Where do Track Your Plaque membership revenues go?

People pay about $90 per year to become Members on the Track Your Plaque website. This provide access to our in-depth Special Reports, guides, webinars, and our proprietary software data tracking tools. Members can also participate in online discussions, such as those in the Track Your Plaque Forum and chats.

Why is there a charge for membership in the program and where does the money go?

Money raised from membership fees goes towards:

1) The costs of doing business, e.g., server fees, software purchases, legal fees. Hosting webinars, for instance, costs us about $99 per month for the GoToWebinar software service.

2) Software development--Our most recent round of software data tracking tools, for instance, cost us nearly $30,000. That may not be a lot from big business standards, but it is onerous enough that obtaining membership dues really helps.

3) Graphics development--A website without graphics would be awfully dull, regardless of the quality of the textual content. Some of the newest tools on the Track Your Plaque website require photography and graphics work, which can add up very quickly.


Where membership fees do NOT go:

1) In our pockets--In fact, except for the various contractors who are paid for their services (e.g., software developers), NOBODY on the Track Your Plaque staff are paid: not me, nor any of the behind-the-scenes staff. Some of the staff overlap with my office staff, but they are paid purely out of the office revenues, not out of Track Your Plaque membership dues.

2) Towards overhead costs beyond those listed above--For example, membership fees do not pay for office lease, utilities, phones, etc.


We rely on membership fees because we have chosen to remain as free of commercial bias as possible. We host no advertising, we have no behind-the-scenes corporate or institutional agendas, we show no favoritism to any business or commercial operation. We believe this permits editorial freedom that few other health websites can enjoy. (In fact, I know of no other that is so free of commercial bias, outside of small blogs or narrow-interest websites.)

If you want to see what damage commercial bias can create, just go to a health website like WebMD. I challenge you to find information that is not flagrantly biased by commercial influence, namely that of the drug industry. (According to the WebMD SEC filings, in fact, the great majority--approximately 80%--of their $331 million revenues (2007) were derived directly or indirectly from the drug industry.) This commercial bias reaches into all of WebMD's related businesses, including MedicineNet.com, RxList.com, Medscape.com, and several others.

Preventing heart disease is not a money maker, sad to say. It is, from the perspective of conventional heart care, a big money loser. Undergo a heart catheterization, hospitalization, stent or bypass for anywhere from $14,000 to well over $100,000---or pay $90 for in-depth health information that dramatically reduces the potential need for the hospital and its procedures, minimizes need for prescription medication (statins alone, of course, are a $27 billion annual revenue phenomenon), and achieves all this by maximizing nutrition, self-purchased nutritional supplements, and inexpensive heart scans. Nobody is going to make a bundle off of this approach.

So that is why we charge a membership fee. I often get a laugh from some of the comments of people on this blog or even in my office who believe that we are rolling in money from the website from membership dues. The opposite is true: We don't pay ourselves. Virtually every penny is reinvested back into the website to better serve the Members.

Comments (9) -

  • steve

    12/26/2008 6:29:00 PM |

    aren't you coming out with a new edition of your book?  Clearly it will be cheaper than a yearly membership, and hopefully will contain all the info. shown on TYP membership site; otherwise it would be in some respects short changing the reader. Why not just buy the updated book to get current info at less expensive price?

  • virginia

    12/27/2008 5:01:00 AM |

    thanks. i have linked you via my blog...found you at fanaticcook.

  • Bob Parks

    12/27/2008 6:20:00 PM |

    you wrote:

    "approximately 80%--of their $331 revenues (2007)"

    That has to be a typo, $331 million maybe?

    Bob

  • Anonymous

    12/27/2008 6:23:00 PM |

    The dues I've paid to be a TYP member, and the wealth of unbiased and cutting edge information I've derived there from, are  some of the BEST preventive healthcare dollars I could have spent.

    My co-pays for a stay in the hospital or trip to the cath lab could pay for many years of membership in TYP.  My bet is that the information I've derived from Track Your Plaque will keep me away from those scary places... or give me my best shot if I should ever have to go there.

