Vytorin debate continues
Posted: Mar 31st 2008 12:30PM by Maggie Vink
Filed under: General Health, Health in the Media

A medication frequently prescribed for high cholesterol came under fire a few months ago when a trial showed the medication -- a combination of simvastin and ezetimibe -- worked no better than simvastin alone. Simvastin is a statin designed to lower LDL cholesterol; ezetimibe is another medication that should lower LDL in another way.
The results of the trials regarding the
efficacy of Vytorin are being discussed at the American College of Cardiology's annual meeting this week. At this point, researchers aren't entirely sure if the results of the trial are indicative of how Vytorin would affect those with mildly
high cholesterol or those who are newly diagnosed; all the participants in the study had very high cholesterol and had been under treatment for years.
Tags: cholesterol, cholesterol drug, cholesterol drugs, CholesterolDrug, CholesterolDrugs, Ezetimibe, heart, heart disease, heart health, HeartDisease, HeartHealth, LDL, Simvastin, statin
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-31-2008 @ 3:16PM
charris said...
I have been on cholestromine, provachol, naicin, zocor, and now vytorin. The cholesromine power was awkward and not convenient as well as its effectivenes questionable. The provachol was not tolerated very well, muscle pain, naicin caused flushing, zocor after 2.5 years could not lower the LDL below 217. Vytorin, started in November 2006, at next physical, total cholestorol had decreased to 175. I was happy with the results. Why? Since the whole blood fat issue started at least for me around 1986 I had levels well above 200 and at one time peaked to 289. What I do not understand is all of the hoopla on the effectiveness of this combination drug. Since the high blood fat is what causes the artery plaque, then it makes sense to me to lower the plaque to reduce the possibility of artery blockage which in turn leads to heart attacks and strokes. Further, what is really frustrating is that I'm not sure that I should change anything since this combination drug had done one thing: reduced the overall cholesterol levels hopefully to reduce my potential for a heart attack or clogged arteries.
Reply