Is health the absence of disease?

It sounds like a word game, but is health the absence of disease?

In other words, if you're not sick, you must be well. If you don't have cancer, heart disease (overtly, that is, like angina and heart attack), the flu, diarrhea, fevers, pain someplace . . . well then, you must be well.

Of course, most of us would disagree. You can be quite unhealthy yet have no overt, explicit disease. Yet this is the philosophy followed in conventional medicine when it comes to many aspects of health.

With regards to heart disease, if you have no chest pain or breathlessness, you don't have heart disease. "Oh, all right, we'll perform a stress test to be sure." Track Your Plaque followers, as well as former President Bill Clinton, recognize the enormous pitfalls of this approach: It fails to identify the vast majority of hidden heart disease. In heart disease, the apparent lack of overt, sympatomatic "disease" does NOT equal the true absence of disease, even life-threatening.

How about nutritional supplements? Vitamin D is a perfect example. Blood levels of vitamin D of 10 ng/ml--profound deficiency--are common, yet people feel fine. Beneath the surface, blood sugar rises because of poor insulin response, hidden inflammatory responses are magnified, HDL is lower and triglycerides are higher, coronary plaque grows at an accelerated rate, colon cancer activity is heightened . . . Though you feel fine.

Can an abnormal "endothelial response" be present while you feel fine? You bet it can. This refers to the abnormal constrictive behavior of arteries that is present in many people who have hidden coronary plaque or risk for coronary plaque, but is entirely beneath consciousness.

How about a triglyceride level of 200 mg/dl, fatally high from the Track Your Plaque experience? (We aim for <60 mg/dl.) This is typical in people who follow the diets endorsed by agencies like the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association, organizations too eager to keep the money flowing from corporate sponsors and thereby offer us their advice based more on politics and less on health. Triglyceride levels of 200 mg/dl cause no symptoms.


At so many levels, the absence of disease is NOT the same as health. Health is something that is expressed by, yes, feeling good, but it's also measured by so many other factors hidden beneath the surface. An annual physical is one lame effort to address this aspect of "health." But it needs to go farther, much farther.

Heart scan, lipoprotein testing, vitamin D blood level--those are the basic requirements to go beyond the shortsighted practice of the conventional approach in the world of heart disease.

Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs





Take a look at the list of ingredients in Cocoa Puffs: corn, sugar, corn syrup--all high glycemic index foods.

In other words, Cocoa Puffs is the physiologic equivalent of pure table sugar. Sure, it comes packaged with this wacky bird and the back of the box usually has fun games and offers. There's also the clever, fast-paced TV commercials to remind you of how fun Cocoa Puffs can be.


What is the actual consequence of a breakfast of a food like Cocoa Puffs in a cup of skim milk? That's easy: A big surge in insulin and blood sugar (from the corn and sugar), a drop in HDL cholesterol, surge in triglycerides (from the sugar and sugar-equivalents), increase in small LDL. Beyond this, you raise blood pressure and experience an insatiable increase in appetite. Then you get fat.

Obviously, none of this is desirable. Then why does the American Heart Association allow its Heart CheckMark endorsement on the package?

The Heart Association is trapped in 1982. Low-fat was in, saturated fat was the sole enemy of heart disease.

In 1982, the evils of small LDL, for instance, were unappreciated. LDL cholesterol was LDL cholesterol--all of it was bad and saturated fats seem to raise LDL. But the story has evolved enormously since then: LDL is not all the same. Small LDL is among the principal culprits in heart disease, the same small LDL hugely magnified by Cocoa Puffs and other similar products that fill 70% of supermarket shelves.

The American Heart Association needs to get with the times. The conversation on healthy diets has progressed considerably. Yet garbage foods that wreak havoc on health like Cocoa Puffs continue to be endorsed by an organization that still carries substantial clout with the American consumer.

My advice: Until they change their tune, anything that carries the endorsement of the American Heart Association should be eliminated from your diet.

