Lenin, I'm sorry, I should have told you how to find it. I couldn't find it until i called Dr. DiMauro to talk to him about my mother/s ataxia caused by lipid lowering medications. You can find it if you look up...DiMauro atorvastatin and Coq10. Peter Langsjoen is also an expert in Coq10. Most of his expierence is from hands on effects with his patients. He has alos found that while Zetia does not interfere with the production of Coq10 (just like they say)...it does not allow your body to absord CoQ10 and other fat soluble vitamins (what they don't tell you). In effect the entire time my mother was taking CoQ10 supplements the Zetia was not allowing her to absorb it.

Lenin, did you do what i said and look up DiMaurro and Atorvastatin? I have also talked to him, and as we all know, not all information is published or readily available. Statins stop the production of Coq10; therfore, you are not getting the supply that your body would normally make. Is it worth taking the Coq10? Or maybe a better question...is it worth trying to lower your cholesterol?

OK,

I DID find this finally and DiMauro, at Columbia, was involved:
[QUOTE]OBJECTIVE: To measure CoQ(10) levels in blood from hypercholesterolemic subjects before and after exposure to atorvastatin calcium, 80 mg/d, for 14 and 30 days. DESIGN: Prospective blinded study of the effects of short-term exposure to atorvastatin on blood levels of CoQ(10). SETTING: Stroke center at an academic tertiary care hospital.Patients We examined a cohort of 34 subjects eligible for statin treatment according to National Cholesterol Education Program: Adult Treatment Panel III criteria. RESULTS: The mean +/- SD blood concentration of CoQ(10) was 1.26 +/- 0.47 micro g/mL at baseline, and decreased to 0.62 +/- 0.39 micro g/mL after 30 days of atorvastatin therapy (P<.001). A significant decrease was already detectable after 14 days of treatment (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Even brief exposure to atorvastatin causes a marked decrease in blood CoQ(10) concentration. Widespread inhibition of CoQ(10) synthesis could explain the most commonly reported adverse effects of statins, especially exercise intolerance, myalgia, and myoglobinuria.


I thus was gratified to find SOME evidence that the effect of lowering of the body's level of CoQ10...would that the study involved more than 32 people. Of course the emboldened "COULD." always gives me problems with any study. "Could" should NOT be a word in a conclusion....only in a hypothesis!


On Quackery,
To the extent that Ubiquinone is often compared by the "orthomolecular press" as a musunderstood cure-alls of supplementation, I think the quackery label is not too far from applicable to Dr. Langjoen. Peoples idea of what constitutes quackery differs but mine prety much encompassees those who make unsubstantiated claims for supplemtents that cure or successfully treat multiple diseases...like obesity, heart disease, and AIDS and myositis and STROKE. The icing on the cake is often the bemoaning about the conspiracy to silence these harbingers of wisdom.

Stuff like this curdles my blood:
[QUOTE]Ubiquinone is one of the two most important essential nutrients (the other being ascorbic acid). These two molecules, along with other essential nutrients, have been rejected as unpatentable and unprofitable by certain "authorities" and interests, according to expose's by Pauling and others.[1,2] This has been one of the most lethal errors of modern medicine because no cell, organ, function, remedy, etc, can avoid failure unless essential nutrients, especially these two, are optimal. Supplementation of both is mandatory: for ascorbate, lifelong (since humans can't synthesize it); for ubiquinone, increasingly with age. In this update, to facilitate study of ubiquinone, we seek to assemble in one place vital information that is not widely known.
I'm not saying that Langsjoen is at the level of fraudulent quackery of a Matthias Rath, but his pronouncements on CoQ10 with VERY little clinical proof skirt the edges.

Just think of the difference:
Statin tests have gone on for over a decade and involved tens upon tens of thousands of double blinded patients...study after study after study at major hospital after major hospital in country after country. THESE kind of results are doubted.
BUT CoQ-10, policosanol, ascorbate, amino acids, pantethine and a litany of others get almost NO scrutiny and arre accepted because of a host of "coulds," "mights", "seems plausibles"...in a paperback at Barnes & Noble. THese supplements then become HUGE financial successes.

Proponents of the latter are what I dub quacks...claiming cures without proof!

There are people making many many $$millions$$ selling CoQ10. Doesn't EVERY thinking person think that much more study is warranted for a substance that is being so heralded before they plunk down their $30?