Is it mainstream or alternative?

A question I get about once a week: "Is your program a kind of alternative medicine?"

Our program for control and reversal of coronary plaque using CT heart scans applies an eclectic panel of tools to achieve its goals. We use high-tech methods like lipoprotein analysis and CT heart scans; nutritional supplements like fish oil, vitamin D, and l-arginine; diet strategies and "functional foods" (using foods as a therapeutic tool); and conventional medication.

I don't consider this approach "alternative" in the sense that it uses unmeasurable or spiritual strategies. But I don't consider it mainstream, either, since current mainstream practice of heart disease prevention is far less rigorous with far less satisfactory results.

I think I can sum up the Track Your Plaque approach by saying that we use tools that work. Our measure of success is whether or not your heart scan score is stopped or reduced--that's hard to fudge. You can call it what you will, but I call it the best program for heart disease prevention I know of, alternative or mainstream.

Want to see someone turn diabetic?

If you want to witness the transformation of someone into a pre-diabetic or diabetic, put them on a low fat diet.

Dr. Dean Ornish's program, detailed in his books, Dr. Dean Ornish's Program for Reversal of Heart Disease and Eat More, Weigh Less , are woefully outdated in 2006. Yet the low fat notion continues to show up in the consciousness of people I talk to about heart disease reversal.

"I'm already on a low fat diet. Do you think my heart scan score has reversed?"

Highly unlikely. What Dr. Ornish (as a non-cardiologist, by the way) failed to recognize is that what he did manage to reverse in a small number of people is something called "endothelial dysfunction", but he did not reverse or shrink coronary plaque.

Given the limitations of technology when the Ornish concept got its start, it appeared as if reversal was obtained. In reality, all his approach accomplished was a relaxation in tone of abnormally constricted arteries, thus giving the appearance of reversal. Increased artery tone, or endothelial dysfunction, is extremely common when atherosclerotic plaque is present.

Any cardiologist will tell you that there are many ways to reverse endothelial dysfunction: exercise, weight loss, cholesterol drugs, drugs for high blood pressure, fish oil, hormonal therapy, vitamin C, l-arginine, etc. There is nothing special about a low fat diet.

In fact, Track Your Plaque followers will recognize that a low fat diet is, in fact, potentially harmful, particularly when low HDL or small LDL is part of your pattern.

Let's bury the outdated ideas of the Ornish low fat diet once and for all. It doesn't work. All it may do is confuse you and set you back from your real coronary plaque reversal program.

Inulin: A fiber for weight loss

Here's an interesting product that seems to be gaining some popularity for weight loss: Inulin.

Not to be confused with "insulin", with which it is completely unrelated, inulin is a naturally-occurring plant fiber. It's found in broccoli, asparagus, celery, etc. Like beta-glucan from oats or pectin, inulin is a so-called soluble fiber, a fiber that assumes a gel-like consistency when exposed to water.

Inulin has the effect of increasing satiety, or the sensation of fullness. This cuts your craving for foods. I've tried it recently and I prefer it over glucomannan, another soluble fiber for satiety.

The people at Stonyfield Farms have been adding inulin to their yogurts from some time. The nutritionist at the company tells me that there's 2-3 grams of inulin per 6 ounce container of their yogurt.

You can also find inulin as a supplement that you can add to foods, available from some health food stores and online supplement companies. I came across a neat product called Fiber Choice that's now being distributed widely throughout the U.S. I tried their Weight Management version. It was a delicous strawberry taste. The label says take two chewable tablets twice a day, but I found that two tablets three times a day somewhat better. It's best taken around 30-60 minutes prior to each meal and it causes you to be fuller with less food. One caution: It'll cause loads of gas, especially in the beginning. For that reason, you might try starting with a smaller dose, or start on the weekends when you have the option of some privacy!

More info on the Fiber Choice product can be found at their website, http://www.fiberchoice.com.

Disclaimer: I have no relationship with the manufacturer of this product. I'm simply passing on some thoughts on my experience with this interesting possibility for weight loss.

Will you recognize the truth when you see it?

Do you ever wonder that, if the truth were given to you, that you'd recognize it as such? Or would you dismiss it as just another bunch of nonsense?

After all, you and I live in the Information Age. It means that we have access to mountains of information like never before in human history. But it also means that the truth is often drowned out by an avalanche of mis-truths, sales pitches and marketing, and just plain nonsense.

This struck me the other day when I was talking to a patient.