Further validation of the Track Your Plaque 60:60:60 targets

The latest analysis of the data from Treat to New Targets (TNT) Trial shows that higher HDL cholesterol values are associated with reduced risk of heart attack, even in those with low LDL cholesterol values.

This counters the argument that some have made that, if a person takes a statin drug, raising HDL adds no additional benefit.

In the 9770-participant trial (randomized, double-blind), participants were given atorvastatin (Lipitor®) 10 mg or 80 mg per day. The study was sponsored by Pfizer, the manufacturer of Lipitor®. All participants were survivors of heart attacks, significant coronary disease by heart catheterization, or had previously undergone coronary angioplasty, stent placement, or bypass surgery—a high-risk group.

At the third month of enrollment, lipid (cholesterol panel) values were obtained and used as the basis for analysis. Participants on 80 mg atorvastatin achieved an average LDL cholesterol (Friedewald) of 77 mg/dl; participants taking 10 mg achieved a level of 101 mg/dl. Using these values, 8.7% of participants taking the higher dose of drug experienced an event, compared to 10.9% on the lower dose (which the investigators called a 22% relative reduction).

However, when the groups were re-analyzed by HDL cholesterol levels, higher HDLs remained predictive of less heart attack and other events, with the group having the highest HDL of =55 mg/dl experiencing 25% less events. Most interestingly, this effect was upheld even in participants with very low LDL cholesterols of <70 mg/dl.

I'm always a bit leery of drug company-sponsored studies, especially ones in which virtually all the participants tolerated a drug like Lipitor 80 mg, a dose in my experience that is very poorly tolerated for more than a few months. (Muscle aches are, in my experience, inevitable. I do not even recommend this dose.) In other words, the data are, in that respect, too good to believe.

Anyway, despite my reservations about these big money studies, there was nothing to gain from the HDL observation. (Of course, at one time, there would have been, given Pfizer's efforts to commercialize the now-kaput torcetrapib, scrapped because of excess mortality in phase II trials.)

Thankfully, there's other data that likewise suggest that the higher the HDL, the better. Yet more validation for the Track Your Plaque lipid targets of LDL 60 mg/dl, triglycerides 60 mg/dl or less, HDL 60 mg/dl or greater.



Copyright 2007 William Davis,MD

My sister called today . . .

My younger sister, aged 48 years (sorry, sis), called this morning.

"I'm going to my doctor today. What labs should I tell him to draw?" she asked.

"Why do you have to tell him? Can't you just ask him what he thinks should be drawn?"

"No," she said. "He just draws what I tell him to."


Maybe my sister is bossier than most. But I've heard this from many patients, as well. They go to their primary care physician and end up requesting this or that test. Sometimes their doctor complies. Often, they resist and refuse to do so.

I've heard many complaints from patients about doctors refusing to order even fairly benign tests like a vitamin D blood level or lipoproteins, even a C-reactive protein.

The number of these sorts of complaints seems to be growing. Ten years ago, it rarely happened. Today, I hear this nearly every day.

I think it is symptomatic of the growing discontent we all have with the status quo in healthcare. We are all expected to submit to the paternalistic, what-can-you-possibly-know mentality that still rules the day in medical offices. Only 40-50 years ago, if you wanted to look at a medical book, you'd have to ask the librarian for special permission so that they could make sure you weren't just a pervert trying to look at naked bodies. Today, every manner of medical and health information can be found online. Quite a contrast.

We are entering a new age, one in which people are far better informed, have surfed the internet and read media reports on health topics, have been exposed to drug company advertising, and know a fair amount about nutritional supplements. I think the system needs to change to accommodate this rapidly growing hyper-knowledgeable society.

In past, when a health problem turned up, you'd turn to your doctor first. I predict that,in the next few years, we will use the doctor as a place of last resort, the person we turn to when all else has failed, after you've exhausted your information sources.

