6 replies to this topic

[muppet]

Okay, it's not ALWAYS useless ... but 1/2 a million people a year are getting this when they DON'T need it ... gee, I wonder WHY? Couldn't be about money, could it? Now if we could only focus on prevention instead of "after the fact" drugs ... then we'd be getting somewhere. March 27, 2007 08:23 PM CDT From the KOLD News 13 Newsroom Drugs or angioplasty. A landmark study shows medication rather than surgery is key to combating heart disease, and preventing a heart attack. The study found that more than a half-million people a year who have chest pain are getting unnecessary or premature angioplasty to unclog their arteries. The study says angioplasty, which uses a balloon to pry open a blocked artery and a stent to hold it open, is no better than conventional drug treatment. It says angioplasty did not save lives or prevent heart attacks in non-emergency patients. And the researchers found angioplasty gave only slight and temporary relief from chest pain. Chest pain is one of the main problems it's supposed to solve. The researchers found patients taking aspirin and drugs called statins were no less likely to suffer a heart attack or die than those who had the angioplasty. The Cleveland Clinic's Dr. Steve Nissen says, "The stent is only covering perhaps one or two percent of all the plaque in the coronary and that's not enough to prevent the next heart attack." The researchers say angioplasty remains viable for high-risk patients but they're only one-third of the million who have angioplasties every year. The study is in the New England Journal of Medicine

Edited by muppet, 28 March 2007 - 08:22 AM.

[stocks]

Product Description
A fearless expos of mainstream medicines most revered dogma, Malignant Medical Myths is solidly based on trusted medical and nutritional books and journals. Americans spend $2 trillion per year on health care, about $7,000 each, yet it buys almost the poorest healthcare among developed countries, with 200,000 deaths per year from medical treatment. Find out why advice from authorities on screening tests, drugs, diet, exercise, alcohol, radiation, radon, and water fluoridation is often wrong and commercially motivated. See how clinical trials are slanted. Understand how sickness is created to sell treatments, and which government agencies support these shenanigans.

About the Author
Joel M. Kauffman obtained a BS in Chemistry from the Philadelphia College of Pharmacy and Science, now called University of the Sciences in Philadelphia (USP), and a PhD in Organic Chemistry from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. After 11 years of experience in the chemical industry, Dr. Kauffman joined USP in 1979, rising to Professor of Chemistry. His experience includes about 10 years of exploratory drug development at USP and 4 years at the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences. He obtained grants and contracts from many sources including the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Energy, the Office of Naval Research and the Army Research Office and several manufacturing companies. With 80 papers on chemical and medical topics, and 11 patents, including 2 on antituberculosis drugs, Dr. Kauffman has turned his attention to exposing fraud in medicine.

http://www.amazon.co...y...2524&sr=1-1



The book is neatly divided into three sections. In the first, Colpo comes out swinging like a disciplined prize fighter. He cites study after scientific study that demonstrates with brutal accuracy, the fatal weaknesses of the cholesterol theory. He reveals the truth behind the heart disease mortality statistics touted by organizations like the American Heart Association and he shows how honest medical research has been misappropriated to support a deeply flawed hypothesis. His analysis of the key players and primary studies demonstrate how cholesterol lowering drugs, the misbegotten progeny of heart disease research, have become a multi-billion dollar money-machine for a rapacious drug industry. If you like facts and figures and irrefutable science-based proof, you'll love this section.

Unlike the red herring cholesterol theory that this book tears down, section two takes a hard look at what the research has actually shown to be causative factors for coronary heart disease (CHD). Colpo makes a case, in a methodical easy to digest fashion, for the real causes of CHD and follows that up in section three with practical advice on Preventing Heart Disease the Drug-Free Way. He also takes on the conventional wisdom regarding dietary fiber, soy and olive oil, the holy trinity of supposedly healthy eating.