64 years old with a high heart scan score placing her at significant risk, she looked confused. I'd just described the multitude of causes of coronary plaque that we'd uncovered. The heart scan alone had been a shocker.

"I don't understand. My doctor told me that I had nothing to worry about. I've known him for years and he knows me really well. He did a stress test. That was fine. I don't get all this other stuff you're telling me--lipoprotein whatever..."

Despite my efforts to help her gain an understanding of our intensive approach, she just became increasingly more frustrated. "I just don't think I can do this."

That's the last I've heard from her. As far as I know, she's returned to the comfort of her family doctor who has reassured her over the years. And perhaps there's some good in that. But I do fear for the day when, unexpectedly, she suffers some catastrophe that we told her was coming sooner or later unless real preventive efforts were started.

You could say that she failed to recognize the truth when it was given to her-- boldly, unadorned, and with far greater scientific certainty than the casual reassurances she was accustomed to. But, unfortunately, that's all that some people want.

Don't neglect the basics in your heart disease reversal program

Carl loved new ideas and novel approaches. You could tell by the sheer number of nutritional supplements he took. His list had grown to 18 different supplements over the past two years.

Carl came to me for coronary plaque regression. Lipoprotein analysis did uncover several previously unsuspected abnormalties, most notably small LDL particles and lipoprotein(a). In addition, Carl's LDL cholesterol ranged between 111 mg-156 mg and he was clearly hypertensive, with systolic blood pressures consistently around 150-160. (Recall that people with Lp(a) are more prone to hypertension.)

Carl was more than willing to have his lipoprotein(a) reduced. We did so with niacin and testosterone and the level dropped to near zero. Likewise, we corrected his small LDL pattern with niacin, fish oil, and a reduction in processed carbohydrates.

But Carl really resisted doing much about his LDL cholesterol and high blood pressure. I got the sense that these "boring" issues simply didn't interest him. After all, LDL cholesterol and blood pressure were the stuff of TV commercials and the popular conversation propagated by drug companies.

Carl's follow-up heart scan, however, finally persuaded him: a 24% increase in one year, likely due to the neglect of the basic issues.

I liken Carl's case to being like the teenager with a new car who polishes the paint to a bright finish, puts new wheels and tires on it, spruces up the interior with various doodads--but then fails to change the oil. Sometimes it's the most basic issues that can diminish your success.

Issues like LDL cholesterol and high blood pressure aren't the most glamorous, but they do count in your coronary plaque control program.

Is your doctor a hospital employee?

There's a disturbing trend that's growing--silently but rapidly.

In Milwaukee, three hospital systems compete for the local health care dollar. To gain more control over revenues and the routing of patients, the hospitals are aggressively hiring physicians to work for them. I've witnessed many of my cardiology colleagues, primary care doctors, and a substantial number of procedural specialists enticed by the offers made by hospital employers.

This phenomenon is not unique to Milwaukee but is being used in many, perhaps most, major cities in the U.S.

This means that physicians are employees of the hospital. That way, employee-physicians are obliged to use only the hospital system that employs them. In the old days, your doctor could use any hospital he/she desired, depending on the quality, location, facilities, etc. Now, many physician-employees are given no choice but to use the hospital that pays their salary.

That by itself is not necessarily bad. But combine salary with incentives for bringing in patients for hospitalization and procedures--that the rub. In other words, physician-employees are incentivized to generate more revenue for the system, just as employees in many other industries.

If you're a salesman for an insurance company, your job is to bring in more business. If you're a worker on an auto production line, you're expected to meet certain quotas. These same principles are now being applied to many physicians.

How does this affect you? Well, if your physician--especially procedure-driven specialists like cardiologists, general surgeons, orthopedists, etc.--is a hospital employee, BEWARE! Do you really need that procedure, or is your doctor suggesting you have a procedure because it will add to his track record?

Prevention? In this model of health care, why bother? It certainly doesn't pay for a hospital to keep you well. Then why should your physician-employee?

Be careful who you're dealing with. If your physician is a hospital-employee, don't bet on getting preventive care. It's more likely you're that just a future source of revenue when it's time for your bypass operation, hip replacement, carotid endarterectomy, etc.

What more powerful argument is there for increased self-empowerment and information for health care consumers?

Take a walking vacation

If you're planning a vacation, why not consider a walking vacation?