I hope that the Track Your Plaque process will become one of the engines of change, an information resource that provides empowering tools that don't replace your doctor, but provide many information tools that are superior and may minimize your reliance on a health care provider.


Copyright 2007 William Davis, MD

Failure to diagnose

I picked up a hospital publication today. Featured prominently on the cover was a glossy photo of an attorney and his wife, both smiling.

The headline: "Atorney grateful for the lifesaving work of the ______ Hospital."

The story detailed the near-tragic story of how this 59-year old man was exercising at his local gym, only to lose consciousness after stepping off one of the exercise machines. Bystanders--hospital employees, as luck would have it--checked the man's pulse: none. They performed CPR. Ambulance called, blah blah blah.

Severe coronary disease discovered, extensive atherosclerotic plaque in all three coronary arteries, a 12-inch chest incision later and he and his wife are eternally grateful for the fine work done at X hospital. And so they should be for a job well done.

But wait a minute. After the urgent hospital dust settled, did anyone ask the one crucial question: Why wasn't this man's far-advanced heart disease identified? Why did he have to die and be resuscitated before his disease was recognized?

If this man was an indigent, homeless alcoholic . . . well, perhaps it would be no surprise. Health is neglected in this population. But a successful attorney?

Detecting hidden coronary atherosclerotic plaque simply isn't that tough. In Milwaukee, $199 would have diagnosed his disease unequivocally.

Unfortunately, we still have to set off drumrolls and crash cymbals to even begin to get the attention of the practicing physicians around us who continue to fail to diagnose hidden coronary disease. I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear if this man had a $4000 nuclear stress recently that was normal. Why would a nuclear stress test be normal? Easy: Wrong test.

The hidden message: The failure to diagnose paid somebody and some hospital over $100,000. So, why bother detecting disease before the payoff?

The profit motive in all this is all too obvious. The only other explanation is the enormous, repetitive, and systematic stupidity of the conventional approach to heart disease detection. You have the solution, at least for you and the people around you, in a CT heart scan and in the Track Your Plaque program.


Copyright 2007 William Davis, MD

Interview with world heart scan authority, Dr. John Rumberger












Dr. John Rumberger has, from its start, been a good friend of the Track Your Plaque program.

We are very proud to have his friendship. Dr. Rumberger is not only a world-renowned scientist in the world of cardiac imaging and heart scanning, but also a humanitarian and gentleman. From the very first day I met Dr. Rumberger many years ago, when he answered my many silly and naive questions about heart scans, I came to appreciate his deep and genuine interest in improving the world of heart disease detection.

I tracked Dr. Rumberger down from his busy schedule, now on a new project at the Princeton Longevity Center in Princeton, New Jersey.




TYP: Dr. Rumberger, we understand that your career has taken a new direction. Can you tell us about your current project?

Dr. Rumberger: I have not really taken a new direction, but further expanded on my opportunities.

I remain Medical Director of PrevaHealth Wellness Diagnostic Center (formerly Healthwise) in Columbus, Ohio. At that center, we see patients referred by their doctors for further refinement in cardiac risk stratification using heart and body scanning. However, by only doing scans alone there are limited opportunities for me to react in a meaningful way with the individual patients and thus I miss opportunities to do direct one-on-one teaching.

Currently, I spend most of my time in Princeton, NJ as Director of Cardiac Imaging for the Princeton Longevity Center. At the PLC, we perform comprehensive medical examinations along with screening CT scans, blood work, fitness and diet consultation to affect a more thorough one-on-one experience. Each patient then receives a comprehensive de-briefing.

In addition, since I have been involved with cardiac CT for now nearly 24 years, the PLC also affords me an opportunity to develop a CT coronary angiography training program for cardiologists and radiologists (www.cardiaccta.us). Together, these new efforts are merely an extension of my interests in prevention, patient care, and teaching.