Colpo goes on to make hamburger out of one of the sacred cows of modern medicine by citing this stunning example of neo-Orwellian doublespeak from the American Diabetes Association: "Yes, foods with carbohydrates--starches, vegetables, fruits, and dairy products--will raise your blood glucose more quickly than meats and fats, but they are the healthiest foods for you."

Not to be outdone, the American Dietetic Association (ADA) loses a bit of its luster when it is revealed that this organization rakes in hundreds of thousands of dollars from companies like Coca Cola, Kellogg and Nestle USA. The ADA writes industry-friendly `fact sheets' that benefit many of these same financial supporters. Even the American Heart Association earns millions by selling its endorsement --at $7,500.00 up front and $4,500 per year afterwards for `heart healthy' products like Cocoa Puffs, Cookie Crisp and Count Chocula cereals!

Colpo doesn't just point out the logical disconnects and the conflicts of interests in some of these practices; in a chapter titled Heart Frauds, he shows the reader how to avoid being taken in by this type of medical industry BS (baffling sagacity).

The impact of stress and free radicals on heart health, high blood sugar, the value of the right kind of dietary fat and why you should avoid statins (cholesterol lowering drugs) are among the many topics discussed in this book. Readers looking for actionable recommendations to reduce their risk of heart disease will find plenty to chew on here.

While some parts of this book may challenge the knowledge-base of a seasoned cardiologist, Colpo has done a remarkable job of balancing the technical jargon with a clear, easy to read writing style that yields a book both you and your doctor can learn from. The organization of the content works when read in both a linear or non-linear fashion. That is to say, if you're already familiar with some of the content and concepts in this book, it works equally well as an excellent resource on CHD research as well as a guide for reducing your own risk for heart disease.

The Great Cholesterol Con has done what many professional scientists have failed to do and that is to look objectively at what the available research shows by analyzing existing studies and connecting the dots. Colpo proves that it can be done when the scientist's objectivity isn't compromised by industry money, personal egotism or the lemming-like need to maintain the status quo.

Much of what this book has to say about health and heart disease may come as a shock to the average reader who may be unaware of the existence of the mountain of research proving the cholesterol theory and its spawn, the low-fat plant-based diet, to be the greatest health con of the last century. Some readers may quibble with the details such as Colpo's withering appraisal of the value of whole grains, but don't be distracted by these minor differences. As Colpo notes, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. What is important is the big picture, which is the cholesterol con and what you can do about it. In the end, he challenges the reader by leaving it up to objective science and the right of the individual to determine the best choices for optimal health.

http://www.amazon.co...-...=1-1&sr=1-1

[muppet]

Thanks Stocks ... I agree! It's important for people to realize that organizations like the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society (among others) are self serving and corrupt. How can they defend accepting money for putting their seal of approval on such crap as pop tarts, cocoa puffs and other junk food? Most people think that these organizations are noble and caring groups - ashame. As author Dr. Robin Cook says "Most medical organizations exist to serve their own internal needs ... not to cure any disease." If the American Cancer Society could cure cancer, they'd have no reason to exist. Best, M.

Edited by muppet, 28 March 2007 - 11:20 AM.

[maineman]

Muppet said:



"The researchers found patients taking aspirin and drugs called statins were no less likely to suffer a heart attack or die than those who had the angioplasty"



Yes, we've known this for awhile. Those of us good doctors in primary care medicine have pushed to get all intelligent adults with LDL levels above 130 who've been unable to get it lower with diet and exercise on statins for the past 20 years. As a result there has been a dramatic (understated) decline in the incidence of STEMI (or ST-elevation myocardial infarctions) and ischemic stroke. The results are mind-boggling, not unlike the success seen in polio prevention, for example.



Many of us have know the data in the NEJM article since a prior study around 3 years ago compared lifestyle modification versus stent/angioplasty. In that fabulous study (I know, you all think science is stupid...)they took patients with documented coronary artery disease who did not have a heart attack and split them into two groups. One group had aggressive life-style management, with dietary counseling, smoking cessation, monitored exercise and drug therapy of cholesterol. The second group got tradition bypass surgery (or stent/angioplasty). At 5 and 10 years the lifestyle group was actually doing better than the surgical group.