    To my knowledge, there is no other website that provides such a wealth of information, and the tools to use it, for such a low subscription fee.

    Dr. Davis you do an extraordinary job with the TYP website, thank you for all you do!  Your work is sincerely appreciated.

    Happy New Year to you, and to Track Your Plaque website staff and members.

    madcook
    Houston, TX

  • Richard Nikoley

    12/27/2008 8:25:00 PM |

    For what it's worth, Doc Davis, I never had a doubt.

    Not that it would have mattered anyway. Would that the financial rewards went to those most and not least deserving and that such would be welcomed with open arms by the beneficiaries of your revolutionary, life-saving approach.

    I salute you, sir.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/29/2008 1:39:00 AM |

    Thanks for catching that, Bob.

  • Anonymous

    12/29/2008 4:34:00 AM |

    Please keep the fee high enough to keep the information unbiased and to keep out those who do not understand the power of the information and would dilute the message.

  • Anonymous

    12/29/2008 5:30:00 AM |

    Steve, the Track Your Plaque book and the Track Your Plaque website are two quite different things.

    I have the first edition of the TYP book (and have given away copies to friends who discovered they have coronary artery disease). I have been a TYP member for some time. I also intend to buy the new edition of the book when it is out (and I will continue to give out copies to people I know who discover they have CAD).

    The new Track Your Plaque book will have Dr. Davis' updated observations, the latest (evolved) version of the program, and more, and should be current, at least as of the date of publication.

    The Track Your Plaque website is both comprehensive and interactive:  The latest aspects of the program are there, as well as extensive information and articles about each aspect of TYP strategies, AND it will be updated over time as new strategies evolve.  In addition there are new interactive tools to track your blood work and tell you how well you are doing with your program and your heart scan scores.  There are also wonderful forums where TYP members can post questions, and receive information and advice from other members, as well as Dr. Davis and some of his staff, in a very supportive atmosphere.

    There is nothing like the TYP membership website, not even a brand new updated edition of the TYP book, and it is, for my money, a bargain.

    Hope this helps!

    madcook

  • pamojja

    11/15/2009 3:57:47 PM |

    are there other options to join TrackYourPlaque other than with credit cards?

    I don't want to get one for just this purpose, especially not in times of the big credit crunch.

    Thanks for any suggestions.

Loading
"Millions of needless deaths"

"Millions of needless deaths"

"Millions of needless deaths" is the title of an editorial by Life Extension Magazine's Bill Faloon.

". . . If vitamin D’s only benefit was to reduce coronary heart attack rates by 142%, the net savings (after deducting the cost of the vitamin D) if every American supplemented properly would be around $84 billion each year. That’s enough to put a major dent in the health care cost crisis that is forecast to bankrupt Medicare and many private insurance plans."

Although I don't agree with all the over-the-top commentary that issues from Mr. Faloon or Life Extension (although I sit on their Medical Advisory Board), I agree with virtually all of the issues he raises with vitamin D.

Despite the enormously compelling observations of vitamin D potential effects in populations, the medical community's reluctance comes from the lack of treatment data. In other words, what we lack are long-term data on vitamin D supplementation vs. placebo on rate of heart attack, vitamin D vs. placebo on risk of colon cancer, etc.

The data that exists connecting vitamin D levels with cardiovascular risk originate from three population observations:

1) The NHANES data in 16,000 participants showed 20% increased risk of cardiovascular events in those with vitamin D levels <20>20 ng/ml after factoring in all standard risk factors.

Another NHANES analysis showed the high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in those with cardiovascular disease.

2) A German study of 2500 participants that showed showed the lowest quartile of vitamin D levels (<13.3>28.4 ng/ml.

3) The Health Professionals' Follow-Up Study of 18,000 males showed a 2.4-fold increase in cardiovascular events in those with vitamin D levels <15>30 ng/ml.

