Dr. Dwight Lundell on omega-3s and CLA



An interview with Dr. Dwight Lundell, cardiac surgeon and author of the new book, "The Cure for Heart Disease."


Dr. Lundell comes to us with a unique pedigree. He is a cardiothoracic surgeon practicing in the Phoenix, Arizona, area. Despite having performed thousands of coronary bypass operations, including numerous "off-pump" procedures earning him a place in the Beating Heart Hall of Fame and a listing in Phoenix Magazine’s Top Doctors for 10 years, more recently Dr. Lundell has turned his attentions away from traditional surgical treatment and towards prevention of heart disease and.

In particular, Dr. Lundell is a vocal advocate for omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil and conjugated linoleic acid, or CLA.

When I heard about Dr. Lundell’s unique perspectives, I asked him if he’d like to tell us a little more about his ideas. Here follows a brief interview with Dr. Lundell.



You’re a vocal advocate of the role of omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil in heart disease prevention. Can you tell us how you use it?

In my book, I recommend 3 g of fish oil daily. This would normally yield about 1000 mg of EPA and DHA depending on the concentration of the supplement. This is approximately the dose that reduced sudden cardiac death by 50%, and all cause death, by 25% in patients with previous heart attack.

In patients with signs of chronic inflammation such as heart disease, obesity, arthritis, metabolic syndrome or depression or in those patients with elevation of CRP, I would recommend higher doses, 2000 to 3000 mg per day of EPA and DHA. The FDA has approved up to 3400 mg for treating patients with severely elevated triglycerides.

I personally take a 2000 mg EPA and DHA per day because I have calcium in my coronary arteries.




Of course, in the Track Your Plaque program we track coronary calcium scores. Do you track any measures of atherosclerosis in your patients to chart progression or regression?

Carotid ultrasound with measurement of IMT [intimal-medial thickness] has been shown to be a good surrogate marker for coronary disease, as has vascular reactivity in the arm. CT scanning with calcium scoring is a direct marker of coronary disease. CT does not differentiate between stable or unstable plaque but there is no good noninvasive way of doing this.

The dramatic value of CT scan calcium scoring is to demonstrate to people that they actually do have coronary disease and to motivate them to make the necessary lifestyle and nutritional changes to reduce it. CT scan with calcium scoring is a direct way to measure the progression or regression of coronary artery disease. If there is a choice between a direct measurement and indirect measurement, always choose the direct method.

Every patient treated with CLA in my clinic, experienced significant reductions in C-reactive protein. These patients were also on a weight-loss program, so I can't prove whether it was the CLA or the weight-loss that improved their inflammatory markers. In the animal model for arteriosclerosis, CLA has a dramatic effect of reducing and preventing plaque. This has not yet been proven in humans.

Normally, when people lose weight 20% or more of the loss is lean body mass (muscle) this lowers the metabolic rate and frustrates further weight-loss. My patient, from teenagers to retirees, lost no lean body mass and continued to have satisfactory weight-loss when CLA was used as part of the plan.



In reading your book, your use of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) as a principal ingredient struck me. Can you elaborate on why you choose to have your patients take CLA?

My enthusiasm for CLA is based on:

1) Safety?this is of paramount importance. Animal toxicity studies have been done, as well as multiple parameters measured in human studies, both of these are well reviewed recently in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2004:79(suppl)1132s). CLA, a naturally-occurring substance, is not toxic or harmful to animals or humans. The only negative report is by Riserus in Circulation (2002), where he found an elevated c- reactive protein; however, he used a preparation that is not commercially available and not found in nature as a single isomer.

2) Effectiveness?also critically important. A recent meta-analysis [a reanalysis of compiled data] in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2007; 85:1203-1211) demonstrated the effectiveness of CLA in causing loss of body fat in humans. The study also reconfirmed the safety of CLA.

Since we now know that atherosclerosis is an inflammatory disorder, any strategy that reduces low-grade inflammation without significant side effects would seem to be beneficial in the treatment and prevention of atherosclerosis. CLA not only has antioxidant properties, but it modulates inflammatory cascade at multiple points. CLA reduces PGE2 (in much the same way as omega-3) CLA also has been shown to reduce IL-2, tumor necrosis factor-alpha and Cox–2. It reduces platelet deposition and macrophage accumulation in plaques. It also has some beneficial effect in the PPAR [peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors, important for lipid and inflammatory-mediator metabolism] area.

Part of the effect of CLA may be because it reduces fat mass and thus the amount of pro-inflammatory cytokines produced by fat cells.

I reiterate and fully admit that CLA has not been shown to have any effect on atherosclerosis in human beings. However, the results in the standard animal models for atherosclerosis (rabbits, hamsters,APO-E knockout mice) are very dramatic.

From all I know, it appears that the effective dose for weight loss and the animal studies in atherosclerosis would be equal to about 3 g of CLA per day. The anti-inflammatory properties of CLA seem to work better in the presence of adequate blood levels of omega-3.



I’m curious how and why a busy cardiothoracic surgeon would transform his practice so dramatically. Was there a specific event that triggered your change?

