treatment as 'shocking and blatant discrimination', she added: 'Labour's dislike of independent schools is filtering down into the NHS and that is very damaging. 'The NHS has always been such a beacon of treatment for all. If you discriminate against children because of the school they went to, where does it end? 'In cases like my son's, they are effectively discriminating against children who are disabled and against some of the most vulnerable members of society. This is going to affect a lot of children if it is a new NHS protocol. Many people will not want to send their children to independent schools if it means foregoing NHS treatment.' Such an exodus would follow the record 11,000 pupils who have left the sector since Labour introduced VAT on fees in January. The woman added: 'I genuinely despair at what is happening. It's the demolition of the British private school system It feels like an ideological battle is going on.' The website of her local NHS Trust says children's occupational therapy services are offered to 'all school aged children who are residents in the Richmond or Kingston boroughs and attend a state-maintained Richmond school.' A spokesman declined to address specific claims that private pupils had been discriminated against but 'apologised if the wording in our correspondence caused upset. We are in the process of revising it to ensure greater clarity.' He added: 'Occupational therapy services are available to all school-age children who have an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) either through the NHS or the local authority. For children without an EHCP, advice may be available through existing NHS services provided in state school.'

I can't shift pink marks on my skin – they keep popping up but I can't get a GP appointment
I can't shift pink marks on my skin – they keep popping up but I can't get a GP appointment

Scottish Sun

time3 hours ago

  • Scottish Sun

I can't shift pink marks on my skin – they keep popping up but I can't get a GP appointment

Got a health-related problem? Send it to Zoe, email below ASK DR ZOE I can't shift pink marks on my skin – they keep popping up but I can't get a GP appointment Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) OUR resident specialist and NHS GP, Dr Zoe Williams, shares her expert advice. Today, Dr Zoe helps a reader who has noticed marks on their skin. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 Dr Zoe Williams helps Sun readers with their health concerns Credit: Olivia West 2 A reader sent in an image of their rash Credit: supplied Q) I HAVE some skin marks that I first noticed last year. I tried to see my doctor but could only get a phone consultation which, as you can imagine, was useless. They wanted me to email a picture, but I couldn't access the site. I've used a steroid cream, which I had for a different issue, and found it makes the marks go, but after a while, more appear elsewhere. They aren't sore or itchy, but this is really getting me down. Can you help? A) Thank you for sending the images of the rash, which appear to show oval salmon-pink-coloured patches on your torso. While seeing images of skin is helpful, we doctors usually need to get a history from the patient in order to make a diagnosis. I would like to know if, prior to the rash appearing, there was a single larger patch that came up first. If this was the case, then that would likely be the herald patch – a sign of the harmless skin condition pityriasis rosea. It usually gets better on its own over the course of around four to ten weeks. You say you first noticed skin marks a year ago, but I'm unsure if there was a period in between where it cleared. This could be a second episode of it. If this sounds likely, it will resolve on its own and a mild steroid cream can alleviate any discomfort if there is any. If you do not think it is this, then you need a consultation with a GP. Sun Health Explainer: Skin rashes - eczema, psoriasis, sepsis TIP: As we enjoy the summer, try to refrain from wearing sandals and flip-flops too often. Their lack of support can lead to calluses, corns and issues like plantar fasciitis, which causes heel pain.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store