While we lack treatment data (vitamin D vs. placebo) in a large population, we do have data that Suzie Rockway, Mary Kwasny (both from Rush University, Chicago) and I generated on the effect of vitamin D as a part of a broader treatment program on coronary calcium scores:

Effect of a Combined Therapeutic Approach of Intensive Lipid Management, Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation, and Increased Serum 25 (OH) Vitamin D on Coronary Calcium Scores in Asymptomatic Adults.
Davis W, Rockway S, Kwasny M. Amer J Ther 2008 (Dec 15).

The impact of intensive lipid management, omega-3 fatty acid, and vitamin D3 supplementation on atherosclerotic plaque was assessed through serial computed tomography coronary calcium scoring (CCS). Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction with statin therapy has not been shown to reduce or slow progression of serial CCS in several recent studies, casting doubt on the usefulness of this approach for tracking atherosclerotic progression. In an open-label study, 45 male and female subjects with CCS of >/= 50 without symptoms of heart disease were treated with statin therapy, niacin, and omega-3 fatty acid supplementation to achieve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides /=60 mg/dL; and vitamin D3 supplementation to achieve serum levels of >/=50 ng/mL 25(OH) vitamin D, in addition to diet advice. Lipid profiles of subjects were significantly changed as follows: total cholesterol -24%, low-density lipoprotein -41%; triglycerides -42%, high-density lipoprotein +19%, and mean serum 25(OH) vitamin D levels +83%. After a mean of 18 months, 20 subjects experienced decrease in CCS with mean change of -14.5% (range 0% to -64%); 22 subjects experienced no change or slow annual rate of CCS increase of +12% (range 1%-29%). Only 3 subjects experienced annual CCS progression exceeding 29% (44%-71%). Despite wide variation in response, substantial reduction of CCS was achieved in 44% of subjects and slowed plaque growth in 49% of the subjects applying a broad treatment program.


I also summed up the data as of early 2008 in a Life Extension article:

Vitamin D's Crucial Role in Cardiovascular Protection


I do agree with Mr. Faloon: It's time to take the vitamin D issue very seriously. Personally, I think it is foolhardy to not correct vitamin D deficiency, even in the absence of long-term treatment data.

Should we subject people living in tropical climates with vitamin D blood levels of 90 ng/ml to long-term observation? Though that has not yet been done, it has been done--in effect--through observations on the prevalence of diabetes, heart disease, and various cancers by latitude: the farther away from the equator, the greater the prevalence of these diseases.

That's more than good enough for me.

Comments (4) -

  • Anonymous

    1/7/2009 1:11:00 AM |

    How is it possible to reduce the risk of heart attack by 142%? I studied a different math, I guess.

  • Jenny

    1/7/2009 7:22:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    Though I have seen the research suggesting that low Vitamin D is strongly associated with diabetes, I wonder if you can comment on this study that found that there was no change on insulin sensitivity when Vitamin D levels were raised in people without diabetes.

    Glucose tolerance and vitamin D: Effects of treating vitamin D deficiency. Kamilia Tai et al.

    Your study looks very interesting, and I hope you can get it published. But because you altered several variables at once it is not possible to attribute the effect to any of the variables in isolation.

    I am eagerly awaiting more research that will see if Vitamin D supplementation actually reverses health conditions, or whether high levels are a marker of some other problem--changes in fat tissue, kidney function, etc.

  • vin

    1/8/2009 4:20:00 PM |

    Rockway,Kwasny study you quoted showed reduction in calcium count in 44% and slow progress in 49% of the people. Figure of 44% success rate is very disappointing, seeing the test subjects were given almost the same food and supplement regime as you recommend in your blog.
    What is wrong with the test? Why isn't the success rate 90%?

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 12:26:59 PM |

    While we lack treatment data (vitamin D vs. placebo) in a large population, we do have data that Suzie Rockway, Mary Kwasny (both from Rush University, Chicago) and I generated on the effect of vitamin D as a part of a broader treatment program on coronary calcium scores:

Loading