TYP: Based on your book, The Way Diet, we understand that you advocate gravitating away from processed foods and incorporating more nuts, monounsaturated oils, lean proteins like fish, and a reduction in processed carbohydrates. You’ve also been a proponent of the Mediterranean diet that demonstrated a dramatic reduction in cardiovascular events in the Lyon Heart Study.

Has your philosophy or practice regarding nutritional strategies evolved or changed in any way since your book was published?

Dr. Rumberger: No, the strategies put forward in The Way Diet have, if anything, been reinforced by further and further research in selecting foods that are naturally high in anti-oxidants with lean sources of protein and reduced intake of processed sugar-containing preparations. The book, however, is what I call a ‘philosophy’ book which looks at three major aspects: proper diet, adequate exercise, and stress management. I also include some recipes which follow the dietary plans, but are done using ingredients that are commonly found in the average home.



TYP: We regard you as the source of much of the wisdom in heart scanning as the basis for early heart disease detection. Much of the original and subsequent scientific data, in fact, bears your name. Can you touch on some of the new directions your research has taken over the past couple of years?

Dr. Rumberger: We have come a long way from the beginning and there is a long way to go to get this incorporated into routine preventive care in the United States.

The most recent research has provided not so much more information as continuing to reinforce the old research. As I always say: if your research continues to show the same thing, then maybe there is a clear pattern here! The biggest challenge is getting this message into the mainstream and also trying to get cardiologists (and internists and, in fact, the general public) away from ‘stenosis’ detection to define the real cause of heart attacks (plaque) and into ‘plaque detection.’ This is where basic heart scanning has the greatest potential to reduce the expanding burden of heart disease.

You may be aware of our SHAPE initiave in which an international group of cardiologists and scientists have advocated getting a heart scan FIRST and then, if abnormal, checking your cholesterol values; rather than using cholesterol (which is valuable, but highly variable in predictive power) to determine who needs medications or further testing. The heart scan can define the current level of plaque and THEN you can determine what to do about it. [See the Track Your Plaque report on the release of the Shape Guidelines at SHAPE Guidelines]



TYP: We understand that you are performing CT coronary angiography in your center. What are your thoughts on the role of CTA in 1) screening for coronary disease, and 2) its role in the diagnostic process?

Dr. Rumberger: CT coronary angiography (CTA) is an incredible method to really define the extent of disease, beyond just coronary calcium. Its role is most appropriate in ruling OUT a significant ‘stenosis’ while really defining the absence or presence (and thus ‘how much’) of plaque. It is the ultimate ‘plaque detector’. CTA is best used in patients who have some symptoms, but in whom the clinician feels may NOT have clear cardiac chest pain. By risk-stratifying using CTA, we also gain information about heart size, heart function, whether there is prior heart damage, as well as other important information. This then becomes a very universal means to risk-stratifying individuals.



TYP: Thanks for your wonderful insights, Dr. Rumberger! We look forward to hearing about your future projects and research directions.





About John Rumberger, PhD, MD:

Dr. Rumberger is among the world's leading authorities on cardiac and vascular imaging using EBT and CT Scanning. Dr. Rumberger was among the first to pioneer the use of new CT technologies for heart scanning. He currently serves as Director of Cardiac Imaging at the Princeton Longevity Center, Princeton, NJ.

Dr. Rumberger is formerly Professor of Medicine and Consultant in the Department of Cardiovascular Diseases at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Dr. Rumberger received his doctorate in engineering from The Ohio State University in 1976 and graduated from the University of Miami School of Medicine in 1978.

During his over 20 year career as a clinician, educator, and researcher, Dr. Rumberger has published nearly 500 scientific papers and book chapters. He has lectured worldwide on EBT, early heart disease diagnosis, and wellness. He is an Established Investigator of the American Heart Association and a Founding Member of the International Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging. Dr Rumberger is an active Reviewer for the Journal of the American Medical Association, Archives of Internal Medicine, and the New England Journal of Medicine.