The transition from a very busy surgical practice to writing and speaking about the prevention of coronary disease has not been particularly easy, but it has been very interesting. I can't really point to any specific epiphany, it was a general feeling of frustration that we were not making any progress in curing heart disease, which is what I thought I was doing when I began my medical career.

Of course, I enjoyed the technical advances, the dramatic life-saving things that you do and I did on a daily basis. American medicine is spectacularly good at managing crises and spectacularly horrible at preventing those crises.

The lipid hypothesis is old and tired, even the most aggressive statin therapy reduces risk of heart attack by about 30% in a relatively small subset of people. It's interesting that we're now looking at statins as an anti-inflammatory agent.


Thanks, Dr. Lundell. We look forward to future conversations as your experience with CLA and heart disease prevention and reversal develops!


More about Dr. Lundell's book, The Cure for Heart Disease can be found at http://www.thecureforheartdisease.net.


Note: We are planning a full Special Report on CLA for the Track Your Plaque website in future.

Comments (15) -

  • Anonymous

    9/6/2007 8:46:00 PM |

    Do you know much about the diet he recommends to decrease inflammation and heart disease?
    Thanks!

  • Dr. Davis

    9/6/2007 9:56:00 PM |

    He uses a low processed carbohydrate diet. I'm afraid I did not get too far into that aspect of things with him.

  • Anonymous

    9/6/2007 11:22:00 PM |

    Thanks for the reply. I assume by "low-processed" you mean whole grains?
    Greg

  • Dr. Davis

    9/7/2007 1:45:00 AM |

    Although I read Dr. lundell's book, I remain unsure about how tightly he advises processed carbohydrate control. He is clear on minimizing sugars and sugar-equivalents like sodas and fruit drinks. However, on questions like some grains, I remain unclear.

  • Anonymous

    9/7/2007 10:20:00 PM |

    I was under the impression that CLAs only exist in animal products and that beef is particularly rich in CLAs.  I also understood that CLAs are a form of transfat, although perhaps a beneficial form, if there is such a thing.  Do you think that adding CLA is helpful for regression of plaque?  Does TYP recommend doing so?  If so, should the CLA be via a supplement and what dosage is typical?

  • Dr. Davis

    9/8/2007 1:07:00 AM |

    We are putting together a clinical trial to examine this issue. I don't have any preconceived notions over whether CLA will work or not. The animal data for reversal of atherosclerosis is fabulous, almost too good to believe.

    The human data on weight loss is, in aggregate, modestly promising. But will it reverse atherosclerosis in humans? We're going to try and find out.

  • Jill Doss

    6/5/2008 12:40:00 AM |

    It is my understanding that CLAs are a derivative of Parent Omega 6. I have read that the correct proportions are two parts omega 6 to one part omega 3.  This is referred to as Essential Fatty Acids (EFAs).  Lack of EFAs impede the use of oxygen and oxygenation is crucial to the miochondria of a cell.  I'm interested to see what your comments are on EFAs.

  • Anonymous

    1/8/2009 12:56:00 AM |

    Are you aware Dr. Lundell's medical license was revoked in 2008 by the Arizona Medical Board?  Go here to read about him: www.azmd.gov

  • David

    4/20/2009 1:08:00 PM |

    It's true.
    http://azmd.gov/GLSuiteWeb/Repository/0/0/1/4/97d47a09-71b9-4f30-8bfe-78428be876c4.pdf

  • Jim

    8/18/2009 4:38:47 PM |

    @anon & David,

    I didn't read the whole report of the deliberations, but from reading the first one, several observations can be made:
    -Dr Lundell had retired from thoracic surgery at the time of the hearings.
    -The hearings concerned complaints about certain high risk surgeries done by Dr Lundell, as they are done by all thoracic surgeons.
    -None of this has anything to do with a nutritional approach to halting and reducing CVD.

  • Anonymous

    1/9/2010 8:48:17 PM |

    Hi! How about fresh juiced carrots? It's hec of carbo thing but is it slow, fast, should I just eat vegetables and fruits and not juice them?

  • buy jeans

    11/4/2010 5:14:15 PM |

    In my book, I recommend 3 g of fish oil daily. This would normally yield about 1000 mg of EPA and DHA depending on the concentration of the supplement. This is approximately the dose that reduced sudden cardiac death by 50%, and all cause death, by 25% in patients with previous heart attack.

  • pammi

    11/9/2010 9:50:34 AM |

    Heart  disease is one of the most  dangerous disease which takes thousands of life every years all over the world. If we know its symptoms and Treatment for heart disease. We can prevent is to large extent.

  • MIKE

    8/11/2011 6:39:19 AM |

    I've been taking fish oil since 2005.Went to a cardioligist who wrote me out a script for lipitor after my cholesterol test was a little high.Being skeptical i then went hom and researched this horrible medication and realized i could take a much healthier,cheaper and much better alternative.Well that alternative was fish oil and i'm so glad i did my research first before blindly accepting my fate.

