Article reference:

Heart Disease CAN Be Prevented - By Natural Means

Heart disease is one of the main killer diseases in Western countries. One would think that with all that attention on cholesterol and with numerous drugs to combat heart disease, that the incidence should be lower than in the less developed countries. The contrary is the case. Could we be medicating ourselves to death?

Thanks to JoAnn Guest for forwarding this great article on the Alternative Medicine Forum.

Mainstream Heart Treatments: More Imminent Dangers Involved
JoAnn Guest
Sep 17, 2004 21:12 PDT

Recent studies indicate that cholesterol 'contributes' to heart disease ONLY when it undergoes 'oxidation', or is subjected to "free radical" damage.

Cholesterol damaged by "free radicals" is taken up by our white blood cells (macrophages) and deposited in fatty streaks on artery walls. This condition fosters plaque buildup in our arteries and plays a key role in the development of heart and artery disease.


Dangerous side-effects of some Common Prescription Drugs

Beta blockers and calcium channel blockers are the mainstay of conventional treatment for heart disease, angina, and even cardiac arrythmias for millions of people.

Calcium channel blockers tend to relax artery walls and lower blood pressure by blocking the 'entrance' of calcium into the cells!

However, they also block "essential functions" of the heart and blood vessels. In numerous studies, patients taking large amounts of calcium channel blockers had a 60% higher death rate!

An effective "alternative" to the calcium channel blockers is MAGNESIUM.

Supplemental magnesium is as effective as the popular prescription drugs in relaxing the smooth muscles of the arteries and 'reducing stress' on the myocrdium, however by more gentle natural means. Increasing your daily intake of magnesium, potassium and potassium-rich foods may also be effective in preventing arterial plaque from

"Beta blockers" are often given to treat high blood pressure:

They work by blocking the ability of your heart to respond to epinephrine and adrenaline, which stimulate your pulse rate and blood pressure, elevating both.

They are meant to weaken the heart so that blood 'pressure' is lowered and heart pain reduced.

Beta blockers can be beneficial for 'temporary' relief, but that's not how they're used! Virtually every doctor I know prescribes them indefinitely!

Anti-hyperlipidemic drugs (Statins) are given to lower cholesterol levels.

These drugs all have dangerous side effects and again, there is little evidence that they reduce the risk of heart attack! Statin drugs such as Mevacor and Zocor are the the most popular of lipid-lowering drugs.

They reduce the "production" of cholesterol in the liver and "alter" the way LDL cholesterol enters the cells.

According to the "Physician's Desk Reference" (PDR), side effects of these drugs include liver toxicity, muscle inflammation, gastrointestinal symptoms, and an increased risk of cataract formation.

A significant side effect of statin drugs not mentioned in the PDR is a "reduction" in your body's production of 'Coenzyme Q10'.

Co-Q10 is essential for healthy heart muscles.

Co-Q10 is more prevalent in your heart than any other muscle in the body!!

Colestid and Questran (resins): absorb bile acids from cholesterol in the intestinal tract and cause them to be excreted, lowering cholesterol levels circulating in the blood.

Resins have 'considerable' side effects, some of which are constipation, nausea, bloating, and, more seriously, reduced absorption of vitamins A,D, E, and K. Over the long term, these deficiencies may cause bleeding disorders and vision problems!

Atromid-S actually INCREASED DEATHS from 'non-cardiac' causes, primarily CANCER!

A More Safe Natural Approach:

We now know that cholesterol-lowering drugs have dangerous side effects and there is scant research that they lessen the risk of heart attack!

There are safe alternatives that address the CAUSES of heart disease, not just the SYMPTOMS! They work to prevent and in some cases even 'reverse' heart disease.

A nutrient dense, low protein diet rich in organic fruits and vegetables, a high-potency, antioxidant-rich multivitamin regimen, "essential fatty acid" supplementation along with moderate exercise greatly reduces your risk.