Summer in Wisconsin

It's been a glorious summer in Wisconsin.

For weeks straight, we've enjoyed bright, sunny days with temperatures in the 70s and 80s. Even now, in late September, our windows are wide open and the days are warm and sunny. Yesterday, it was 84 degrees. Yes, it did rain for a stretch of about 10 days in August, but for the most part it has been a wonderfully sunny summer.

So it struck Andy as a big surprise when we checked his 25-OH-vitamin D3 blood level: 15 ng/ml--severe deficiency.

"I don't get it. I'm outside almost every day. Look at me! How do you think I got this tan?"

Indeed, Andy sported a nice dark tan over exposed areas.

In fact, Andy was among the dozen or so people this month with deficiencies of this magnitude.

Deficiency is not the exception; it is the rule. Of course, if Andy's blood level is at the level of severe deficiency in September, he will only trend lower over the next few weeks and months. He would likely have shown vitamin D blood levels of <10 ng/ml by January--profound deficiency.

With deficiency of this severity, Andy has been exposing himself to risk for prostate and colon cancer, diabetes and metabolic syndrome, low HDL, higher triglycerides, higher blood sugars, higher C-reactive protein, osteoporosis, arthritis . . .

Correcting the deficiency is easy. But, as you can see, getting sun is not always the answer. Even with an active, outdoor lifestyle and a tan, Andy still remained significantly deficient. Oral replacement with vitamin D3, or cholecalciferol, is an absolute necessity.

Wacky statin effects

In general, I try to exhaust possibilities before resorting to the statin drugs. But we still do use them, both in general practice and the Track Your Plaque program.

There are indeed a number of ways to reduce, minimize, or eliminate the need for these drugs. For instance, if your LDL is 150 mg/dl but comprised of 90% small particles, then a reduction in wheat and other high-glycemic index foods, weight loss, fish oil, and niacin can yield big drops in LDL.

But sometimes we need them. Say LDL is 225 mg/dl and is a mix of large and small. Exercise, weight loss, niacin, oat bran, ground flaxseed, Benecol, etc. and LDL: 198 mg/dl. Alright, that's when statins may be unavoidable. There's also many people who are not as motivated as all of us trying to reverse heart disease. Some just want the easy way out. Statins do indeed provide that option in some people.

So in truth, we end up using these drugs fairly regularly. How common are muscle aches and fatigue? In my experience, they are universal . If taken long enough, or if high doses are used, muscle complaints are inevitable. Most of the time, thankfully, they're modest and often relieved with a change in drug or with coenzyme Q10 supplementation.












But there's more to statin side effects than muscle aches. Among the wacky effects that I have witnessed with statin drugs:

--Insomnia-especially with simvastatin (Zocor and Vytorin). Insomnia can be quite severe, in fact, with difficulty sleeping more than 3-4 hours a night.

--Bone aches--I don't know why this happens, unless it's somehow related to muscle aches. I've seen this with all the statins, but more commonly with Crestor.

--Memory impairment--a la Dr. Duane Graveline's wacky book, Lipitor: Thief of Memory. I've seen this with Lipitor, though it's uncommon, and less commonly with simvastatin (Zocor, Vytorin).

--Diarrhea--More common with Zetia and Vytorin (which contains Zetia), because of the inhibition of bile acid reabsorption.

--Migraine headaches--This I certainly do not understand, but the cause-effect relationship is undoubtedly true in an occasional person.

--Low libido--In men more than women, though it may be more due to men being more willing to admit to it.

--Increased appetite--Rare, though I've seen dramatic instances.

--Tinnitus--Ringing in the ears. I've only seen it with Lipitor and Zocor.


In their defense (and in general I am no defender of the drug manufacturers), most people do fine with statin drugs, though the majority do eventually require coenzyme Q10 in my experience. By the way, coenzyme Q10 can be an indispensable aid to help tolerate statin agents.

I'd love to hear about your wacky experiences.