  • Brian

    11/24/2011 11:59:44 PM |

    Given the blood-thinning properties of fish oil, is it advisable to take it along with blood thinners such as Plavix or Coumadin?

Loading
Which statin drug is best?

Which statin drug is best?

I re-post a Heart Scan Blog post from one year ago, answering the question: Which statin drug is best?

I still get this question from patients in the office and online, nearly always prompted by a TV commercial. So let me re-express my thoughts from a year ago, which have not changed on this issue.


The statin drugs can indeed play a role in a program of coronary plaque control and regression.

However, thanks to the overwhelming marketing (and lobbying and legislative) clout of the drug manufacturing industry, they play an undeserved, oversized role. I get reminded of this whenever I'm pressed to answer the question: "Which statin drug is best?"

In trying to answer this question, we encounter several difficulties:

1) The data nearly all use statins drugs by themselves, as so-called monotherapy. Other than the standard diet--you know, the American Heart Association diet, the one that causes heart disease--it is a statin drug alone that has been studied in the dozens of major trials "validating" statin drug use. The repeated failure of statin drugs to eliminate heart disease and associated events like heart attack keeps being answered by the "lower is better" argument, i.e., if 70% of heart attacks destined to occur still take place, then reduce LDL even further. This is an absurd argument that inevitably encounters a wall of limited effects.

2) The great bulk of clinical data examining both the incidence of cardiovascular events as well as plaque progression or regression have all been sponsored by the drug's manufacturer. It has been well-documnted that, when a drug manufacturer sponsors a trial, the outcome is highly likely to be in favor of that drug. Imagine Ford sponsors a $30 million study to prove that their cars are more reliable and safer. What is the likelihood that the outcome will be in favor of the competition? Very unlikely. Such is human nature.

If we were to accept the clinical trial data at face value and ignore the above issues, then I would come to the conclusion that we should be using Crestor at a dose of 40 mg per day, since that was the regimen used in the ASTEROID Trial that achieved modest reversal of coronary atherosclerotic plaque by intravascular ultrasound.

But I do not advocate such an ASTEROID-like approach for several reasons:

1) In my experience, nobody can tolerate 40 mg of Crestor for more than few weeks, a few months at most. Show me someone who can survive and tolerate Crestor 40 mg per day and I'll show you somebody who survived a 40 foot fall off his roof--sure, it happens, but it's a fluke.

2) The notion that only one drug is necessary to regress this disease is, in my view, absurd. It ignores issues like hypertension, metabolic syndrome, inflammatory phenomena, lipoprotein(a), post-prandial (after-eating) phenomena, LDL particle size, triglycerides, etc. You mean that Crestor 40 mg per day, or other high-intensity statin monotherapy should be enough to overcome all of these patterns and provide maximal potential for coronary plaque reversal? No way.

3) Plaque reversal can occur without a statin agent. While statin drugs may provide some advantage in the reduction of LDL, much of the benefit ends there. All of the other dozens of causes of coronary atherosclerotic plaque need to be addressed.

So which statin is best? This question is evidence of the brainwashing that has seized the public and my colleagues. The question is not which statin is best. The question should be: What steps do I take to maximize my chances of reversing coronary atherosclerotic plaque?

The answer may or may not involve a statin drug, regardless of the subtle differences among them.

Comments (7) -

  • Anonymous

    2/8/2009 5:04:00 PM |

    For those with atherosclerosis, I would think the most important question is how to stabilize existing plaque to prevent emboli. Then worry about the minimal reversal that is possible. But perhaps the solution to both problems is the same.

  • Anonymous

    2/9/2009 3:58:00 PM |

    K1f6 can predict who will respond favorably to statins and who will not benefit. Available from Berkely Heart Lab and other places.  Dr Davis, do you test?

  • Rick

    2/17/2009 11:01:00 AM |

    It would be great if you could follow-up this post sometime with another version, where the question is interpreted as meaning something like: "My doctor and I have agreed that I should take Vitamin D, niacin, and fish oil, eat walnuts everyday, and get more exercise, and that I also need a statin to get my cholesterol down as quickly as possible. Which statin drug would be best?" This could help us understand some of those subtle differences you mention.

  • Anonymous

    7/27/2009 10:40:04 AM |

    Statins are good for cholestrol but really should only be used for at risk patients Drug Companies have encouraged statin use for more patients than is neccessary

  • Rick

    7/29/2009 5:09:36 AM |

    Thanks, Anonymous, I understand that point. But I'd like to find out, for people who do need statins, how the statins differ, how one fixes dosage, whether there are targets beyond which doctors should withdraw the drug or reduce dosage, and so on. Any pointers to that kind of info would be great.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 8:27:47 PM |

    However, thanks to the overwhelming marketing (and lobbying and legislative) clout of the drug manufacturing industry, they play an undeserved, oversized role. I get reminded of this whenever I'm pressed to answer the question: "Which statin drug is best?"

  • Anonymous

    2/1/2011 12:09:18 PM |

    Some people have already had one or more heart attacks, and even statin sceptics seem to accept that these people can benefit from a statin. So it would be very useful if there were a post which actually compared statins from this point of view.

Loading