The Diabetes Forum Support Community For Diabetics Online banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,491 Posts
...So last night I ate a piece of white toast with peanut butter on it... Just one piece...

Within 10 mins I began to feel like I had drunk a bottle of champagne...I became extremely tired.....
30 mins after that my BG had dropped from 6.6 to 5 and then an hour after that I was at 8....
I didn't eat anything else, the amount of carbs in the one slice was 15g...

I would like to understand the mechanism of why I felt tired and woozy and why my BGs fell and then rose??

I REALLY hope that all makes sense :)
If I had to GUESS I'd suggest that you were hitting a blood sugar low before the digestion process of the toast/peanut butter 'kicked in'. This is why you went lower before going higher.

Obviously, with getting to 8.0 (144) from a lower reading, the white bread certainly spikes you. (The peanut butter would actually help keep the spike lower, because the protein and fat helps slow digestion...)

As such, the low-carb is doing the job well, and you should stick to it.

My question is, WHY ARE YOU ON LIPITOR? (Read This.) There is absolutely no benefit to statins (cholesterol-lowering medication) for women. None.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,491 Posts
Except for women who have a history of heart attack or stroke. And this bites because several of my closest women friends fall into one of those categories.
To date none of the studies regarding secondary prevention with statins has shown a reduction in overall mortality in women.

When I say "studies" I mean large, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. Doing some meta-analysis of several studies to show that there "might" be some benefit isn't evidence of anything. (It's hard to find a 'meta-analysis' study that DOESN'T advance a particular interest or theory... that's the beauty of meta-analysis, you can basically make it say what you want...)

There is scant, spotty evidence (casual relationships only) that statins prevent secondary cardiac events for women. There is NO evidence of a reduction in overall mortality.

All the experts agree more testing needs to be done before a definitive conclusion can be reached, yet women make up the minority of the studies, and the drug companies, though marketing to women, aren't anxious to shell out the money for the studies... (perhaps because they already know the results?)

There is absolute evidence that statins not only prevent secondary cardiac events for men, but reduce overall mortality in those with pre-existing cardiac history. Not so for women.

Again, there is NO known benefit for women taking statins, regardless of primary or secondary benefit. Any suggestion there is comes from drug companies pushing suspect data.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shalynne

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,491 Posts
...Years ago I read a case where they were using men for some ovarian study....
That wouldn't surprise me ONE BIT, lol...

But as I read this, there are no studies showing statins useful for women with prior cardiac events, but there have been no adequate studies period...

...The answer is to do appropriate studies for women - like now now.
Exactly. The only problem with that is most research actually points to it not being effective for secondary events for women... so it's doubtful the drug companies will spend the money on those studies. (Or, if they DO fund the study, and it doesn't support the drug for women, it would NEVER see the light of day...)

Now, if like my friend I'd' had a quintuple bypass, I'd have to ask myself, 'how lucky do I feel?' I see that as a different kettle of fish entirely. Not having had a heart attack, bypass, stents - but with wretched lipids - it's easy for me to reject statins which I have.
I'm worried the risk far outweighs the benefits.

In most research that shows a possible benefit for women, the number-crunching goes something like this: If 100 women (who've had previous cardiac events) take the drug continually for 3 years, it may prevent a secondary heart attack in anywhere from 1 to 10 of those women (depending on the study and how you extrapolate the data).

That being said, there's a "possibility" that between 1% and 10% of that group "may" benefit over the course of several years.

However, when you look at the massive list of possible side-effects of the statin drugs... including much-higher incidence of cancer, new diabetes diagnoses, memory-loss, and more, you have to wonder if it's even remotely worth the risk...
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top