I recommend this program to all patients, not just those with heart disease!
Researchers: Diet Cuts Cholesterol as Well as Drug
Tue Jul 22, 4:21 PM

CHICAGO (Reuters) - A strict vegetarian diet can reduce high cholesterol levels about as effectively as cholesterol fighting drugs called statins, Canadian researchers said on Tuesday.

The diet containing natural plant sterols found in plants, organic vegetables and fruits, almonds, cold-pressed unrefined oil, and viscous fibers found in oats, barley and psyllium, was credited with reducing "bad" cholesterol levels by 29 percent over four weeks in a group of 16 subjects.

Another group of study participants who took a daily dose of 20 milligrams of the drug *lovastatin* lowered their cholesterol levels by a comparable 31 percent over four weeks, and a third group on a low-fat diet cut their cholesterol by 8 percent.

The findings suggested that patients with high cholesterol try a dietary approach for six to 12 weeks before turning to cholesterol-lowering drugs, Dr. James Anderson, of the University of Kentucky in Lexington, wrote in an editorial accompanying the study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

"Dietary management is an essential part of the treatment for lipid disorders, although adherence to strict and intensive dietary interventions requires motivation by patients, encouragement by physicians, and, perhaps, counseling by dietitians and nutrition experts," Anderson wrote.

High cholesterol is a known risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and statins reduce the risk of mortality from heart-related illnesses by up to one-third. Unfortunately however, there are many documented dangers involved in taking statin drugs.

Study author David Jenkins wrote:

"Using the experience gained, further development of a more natural dietary approach may provide a potentially valuable dietary option for cardiovascular disease risk reduction in primary prevention."


Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 7:01 pm
Post subject: Carcinogenicity of lipid-lowering drugs.

Carcinogenicity of lipid-lowering drugs.
Newman TB, Hulley SB.

Department of Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, USA.

OBJECTIVE--To review the findings and implications of studies of rodent carcinogenicity of lipid-lowering drugs.

Summaries of carcinogenicity studies published in the 1992 and 1994 Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR), additional information obtained from the US Food and Drug Administration, and published articles identified by computer searching, bibliographies, and consultation with experts.

STUDY SAMPLE--We tabulated rodent carcinogenicity data from the 1994 PDR for all drugs listed as "hypolipidemics." For comparison, we selected a stratified random sample of anti-hypertensive drugs.

We also reviewed methods and interpretation of carcinogenicity studies in rodents and results of clinical trials in humans.

DATA SYNTHESIS--All members of the two most popular classes of lipid-lowering drugs (the fibrates and the statins)cause cancer in rodents, in some cases at levels of animal exposure close to those prescribed to humans.

CONCLUSIONS--Extrapolation of this evidence of carcinogenesis from rodents to humans is an uncertain process. Longer-term clinical trials and careful postmarketing surveillance during the next several decades are needed to determine whether cholesterol-lowering drugs cause cancer in humans.

In the meantime, the results of experiments in animals and humans suggest that lipid-lowering drug treatment, especially with the fibrates and statins, should be avoided except in patients at high short-term risk of coronary heart disease.

Publication Types:
Review Literature

PMID: 8531288 [PubMed

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 7:06 pm
Post subject:
Calcified Plaque burden remains unchanged by Statin drugs

Relation of aggressiveness of lipid-lowering treatment to changes in calcified plaque burden by electron beam tomography.

Hecht HS, Harman SM.

Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, New York 10003, USA.

The comparative effects of more versus less aggressive low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol lowering (to 80 mg/dl) on calcified coronary plaque progression by electron beam tomography were evaluated in 182 consecutive asymptomatic patients after 1.2 years of treatment with statins alone or in combination with niacin.

Despite the greater improvement in lipids in the 80 mg/dl groups, there were no differences in 'calcified plaque' progression (9.3%/year vs 9.1%/year).

We conclude that, with respect to LDL cholesterol lowering with Statins, the"lower is better" theory is not supported by changes in calcified plaque progression.