The concept is really taking off. All you need is a pair of comfortable shoes and an interesting locale. More and more services are popping up to help you plan fun and interesting destinations and itineraries. One such catalog can be found at http://walking.about.com/od/tours/a/walkingvacation_3.htm

Lengthier walks may require some advance planning and toting some supplies. Don't forget the water!

From a health viewpoint, a walking vacation sure beats the heck out of a cruise that packs on 12 pounds of extra weight from the 24-hour a day buffet. If you're in the midst of a weight loss effort, several hours of walking through interesting locales and scenery can make it effortless.

There's loads of neat places to visit from a walker's perspective. One interesting website is www.waterfallwalks.com that lists trails that provide spectacular views of waterfalls.

Another variation on this theme is biking vacations. My wife and I are trying to set the time aside for a biking tour of wineries in the French countryside. That's our kind of multi-tasking!

"Expanded indications for implantable defibrillators"

So reads the headline on a magazine I received recently (along with thousands of my colleagues) from a major hospital system.

It goes on to say: "In January 2005, indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) were substantially broadened [emphasis ours] to include most patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) of 35% or less. This change translates into a 2- to 3-fold increase in the number of Medicare beneficiariries eligible for ICDs."

Ka-ching!!! Hear the money piling up in the bank?

The device manufacturers are constantly churning data and lobbying for reimbursement to expand the use of their devices to more and more people. Defibrillators in particularly are generally a $25,000 to $50,000 opportunity for the device manufacturer alone, not counting the costs incurred at the hospital for implantation.

Beware. As reimbursement for stents and other procedures diminishes, expect a sudden "demand" for more and more people to get implantable defibrillators. Better yet, stay away from the whole issue by preventing your heart attack.

Get a heart scan--but then don't delay taking action!

I just came from one of the local hospitals after having performed a heart catheterization on a patient I met earlier this week.

Jack had gotten a heart scan a year ago with a score of 246, placing him in the 76th percentile. The "event" rate with this percentile rank is around 3% per year--not very high but enough to pose risk over a long period.

Jack chose to ignore his score. After all, the pressures of work at the University, maintaining his home and yard, etc. consumed all his energies. He came to my office--now one year after his scan--and told me about the chest pressure he was getting. Initially, his chest pains occurred with extended walking. In the past week, however, Jack was experiencing chest pressure with just walking 30 feet.

This pattern of increasing symptoms is called "accelerated angina", meaning that Jack was rapidly heading towards a heart attack. So I advised a heart catheterization in near future.

Jack's catheterization showed extensive plaque including a 50% blockage in the mainstem artery and 90% in the artery to the front of the heart (left anterior descending artery). Jack is going to have a bypass operation tomorrow.

What if Jack hadn't ignored his heart scan from a year ago? Well, I'd be very confident in saying that he would not be undergoing bypass surgery tomorrow.

The lesson: Don't dilly-dally on taking action to keep your plaque from growing. While it's not an emergency, it can easily become one if you choose to ignore your scan.

Feel that nudge in your back?

You feel that nudge in your back? That's your local hospitals competing for your bypass surgery business.

Just this morning while watching a morning news show, I saw three advertisements for hospital bypass surgery programs. One ad featured a man in his 50s telling his story:"The cardiologist determined immediately that I needed a triple bypass operation. My family and I are very grateful to _____ hospital!"

In what other field is failure celebrated so prominently? When I see these ads, I hear "My doctors failed to provide early detection and then prevent what became a life-threatening condition, even though heart disease is a chronic process that requires decades to develop." What if our man said instead,"I had a heart scan and my score was high. So I was shown why I had so much plaque. They then showed me how to control and even reduce the amount of plaque I had. I'm living safely and symptom-free without need for surgery or procedures."

Of course, the hospital is out $60,000-100,000 for the surgery. How else could they afford ad campaigns costing several million dollars a year? See these advertisements for what they are: Marketing generated by profit-seeking businesses competing for your dollars--lots of them.
Thiazide diuretics: Treatment of choice for high blood pressure?

Thiazide diuretics: Treatment of choice for high blood pressure?

Thiazide diuretics are a popular first-line treatment for hypertension among the primary care set.

This practice became especially well-established with the 2002 publication of the ALLHAT Study (Major Outcomes in High-Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomized to Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor or Calcium Channel Blocker vs Diuretic:The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)).

ALLHAT showed that an inexpensive diuretic like chlorthalidone (a weak diuretic in the thiazide class, similar to hydrochlorothiazide) as first-line treatment for hypertension achieved equivalent reductions in cardiovascular events (cardiovasular death and heart attack) as non-thiazide antihypertensives, lisinopril (an ACE inhibitor) and amlodipine (a calcium channel blocker, better known as Norvasc).

