|
by Reg Block
Directly or indirectly most of us are affected by heart disease. No age group,
nationality or sex is without sufferers and casualties. We are bombarded with
advertising, news reports and documentaries about causes, treatments new technological
breakthroughs and prevention.
Today there are scores of pharmaceutical drugs designed to raise blood pressure,
lower blood pressure, decrease oxygen, raise oxygen, lower cholesterol and the
list goes on. When you combine that with robotics, lasers, angioplasty, surgery
and officially endorsed diets, death by coronary heart disease (CHD) should not
be at the top of the list.
Despite all the apparent medical advancement and public awareness, coronary heart
disease according to the American Heart Association is still the single leading
cause of death in America. However it should be noted that heart related death
has decreased dramatically since the late '60s.
The medical establishment would like to take credit for the decline in CHD deaths,
attributing it primarily to various surgical procedures, medical devices and pharmaceuticals.
Yet in 2000, the World Health Organization reported, "When the decline began
in the USA, the revolution in coronary care had not started and the current powerful
drugs were not available."1
Further to that, many of the medical procedures that later accompanied the advent
of coronary care, produced a wide array of results.
In the book Reversing Heart Disease, by Julian Whitaker MD, he states, "Studies
have shown that there are marked inconsistencies in interpretation (of angiograms)
from 7.5 percent to 50 percent from one physician to another." He further
supports that by referring to comparison studies by Leonard M. Zir, MD, of the
department of radiology at Massachusetts General Hospital. "Dr Zir found
wide variations in interpretation, and he concluded that this posed a considerable
problem." Further to this, Whitaker profiles research by Carl W. White, MD
"...there was no significant difference in blood flow through the arteries
that had appeared on angiogram to have a 60 percent blockage, compared to arteries
pegged with 90 or even 95 percent blockages." Statistics like this question
the veracity of generally accepted medical industry claims and the effectiveness
of current medical procedures.
Angiography
Angiography is a standard technique for determining levels of blockage in the
heart arteries. A small tube called a catheter is inserted into an artery at the
groin and threaded through to the heart. Dye is then sent through the catheter
and x-rays are taken as the fluid travels through the artery. Later, the doctor,
radiologist or cardiologist interprets the x-ray images and determines a course
of action that may include angioplasty, bypass surgery, drugs and lifestyle changes.
It is widely assumed that the process is accurate. This is true if the dye does
not distend arterial segments and if x-rays do not miss anything. In most cases,
doctors are trained to recognize visible irregularities and to take them into
consideration.
Many qualified papers have been written about the accuracy of angiography. Among
them is, Effect of Variability in the Interpretation of Coronary Angiograms on
the Appropriateness of Use of Revascularization Procedures by Leape LL, Park RE,
Bashore TM, Harrison JK, Davidson CJ, Brook RH. Am Heart J 2000 Jan: 139 (1Pt
1): 106-13. The following segment of that study is quoted from www.garynull.com
"In this study a panel of experts reviewed the readings of 308 coronary angiograms
to determine if errors in previous interpretations led to unnecessary surgical
procedures or to avoidance of essential treatment. The angiograms came from patients
who have been studied previously for appropriateness of angiography, coronary
artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty
(PTCA).
The panel of experts found lack of significant disease in all the vessels while
previous readings found it in 16 percent of the vessels. The experts also found
significantly less severity of stenosis and of disease extension. As a consequence,
17 percent to 33 percent of CABG and 10 percent of PTCA that have been previously
judged as appropriate were now considered uncertain or inappropriate. These results
demonstrate a high rate of inaccurate readings of coronary angiograms leading
to potentially inappropriate cardiac surgeries and to inaccurate conclusions of
studies whose results are based on those readings."
Angioplasty
Angioplasty is a procedure that opens clogged arteries using a catheter and balloon.
It is performed based on the interpretation of angiogram x-rays. If for any reason
the x-rays are suspect, then the angioplasty will not likely be as effective as
hoped or it may not work at all.
