Are statins and omega-3s incompatible?

French researcher, Dr. Michel de Lorgeril, has been in the forefront of thinking and research into nutritional issues, including the Mediterranean Diet, the French Paradox, and the role of fat intake in cardiovascular health. In a recent review entitled Recent findings on the health effects of omega-3 fatty acids and statins, and their interactions: do statins inhibit omega-3?, he explores the question of whether statin drugs are, in effect, incompatible with omega-3 fatty acids.

Dr. Lorgeril makes several arguments:

1) Earlier studies, such as GISSI-Prevenzione, demonstrated reduction in cardiovascular events with omega-3 fatty acid supplementation, consistent with the biological and physiological benefits observed in animals, experimental preparations, and epidemiologic observations in free-living populations.

2) More recent studies (and meta-analyses) examining the effects of omega-3 fatty acids have failed to demonstrate cardiovascular benefit showing, at most, non-significant trends towards benefit.

He points out that the more recent studies were conducted post-GISSI and after agencies like the American Heart Association's advised people to consume more fish, which prompted broad increases in omega-3 intake. The populations studied therefore had increased intake of omega-3 fatty acids at the start of the studies, verified by higher levels of omega-3 RBC levels in participants.

In addition, he raises the provocative idea that the benefits of omega-3 fatty acids appear to be confined to those not taking statin agents, as suggested, for instance, in the Alpha Omega Trial. He speculates that the potential for statins to ablate the benefits of omega-3s (and vice versa) might be based on several phenomena:

--Statins increase arachidonic acid content of cell membranes, a potentially inflammatory omega-6 fatty acid that competes with omega-3 fatty acids. (Insulin provocation and greater linoleic acid/omega-6 oils do likewise.)
--Statins induce impaired mitochondrial function, while omega-3s improve mitochondrial function. (Impaired mitochondrial function is evidenced, for instance, by reduced coenzyme Q10 levels, with partial relief from muscle weakness and discomfort by supplementing coenzyme Q10.)
--Statins commonly provoke muscle weakness and discomfort which can, in turn, lead to reduced levels of physical activity and increased resistance to insulin. (Thus the recently reported increases in diabetes with statin drug use.)

Are the physiologic effects of omega-3 fatty acids, present and necessary for health, at odds with the non-physiologic effects of statin drugs?

I fear we don't have sufficient data to come to firm conclusions yet, but my perception is that the case against statins is building. Yes, they have benefits in specific subsets of people (none in others), but the notion that everybody needs a statin drug is, I believe, not only dead wrong, but may have effects that are distinctly negative. And I believe that the arguments in favor of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation, EPA and DHA (and perhaps DPA), make better sense.



Comments (4) -

  • Ellen Lewis

    6/18/2013 7:32:42 PM |

    thanks, this seems a sensible take on the issue.

  • Dolph

    6/30/2013 4:59:57 PM |

    This is a (too) far stretched conclusion pretty obviously. O3s still haven’t shown any consistent benefit alone, with a statin drug or without it, and cherry picking the studies that seem to look doesn’t help that fact either! The data is just inconclusive.

    A much more interesting blog article I hope to read in the future would be about niacin!
    Niacin has shown more than once to produce favourable outcomes alone and combined with resins. (CDP, FATS, etc.) On the other hand there can be no more doubt that it doesn’t add any benefit to statin therapy after the results of the two big clinical endpoint studies (AIM-HIGH and HPS2-THRIVE), that flush the cute little landmark studies (ARBITER, HATS, etc.) down the toilet where they belong.
    So what does that imply for the TYP-programm? A rhetorical question it should be, but I’m sure somebody will add some woo…

    - See more at: http://blog.trackyourplaque.com/2013/05/dha-the-crucial-omega-3.html#comments

  • Stephen in Jacksonville

    7/3/2013 10:15:53 PM |

    It is interesting that he should be doing this research into how statins react with Omega-3's. Statins may be one of the most widely prescribed drugs at this point, and I certainly think more research should be conducted on their long-term effects. I recently read about another study which looked at the effects of exercise and statins. Apparently, this drug actually works to counteract some of the benefits that are gained by getting regular exercise for people with cholesterol problems.

  • Brandon Barclow

    7/18/2013 6:07:47 PM |

    Stephen in Jacksonville.   There's no maybe to it.  The number 1 and number 2 selling drug in the world are statin drugs.  32 million Americans are currently taking statin medication.  The one thing that the 32 million have in common is:  THEY HATE TAKING THEIR MEDICATION.