Track Your Plaque goes global

I don't use this space to toot my horn (at least I don't too often), but we were looking at the listings of our viewers and members. I was surprised to learn that we now have Track Your Plaque followers in 15 different countries around the world!

We have members from Europe including England, Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium, and the Czech Republic. We have members from as far away as South Africa, Australia, India, Singapore, Thailand, and China.

I see the entire Track Your Plaque process as a grand experiment. Never before in history has a system of health been delivered via a communication medium like the web. The internet provides more interactivity than television, it's more fluid than a book, it's more dynamic and evolves more rapidly than a face-to-face interaction. While we cannot be hands-on over the internet, we can still deliver all the crucial information and, hopefully, the knowledge on how to get it done.



Track Your Plaque is part of an even grander experiment: The movement to shift control over health away from the medical system, doctors, and hospitals and back to individuals. When you think about it, the idea that "health" (more acurately sickness) should be managed by people and institutions (e.g., hospitals and insurance companies) outside of the individual is a 20th century concept. I predict that this notion will also become a relic of the 20th century.

Someday, we will look back and laugh at the folly of the 20th century style of paternalistic health care. Perhaps it was a necessary step in the sequence to transform health to a better system that returns control to the individual. But it's clearly time for a change.

Track Your Plaque is an example of the extraordinary power that can be taken by a lone individual with only minimal assistance of a health care provider. I see Track Your Plaque members who understand heart disease (at least the coronary disease aspect) far better than 95% of my cardiology colleagues, 100% of my internal medicine and family practice colleagues. Physicians maintain a role, but their role has shrunk and receded. They should be facilitators of success in health, educators, a resource to turn to when we need help. It's not that way today. It will be in 50 years.

But, right now, we can get started on this wonderfully self-empowering--liberating-- movement by participating in this global experiment known as Track Your Plaque, the program with the goofy name that has the potential to usurp and unravel this enormous institutionalized system of health care the world has created.

Go to your corners

There's a heated debate being waged on the Heart Hawk Blog

Dr. Melissa Walton-Shirley authored an editorial entitled It Should Be the Right of All Americans to Have Primary Percutaneous-Based Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndrome .

Heart Hawk's response:

Dr. Walton-Shirley feels the best use of time, talent, and money is to build more cath labs and train more people in how to use them so that IF you have a heart attack, you stand a better chance of being pulled back from the brink of death. Unfortunately, you have to first let people get so sick that they are about to die. My position is to use those same resources to prevent such disasters from happening in the first place. Take your pick. You cannot spend the money twice.

I am no stranger to "direct angioplasty," meaning performing immediate coronary angioplasty (with stenting) for heart attack. Since 1990, I have personally performed hundreds, perhaps over a thousand of these procedures, particularly when I was younger and my practice was procedurally-focused. But, after a few years, I quickly recognized the futility of this approach. Yes, you might have aborted a heart attack ,perhaps even saved a life at the brink of death. But wouldn't it have been better to have prevented the entire episode in the first place?

In my mind, putting a cath lab on every corner, as Dr. Walton-Shirley suggests, is like having a fire truck on every street to prevent a house from burning down. It's an enormously expensive proposition that provides no incentive to prevent fires. Why not spend the money on preventing the fires?

Expanding access to cath lab procedures is putting the fox in the henhouse. Procedures yield money--big money--for hospitals and cardiologists. Guess what happens when you build facilities that exceed the need? Yes--the number of procedures grows, whether or not they were needed.

In my view, Dr. Shirley-Walton's opinions are symptomatic of the profit-driven, procedurally-focused quick-fixes that divert money that would be far better spent on effective dissemination of preventive practices.
Buy local, get a goiter

Buy local, get a goiter

The notion of buying food locally--"buy local"--i.e., food produced in your area, state, or region, is catching on.

And for good reason: Not only do you support your local economy, buying locally saves energy, since food doesn't have to be transported from South America or other faraway locations.