After 7 years of treatment, there was 14% death or heart attack among all three groups--no difference.

This was interpreted to mean that inexpensive thiazide diuretics like chlorthalidone offer as much benefit as other blood pressure medications at reduced cost.

On the surface, that's great. Anything that detracts from the ubiquitous pharmaceutical industry propaganda of bigger, better, more expensive drugs to replace old, inexpensive, generic drugs is fine by me.

But you knew there'd be more to this issue! If we accept that thiazides are equivalent to other single-drug treatments for high blood pressure, what do we do with the following issues:

--Thiazides deplete body potassium-This effect can be profound. In fact, built into the ALLHAT mortality rate is an expected death rate from potassium depletion. When potassium in the body and blood go low, the heart becomes electrically unstable and dangerous rhythms develop.

--Thiazides deplete magnesium--Similar in implication to the potassium loss, magnesium loss also creates electrical instability in the heart, not to mention exaggeration of insulin resistance, rise in triglycerides, reduction in HDL.

--Thiazides reduce HDL cholesterol

--Thiazides increase triglycerides

--Thiazides increase small LDL particles--You know, the number one cause for heart disease in the U.S.

--Thiazides increase uric acid--Uric acid is increasingly looking like a coronary risk factor: The higher the uric acid blood level, the greater the risk for heart attack. Thiazides have long been known to increase uric acid, occasionally sufficient to trigger attacks of gout (uric acid crystals that precipitate in joints, like rock candy). (Fully detailed Special Report on uric acid coming this week on the Track Your Plaque website.)

What about the advice we commonly give people to hydrate themselves generously? Yet we give them diuretics? Which is it: More hydration or less hydration? You can't have both.

Do thiazides exert an apparent cardiovascular risk reduction in a society due to its flagrant sodium obsession?

Thus, there are a number of inconsistencies in the thinking surrounding thiazides. In my experience, I have seen more harm done than good using these agents. While I cannot fully reconcile the reported benefit seen in ALLHAT with what I see in real life, all too often I see people having to take another drug to make up for a side-effect of a thiazide diuretic (e.g., high-dose prescription potassium to replace lost potassium, allopurinol to reduce uric acid, etc.). I have seen many people get hospitalized, even suffer near-fatal or fatal events from extremely low potassium or magnesium levels.

My personal view: ALLHAT or no, avoid thiazide diuretics like the plague. Sure, it might save money on a population basis, but I suspect that the ALLHAT data are deeply misleading.

What's better than a thiazide, calcium blocker, or ACE inhibitor? How about vitamin D restoration, thyroid normalization, wheat elimination?

Comments (14) -

  • Anonymous

    1/5/2009 6:29:00 PM |

    Does wheat elimination apply to rye and other grains, or only to wheat?

  • Jay

    1/5/2009 8:24:00 PM |

    I am curious, do some of the potassium sparing diuretics ( like Maxzide ) eliminate some of these blood chemistry changes (all of which are concerning) ?

    I have been using a similar product and find my side effects minimal compared to the previous lisinopril/verapromil combo that resulted in the same degree of lowering BP for me.

    Thanks

  • Jeff

    1/5/2009 9:18:00 PM |

    My mother is on this drug and I just happened to discuss it with her a week or so ago.  She claims no potassium issues and that she takes the lowest possible dose.  I sense it doesn't make sense for her to be on this.  Any suggestions?

  • Anonymous

    1/5/2009 9:45:00 PM |

    Dr, Davis, this is not directly related to this post, but I have a question about fish oil. Mine comes in a capsule form with soybean oil. Is it acceptable or should I look for another one which does not contain soybean oil.

    I also took my first pill of Niacin yesterday ( Just got report of high total cholesterol levels -230). I was up almost all night and was frazzled similar to what I would feel if I drank coffee at night. Is this due to niacin?

  • rabagley

    1/6/2009 6:40:00 AM |

    Anonymous,

    Dr. Davis isn't answering questions on the blog, but I'll try to sum up without too badly screwing up what he might say.

    Dr. Davis is particularly against wheat as a negative value food ingredient.  He has quoted primary research and various non-mainstream dietary experts who theorize that wheat contains addictive substances and contains still more substances that worsen multiple risk factors for metabolic syndrome (early diabetes), diabetes, heart disease, etc.  Basically: bad stuff.  Whole wheat is very little different from refined wheat in his view.