Loading
My letter to the Wall Street Journal: It's NOT just about gluten

My letter to the Wall Street Journal: It's NOT just about gluten

The Wall Street Journal carried this report of a new proposed classification of the various forms of gluten sensitivity: New Guide to Who Really Shouldn't Eat Gluten

This represents progress. Progress in understanding of wheat-related illnesses, as well as progress in spreading the word that there is a lot more to wheat-intolerance than celiac disease. But, as I mention in the letter, it falls desperately short on several crucial issues.

Ms. Beck--

Thank you for writing the wonderful article on gluten sensitivity.

I'd like to bring several issues to your attention, as they are often neglected
in discussions of "gluten sensitivity":

1) The gliadin protein of wheat has been modified by geneticists through their
work to increase yield. This work, performed mostly in the 1970s, yielded a form
of gliadin that is several amino acids different, but increased the
appetite-stimulating properties of wheat. Modern wheat, a high-yield, semi-dwarf
strain (not the 4 1/2-foot tall "amber waves of grain" everyone thinks of) is
now, in effect, an appetite-stimulant that increases calorie intake 400 calories
per day. This form of gliadin is also the likely explanation for the surge in
behavioral struggles in children with autism and ADHD.
2) The amylopectin A of wheat is the underlying explanation for why two slices
of whole wheat bread raise blood sugar higher than 6 teaspoons of table sugar or
many candy bars. It is unique and highly digestible by the enzyme amylase.
Incredibly, the high glycemic index of whole wheat is simply ignored, despite
being listed at the top of all tables of glycemic index.
3) The lectins of wheat may underlie the increase in multiple autoimmune and
inflammatory diseases in Americans, especially rheumatoid arthritis and
inflammatory bowel diseases (ulcerative colitis, Crohn's).

In other words, if someone is not gluten-sensitive, they may still remain
sensitive to the many non-gluten aspects of modern high-yield semi-dwarf wheat,
such as appetite-stimulation and mental "fog," joint pains in the hands, leg
edema, or the many rashes and skin disorders. This represents one of the most
important examples of the widespread unintended effects of modern agricultural
genetics and agribusiness.

William Davis, MD
Author: Wheat Belly: Lose the wheat, lose the weight and find your path back to health

Comments (7) -

  • HS4

    2/7/2012 11:08:16 PM |

    Fantastic, Dr Davis!  I read the article earlier today and was thinking of sending in my own response but yours is ever so much better and comes with greater credibility which is important.   I hope they publish your letter.

  • Dr. William Davis

    2/8/2012 3:02:38 AM |

    Thanks, HS4!

    But don''t hesitate to add your voice. The more they hear this message, the more likely others hear it, too.

  • Scott Hamilton

    2/10/2012 4:01:24 PM |

    There were some comments in past postings regarding ancient vartieties of wheat, such as Emmer and Einkorn. Although these types still pose problems from a total health perspective I was thinking perhaps an original form of barley might also provide better health benefits with less metabolic damage than the newer varieties.

    There are recipes where the addition of grains in relatively small amounts can improve texture and flavor and I have used barley for this purpose extensively in the past.


    Are ther sources of information or supply of older or alternative forms of barley?

  • Ronnie

    2/11/2012 6:53:52 PM |

    Go Doc!

  • farida

    8/7/2012 7:23:42 PM |

    I would like to know if Dr Davis would be interested in doing a 30 min tele lunch and learn workshop, we own a wellness company with 000's  of users on our health portal.  It would be a great way to promote his books/blogs.

  • Magnesium citrate versus glycinate

    8/15/2012 8:12:45 PM |

    [...] wheat from your diet. Give it a try for 2 or 3 weeks and see how you feel.    Here's why:  My letter to the Wall Street Journal: It’s NOT just about gluten | Track Your Plaque Blog  "1) The gliadin protein of wheat has been modified by geneticists through their work to [...]

  • [...] I'm suggesting.   What about WHEAT?  Wheat has been a Frankenfood for the last 40 years, bcfromfl:  My letter to the Wall Street Journal: It’s NOT just about gluten | Track Your Plaque Blog  "1) The gliadin protein of wheat has been modified by geneticists through their work to [...]

Loading