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial

PMID: 12888149 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

JoAnn Guest

See also:

Nattokinase: Prevent Heart Attack and Stroke with the Enzyme Proven to Support Healthy Blood Circulation and Dissolve Blood Clots Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death for men and women

Cholesterol Targets Fraudulent - Association for Honesty in Medicine Charges

Researchers: Vitamin C Deficiency Widespread - Link to Heart Disease, Infections, Cancer

Lipitor - The Human Cost

Vitamin C beats statins in cholesterol - heart disease

Medline, which prides itself to be the largest medical database in the world, has steadfastly refused to index important works on heart disease, published in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine. According to Andrew Saul of, they indexed over over 116 papers by Linus Pauling, but have excluded all those that appeared in JOM. Here is a selection from Andrew Saul's latest newsletter:

... There is nothing at all funny about the world's largest medical library arbitrarily refusing to index certain scholarly information for professional and public access. For instance: the following papers by twice-Nobel-prize winning Linus Pauling are not on Medline simply because they happened to be published in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine.

Rath M, Pauling L. Solution To the Puzzle of Human Cardiovascular Disease: Its Primary Cause Is Ascorbate Deficiency ading to the Deposition of Lipoprotein(a) and Fibrinogen/Fibrin in the Vascular Wall. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol 6, 3&4th Quarters, 1991, p 125.

Pauling L & Rath M. An Orthomolecular Theory of Human Health and Disease. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol 6, 3&4th Quarters, 1991, p135.

Rath M, Pauling L. Apoprotein(a) Is An Adhesive Protein. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol 6, 3&4th Quarters, 1991, p139.

Rath M, Pauling L. Case Report: Lysine/Ascorbate Related Amelioration of Angina Pectoris. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol 6, 3&4th Quarters, 1991, p 144.

Hoffer A, Pauling L. Hardin Jones Biostatistical Analysis of Mortality Data for A Second Set of Cohorts of Cancer Patients with A Large Fraction Surviving At the Termination of the Study and A Comparison of Survival Times of Cancer Patients Receiving Large Regular Oral Doses of Vitamin C and Other Nutrients with Similar Patients Not Receiving these Doses. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Vol 6, 3&4th Quarters, 1991, p 157.

(If you note carefully, you will see that all five of the above Pauling articles appeared in one single volume of the Journal. We would not want word of THAT to get out, now would we. And there's more: )

Rath M, Pauling L. A Unified theory of Human Cardiovascular Disease Leading the Way To the Abolition of This Diseases As A Cause for Human Mortality. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Volume 7, First Quarter 1992, p 5.

Rath M, Pauling L. Plamin-induced Proteolysis and the Role of Apoprotein(a), Lysine and Synthetic Lysine Analogs. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Volume 7, First Quarter 1992, p 17.

Pauling L. Third Case Report on Lysine-ascorbate Amelioration of Angina Pectoris. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Volume 8, Third Quarter, 1993, p 137.

Why are these papers by Linus Pauling not indexed by the amply taxpayer-funded National Library of Medicine? It is not because the subjects are uninteresting. Nor is it because Pauling coauthored them with Matthais Rath, M.D., since the following papers ARE indexed on Medline. Same authors; same topics.

Rath M, Pauling L. Immunological evidence for the accumulation of lipoprotein(a) in the atherosclerotic lesion of the hypoascorbemic guinea pig. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990 Dec;87(23):9388-90. PMID: 2147514 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Rath M, Pauling L. Hypothesis: lipoprotein(a) is a surrogate for ascorbate. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990 Aug;87(16):6204-7. Erratum in: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1991 Dec 5;88(24):11588. PMID: 2143582 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Pauling L, Herman ZS. Criteria for the validity of clinical trials of treatments of cohorts of cancer patients based on the Hardin Jones principle. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989 Sep;86(18):6835-7. PMID: 2780542 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Pauling L. Biostatistical analysis of mortality data for cohorts of cancer patients. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989 May;86(10):3466-8. PMID: 2726729 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

I think it is absurd that Medline, which has indexed 116 papers by Linus Pauling, excludes equally valuable work of his due to where it first appeared.