    Dr. Davis doesn't quite seem ready to throw out all grains, and does not have much to say about oats, rice, barley, rye, etc. one way or the other.  I suspect that this is simply because there isn't that much reporting on those grains and he isn't as confident that they're quite as bad.

    Now for my take on it (I am a software developer with no dietary or medical training): high carbohydrate foods are dangerous.  Don't even get into the fact that grains are a really bad idea.  Those foods with refined, fast digesting carbohydrates (sugars, simple starches, refined flour, etc.) are slightly more dangerous than "whole grain" or "high fiber" foods, but only slightly more dangerous.  They're all bad.  

    They're bad because our bodies are not used to a diet containing very many carbohydrates.  Our bodies have evolved to thrive on a diet containing mostly fat and a moderate amount of protein with a few carbs here and there.  We tamper with that preference and pay the price with the "diseases of civilization" (Diabetes, Heart Disease, etc.).

    Carbohydrates used to be a signal that either game was scarce and/or winter was approaching.  When we eat large quantities of carbohydrates (more than 15-20% of calories), our bodies start to pack calories away.  This storage response is a reaction triggered by insulin, which is itself triggered by the digested sugars moving from the gut to the bloodstream.  When we chronically eat large quantities of carbohydrates, our fat cells get packed tight and eventually can't pack away any more calories.  When this happens, the fat cells are said to be "insulin resistant", and when that happens, you're only a perceptive doctor's visit away from being classified as having Type 2 diabetes.

    And that's only one way that a high-carb, low-fat diet is bad for you.  That doesn't even begin to get into HDL cholesterol, lipid particle sizes, triglycerides (fructose is one of the worst sources of triglycerides in the diet, and triglycerides are one of the primary indicators of risk of heart disease) or anything else.

    I previously states that "grain" itself is a bad idea but didn't explain why.  It's simple evolution.  An apple tree gets a benefit when an animal comes by and eats an apple.  The seeds will go through the digestive tract and emerge unscathed in a pile of fertilizer some distance from the original tree.  The tree wins all around.  But what if you crack open the apple seeds and try to eat them?  Bad plan.  Apple seeds have about a dozen poisons in them, including potassium cyanide.  The plant does not get a benefit if you eat the whole ovary.  We eat the whole ovary of grains and pulses.  This is risky because we have to defuse all of those poisons or we risk damage from those that accumulate or have damage that accumulates.  Some of the defensive chemicals can be neutralized with cooking, some with fermenting, some with physical removal of layers, some with oxidation.  There's a decent chance that you can get them all and not eat any toxins, but I'm not convinced that we're doing it right with soy, wheat, rice, oats, rye, spelt, millet, etc.

    We just don't know enough to be certain.  And there's no real reason to take the risk.

    Read up for yourself.  "Good Calories, Bad Calories" is a fantastic recounting about the history of dietary policy and dietary science, eventually leading to some very interesting conclusions about what makes for a good calorie and a bad calorie.

  • Anna

    1/6/2009 5:02:00 PM |

    Anonymous-
    high total cholesterol levels -230

    But did you have any of the lipid fractions done, too?  High total cholesterol may mean nothing, but you won't know that unless you have more information.  

    An example,  my total cholesterol and LDL (by calculation, not direct measurement has risen a bit (higher than yours, I think it was 261 last time) over the past 10 years with improvements in my diet over the past 5 yrs (LC, no gluten/wheat, low sugar/fructose, minimal processed foods/more home prepared foods, many foods sources direct from the farm/ranch).  But my endocrinologist was fussing about my basic lipid panel results.

    BUT my HDL has also improved quite a bit (gone up 20+) and while my LDL is high according to the conventional wisdom, it is made up of the large fluffy pattern type, which ISN'T associated with CVD.  My total chol/HDL ratio is great.  My triglycerides are very low (they used to be high when I ate high carb/low fat).  AND, my first coronary calcium scan score, done a few weeks ago was 0, no sign of plaque, despite many years of undiagnosed hypothyroidism & impaired glucose tolerance (both treated/managed now), and current high consumption of grass-fed butter and other natural traditional animal fats, whole fat dairy, and 2-3 eggs every single day, plus Vit D supplementation ( my Vit D levels drop too low on sun exposure alone, despite living in So Cal).