Dr Whitaker reports, "One of the most recent clinical trials on angioplasty,
a multi-center study published in 1999, enrolled 341 patients with stable angina,
normal left ventricular function, and high LDL cholesterol. These patients were
randomly assigned to angioplasty plus standard medications or to an aggressive
regimen of cholesterol-lowering drugs. They were followed for 18 months. At the
study’s conclusion there was no significant difference between the two groups
in numbers of deaths or nonfatal heart attacks, although there was a trend toward
fewer heart-related events in the patients treated solely with medication."2
There are many other studies that indicate the long-term success of angioplasty
is questionable and in a significant number of cases the arteries close back up
presenting the need for bypass surgery. This progression has been alleviated to
some degree with the use of stenting devices that are inserted into arteries to
prevent closure after angioplasty.
Stenting, bypass surgery, other treatments and additional contributing factors
also should be explored in the context of heart disease. However in this short
article, the focus will move on to beta blockers, channel blockers and lifestyle.
Beta blockers
Gabe Mirkin, MD, says, "Recent research shows that beta blockers and diuretics,
the drugs most often prescribed for high blood pressure, cause high blood sugar
levels, weight gain, tiredness and impotence."3
In response, Dr Mirkin says, new beta-blocker drugs have been developed that do
not increase the chance of developing diabetes, suffering heart attack or gaining
weight. However he does not list side effects associated with these next-generation
heart medications, perhaps because the results are not yet available. Time may
tell if the new drugs are all they are chalked up to be.
Calcium channel blockers
Calcium channel blockers work by inhibiting the amount of calcium entering the
arteries. This causes the arteries to dilate, thereby increasing circulation and
decreasing blood pressure. Calcium channel blockers such as verapamil, diltiazem
and nifedipine have been widely prescribed for patients with angina, hypertension
and arrhythmia. Studies have demonstrated calcium channel blockers are linked
to increased heart attack statistics, stressed liver, headache, low blood pressure
and increased risk of cancer. 4
Lifestyle
Heart disease, a close relative of diabetes, is also primarily a product of lifestyle.
Many doctors maintain that CHD can be reversed through exercise, stress reduction
and dietary changes. Numerous animal studies have shown that changing to a low
fat diet reversed arteriosclerosis in test subjects. Furthermore, over the years
there have been many well-documented qualified case studies that prove CHD can
be reversed with diet and exercise. Keeping this in mind, at the same time it
is important to acknowledge standard medical procedures and pharmaceutical drugs
also play a significant role in treating heart disease. However, they do not address
the roots of the problem but rather try to repair "plumbing" malfunctions,
manipulate normal body processes and relieve symptoms.
According to Dr Julian Whitaker, "The overwhelming majority of patients can
be safely treated with a vigorous trial of diet, exercise and appropriate medications.
If, and only if, this conservative regimen fails to reduce symptoms should angioplasty
or another invasive technique be considered." Footnotes:
1.Whitaker, J. Reversing Heart Disease, Warner Books Inc.
2002. Kuulasmaa, K. et al. Estimation of contribution of changes in classic risk
factors to trends in coronary-event rates across the WHO MONICA (World Health
Organization MONItor trends in CArdiovascular) Project populations. The Lancet,
Feb. 26, 2000; 335: 657-77.
2. Pitt, B. et al. Aggressive lipid-lowering therapy compared
with angioplasty in stable coronary artery disease. New England Journal of Medicine,
1999 June 8;341 (2): 70-6
3. www.drmirkin.com/heart
4.Whitaker, J. Reversing Heart Disease, Warner Books Inc.
2002. A.) Psaty, B.M. et al. The risk of myocardial infarction associated with
antihypertensive drug therapies. Journal of the American Medical Association,
1995; 274, 620-625. B.) Stelfox H.T. et al. Conflict of interest in the debate
over calcium-channel antagonists. New England Journal of Medicine, 1998 Jan. 8;
338 (2): 101-6.C) Pahor, M. et al. Health outcomes associated with calcium antagonists
compared with other first-line antihypertensive therapies: a meta-analysis of
randomized controlled trials. The Lancet, 2000 Dec. 9; 356: 1949-54. D.) Pahor,
M., et al Calcium-channel blockade and incidence of cancer in aged populations.
The Lancet, 1996; 348 (9026): 493-7. E. Fitzpatrick, A.L. et al. Use of calcium
channel blockers and breast carcinoma risk in postmenopausal women. Cancer, 1997;
80: 1438-47.
 Top
|
|