Many of us "good doctors" are aware that there has been overuse of stents and we hope this article will help regulate their use. The dilemma still remains as follows: the patient in the emergency room with acute chest pain and blocked arteries. Can you convince the patient to "wait" and try lifestyle management or are they going to continue to demand that you unblock their arteries RIGHT NOW before they have a fatal heart attack. Interesting dilemma.... Not all patients are being "conned" into getting their blocked arteries opened up. They demand it.



But nice to see you agree that statins are so valuable in saving lives.



mm

[OEXCHAOS]

I would think that since an angioplasty is pretty namby pamby, if someone shows up with enough symptoms to want it, it probably makes sense to do it, and do the lifestyle stuff thereafter. What I did want to do is see if you had any thoughts on PFE's problematic new cholesterol med. The story I heard on NPR left me with some real questions about what we know or think we know about HDL/LDL and health effects. M

[muppet]

Mark, I did not see the NPR segment, but agree that there is much public confusion about the role of cholesterol in health. Most people have no understanding of HDL or LDL levels ... but even those who do seem misguided in their attempts to alter their own levels. As well, one of the first signs of cancer (certain types) is a dramatically falling cholesterol level .... so the notion that lower is better is not always true. Balance ... homeostasis. M.

Edited by muppet, 29 March 2007 - 09:48 AM.

[maineman]

I would think that since an angioplasty is pretty namby pamby, if someone shows up with enough symptoms to want it, it probably makes sense to do it, and do the lifestyle stuff thereafter.

What I did want to do is see if you had any thoughts on PFE's problematic new cholesterol med. The story I heard on NPR left me with some real questions about what we know or think we know about HDL/LDL and health effects.

M

I missed the NPR report but have been fully aware of this research. Funny, all along I felt that the researchers were heading in the wrong direction with this, so I'm not surprised with the lack of efficacy. Once again, though, I am pleased to see the integrity of these drug behomoths in pulling out once the data did not support moving forward.

The cholesterol "story" has not had the final chapters written. As recently as 30 years ago who knew from "good" and "bad" cholesterol or the myriad bits of data we've now uncovered? The last 30 years have been thrilling times for molecular scientists... each layer of the onion we peel back we find many, many more....

Suffice it to say, for practical purposes (i.e. taking care of real humans day to day right now given what we know), an LDL over 130 is too high. LDL can be lowered by diet in some people, not all. Some people genetically overproduce LDL, even in the face of excellent diets. "Statins" reduce LDL significantly, are safe and well tolerated.

HDL is much more complex and is much more genetically determined (hence my initial skepticism with the research... how are you gonna mess with genetics?). All the yadda yadda about exercise, red wine, etc. that "might" raise the HDL is moot, as the data shows nearly no benefits from those interventions.

In real life, we look at your profile. If you are born with a low HDL (below 35), then it is more important to pay attention to your total cholesterol and LDL, as you are at a disadvantage (HDL helps clear bad cholesterol away). From then on we focus on your LDL. If you need a little statin to help get it under 130, then so be it.

FInally, there are the "triglycerides" or the non-cholesterol fats. A prudent, well-rounded healthy diet (as I've outlined here many times) will keep those down.

This is all you really need to know to stay healty regarding cholesterol. If you REALLY want to learn more about the molecular scientific research, let me know and I'll refer you to reseach journals, but its grueling reading.

Finally, someone mentioned that falling cholesterol is a sign of cancer. I need to emphasize that that statement is bunk. False. Garbage. Urban legend stuff. Here's why: before intelligent people started getting check ups (mammograms, colon cancer screens, paps, etc) most people showed up at the doctor only when they had advanced, and often metastatic disease. At that point they were "cachectic" or wasting away. Those folks, of course, had low cholesterol due to starvation from dying from cancer. So this weird urban legend rose up that turned the data around backwards. I hope I'm making myself clear. Chicken/egg...

mm