    So, the total chol is essentially meaningless without a context.  You need to know the lipid subfractions (by direct measurement, not "calculation") so that the number and size can be assessed.  Many primary care docs just don't understand this and only order the basic panel (much cheaper) instead of a more informative VAP.  

    My husband on the other hand, has a not so great cholesterol lipid fraction profile (he's a long-time smoker, but now trying harder to quit), and his coronary calcium scan score wasn't so rosy.  He started niacin a couple months ago and hasn't had too many problems with the side effects (the flushing has occurred, but not too disruptively).  BUT, he started with a really low dose (50 mg) and gradually built up the amount, going to 2 x 50 mg, 3 x 50 mg, etc.  He's now at 3 x 100 mg daily with little or no side effects.   You might try gradually increasing the dose to see  if that helps.

  • Robert M.

    1/6/2009 8:05:00 PM |

    Anonymous:

    Wheat, barley, and rye all contain the same gluten protein that can cause an immune system reaction or allergy.  Oats are often contaminated, although wheat-free oats are available at specialty stores.

  • Anna

    1/6/2009 11:55:00 PM |

    Grains are not essential to a healthy diet, even if one appears to not suffer from eating them (appears being the significant word!).

    "Essential" applies to nutrients that must come from the diet because the body cannot make them.  There are essential amino acids and essential fatty acids, but no essential carbohydrates.  The body can make all the carbohydrates it needs from a nutrient-dense diet without grains.

  • puddle

    1/7/2009 9:36:00 PM |

    I'd also point out that the Thiazides are sulfa drugs.  Which luckily my pharmacist's computer was aware of, because my medical team sure wasn't.  And I have an anaphylactic shock reaction to sulfa.

  • David

    1/8/2009 9:00:00 PM |

    I agree that it's generally not a good idea to be on blood pressure meds, but I'm curious about what we should do about these drugs for someone who has already had a heart attack? My dad had high BP (over 145/90) before his heart attack, and the docs (two stents later) put him on an ACE inhibitor (Lisinopril) and beta-blocker (Lopressor). He's been exercising, taking vitamin D, cutting out the wheat, and pretty much doing all the normal TYP stuff, and his BP is down to 112/60, heart rate like 54 bpm. Is there any reason someone in his condition would still need to be on the meds? This is not just a personal question, but a general note of curiosity.

    Those med recommendations came from Dr. O'Keefe, the vitamin D researcher here in Kansas City, by the way. After reading his book, I didn't think he'd be such a pill pusher, but he was! He hadn't even looked at dad's chart and was already telling him he needed to up the dose of all his meds. According to O'Keefe (and I was standing right there when he said this) "The best three things you can do for your health right now: 1. Statins. 2. Vitamin D. 3. Fish oil. Don't worry about any of those other supplements [referring to things like magnesium, CoQ10, pomegranate, cocoa, etc]. The science is Simvastatin. The science is Lisinopril."

    Well, at least he was promoting the vitamin D and fish oil! Even at that, though, he didn't even look to see how much fish oil dad was taking, and he told him 1,000-2,000 IU of vitamin D was fine- without even having the blood work back yet! Grrrr.....

    Anyone know of a good cardiologist in the Kansas City area?

  • cure for high blood pressure

    8/20/2009 10:17:32 AM |

    Wheat, barley, and rye all contain the same gluten protein that can cause an immune system reaction or allergy. Oats are often contaminated, although wheat-free oats are available at specialty stores.High blood pressure cure supplement, natural herbal remedy to lower & control high blood pressure.Use Alistrol everyday to help maintain healthy circulation and support cardio-vascular health.

  • Anonymous

    11/18/2009 3:11:29 PM |

    It was extremely interesting for me to read that post. Thanx for it. I like such themes and everything connected to this matter. I definitely want to read more on that blog soon.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 6:18:48 PM |

    Thus, there are a number of inconsistencies in the thinking surrounding thiazides. In my experience, I have seen more harm done than good using these agents. While I cannot fully reconcile the reported benefit seen in ALLHAT with what I see in real life, all too often I see people having to take another drug to make up for a side-effect of a thiazide diuretic (e.g., high-dose prescription potassium to replace lost potassium, allopurinol to reduce uric acid, etc.). I have seen many people get hospitalized, even suffer near-fatal or fatal events from extremely low potassium or magnesium levels.

  • simvastatin side effects

    5/7/2011 1:44:30 PM |

    Thiazide increases uric acid thus increasing the risk of heart attacks. The higher the level of uric acid blood level, the more the risk of heart attacks. This is a great information.

Loading