But what about those of us in the Midwest, particularly around the Great Lakes basin, i.e., the region previously known as the "goiter belt"? In the early 20th century, up to a third of the residents of this region had enlarged thyroid glands, or goiters, due to iodine deficiency. Lack of iodine causes the thyroid to enlarge, or "hypertrophy," in an effort to more efficiently extract any available iodine in the blood.

Well, there's been a resurgence of iodine deficiency nationwide with 11.3% of the population severely deficient, representing a four-fold increase since the 1970s.

Why an iodine deficiency? Because more people are avoiding iodized salt, the principal source of iodine for Americans since the FDA introduced its voluntary program for iodization of table salt back in 1924. Approximately 90% of the patients I ask now declare that they use very little iodized table salt. While a few take multimineral or multivitamin supplements that contain iodine, the majority do not. The globalization of the food supply--eat global--however, has softened the blow, since we eat tomatoes from Mexico, blueberries from Argentina, lettuce from the Salinas Valley of California.

Now, we have the growing trend to eat local. In the Midwest, it means that the vegetables, fruits, and meats grown locally will also be iodine depleted, since the soil is also iodine-poor, being so far from the sea.

Ironically, two healthy trends--avoiding salt and eating local--will be accounting for a surge in unsightly neck bulges in the Midwest, as well as an increase in thyroid disease.

The lesson: Avoid salt, eat local, but mind your iodine.

Comments (19) -

  • mike V

    4/3/2009 6:56:00 PM |

    Dr Davis:

    PREVENTION v PREVENTION!
    A curious thing but I wonder if you mid-westerners really need to be giving up iodized salt at all if you are taking care of your potassium and magnesium?
    When you get time, please let us know your patient findings on mineral status.
    "Lite" salt contains a % of potassium which may be  iodized. Of course one's ability to take potassium maybe compromised by some medications.

    Mike V

    *************************
    UK ARTICLE
    Is salt REALLY so bad for your blood pressure?
    By Jerome Burne
    30th March 2009

    It's been demonised for years. But suddenly experts are asking whether we're missing the bigger picture about salt...

    We're all eating too much salt and it's going to give us high blood pressure - that's the message we've heard for years, but now new research suggests salt is being wrongly demonised.
    A recent study suggests that by concentrating on the effects of salt we could be missing the bigger picture. That's because salt doesn't affect blood pressure on its own; it does so with another mineral we get in our diet - potassium.
    Blood pressure is constantly being raised and lowered - salt is involved in raising pressure by tightening arteries, while potassium is part of the relaxation system. So making sure you have enough potassium is vital.
    Salty snack: Research has found that eating more salt does not necessarily raise the risk of heart disease
    This was highlighted in the study from Loyola University in Chicago. Researchers measured the amount of salt in the urine, an accurate way of measuring how much had been consumed, and found no significant difference in the risk of heart disease whether patients had been eating a lot or a little. What did reduce the risk, however, was the ratio of salt to its balancing mineral potassium.
    The new study 'is a quantum leap in the quality of the data', says lead author Dr Paul Whelton, an epidemiologist and president of the university's health division. That's because it followed nearly 3,000 patients for between ten and 15 years.
    Whelton now believes many of us need to significantly increase our potassium intake to help our arteries.
    'To lower blood pressure and dampen the effects of salt, adults should consume 4.7grams of potassium per day,' he says.
    The British recommended daily dose of potassium is only 3.5g. Foods high in potassium include potatoes, sweet potatoes, yoghurt, tuna, lima beans and bananas.
    'To lower blood pressure and dampen the effects of salt, adults should consume 4.7grams of potassium per day'
    _______________________________________

    As for salt, Dr Whelton and colleagues from America's Institute of Medicine say we should stick to less than 6g (a teaspoon) a day, which is the same as the existing UK guidelines.
    But his study is not the only one to raise questions about conventional approaches to this problem.
    A review of the evidence published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) seven years ago found that while cutting back on salt might help those taking medication for high blood pressure, the research showed no clear benefits for everyone doing it.

    Even more extraordinarily, in 2005, researchers at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York published the results of a 13-year study that had followed 7,000 men and women - this showed that people who consumed less than 6g of salt a day actually had a ********'raised' risk of heart disease.*********

    The author of that study, Dr Hillel Cohen, says this was only an observation, and more work is needed to establish why this trend was found. 'But it does suggest a set limit of salt for everyone doesn't work,' he adds.

    Effective or not, cutting back on salt makes up only a small part of the regime recommended for anyone with raised blood pressure, which is also known as hypertension.
    The first step is usually a version of the Dash (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diet that recommends fruits, vegetables, and low-fat dairy foods, and which has been shown to be effective in bringing blood pressure down. But this can be hard to follow if you've been eating less healthily for years.
      Eating a healthy amount of potassium in your diet can offset the impact salt has on raising blood pressure
    Dr Peter Berkin is a GP in Milton Keynes who favours treating chronic disorders with diet where possible.
    'Doctors always recommend weight loss and improving your diet but they rarely have the time or facilities to help patients to make and stick with the changes,' he says.
    The result is that after six weeks or so, most patients are prescribed drugs to lower their blood pressure.
    An estimated ten million people in the UK have high blood pressure, and in England alone millions of prescriptions are written for drugs to treat them every year. But are drugs the best way to treat the problem?

    What patients are often not told is the numbers of people who have to be treated with a drug in order for just one person to benefit.
    In the case of elderly patients with mild hypertension, of every 76 patients who take the drug, one will avoid a stroke, according to Michael Oliver, professor emeritus of cardiology at the University of Edinburgh, writing in the BMJ.
    Professor Oliver was also concerned about the side-effects of these drugs that benefit so few. 'Reduction of mild hypertension can lead to vertigo, particularly in elderly people,' he wrote.

    The drugs have a range of other effects. Diuretics, which make you go to the loo more often, reducing the volume of water in the blood and in turn lowering blood pressure, can cause gout.

    Calcium channel blockers, which relax the arteries, can bring on headaches, while ACE inhibitors, which work by stopping the blood vessels from narrowing, often cause a nasty cough.

    More seriously, several of these drugs are now linked, ironically, with a raised risk of heart disease.
    One study of 1,860 men followed over 17 years found that ^^^^^^those treated with diuretics were 23 per cent more likely to have a heart attack********* than those who weren't.
    Another widely used class of drug is the beta-blocker. These work by blocking a natural substance that causes the arteries to narrow and the heart to beat faster, enabling the arteries to widen again.
    However, using these actually raises heart problems, according to a review by doctors at St Luke's Roosevelt Hospital in New York. They found that patients given beta-blockers had more heart attacks and more strokes.
    'A study found that people who consumed less than 6g of salt a day had a *****raised risk of heart disease'******
    _______________________________________

    The reason could be that most of the studies involved a widely used beta-blocker, atenolol. Worryingly, even though the problems with atenolol have been known for years, 14 million prescriptions for it were written in England and Wales in 2007.

    'Atenolol should not be given to anybody,' says Dr John Cockcroft of the Wales Heart Institute in Cardiff. 'Nobody disagrees atenolol is guilty, yet we are still using it.'
    Drugs certainly bring dangerously high blood pressure down, and for those with high blood pressure they are a lifesaver. But do people with only slightly elevated blood pressure really need them? Research shows that 167 patients need to take the drugs for a single person to benefit.
    A number of GPs believe that more could be done to help people simply with diet and lifestyle.

    'Around 33 per cent of people aged 25 to 55 have borderline hypertension,' says Dr Adam Carey, a nutrition expert who runs a corporate health programme helping employees to get fit, as well as advising the Welsh rugby union team on nutrition.

    'We can get that down to 9 per cent without using drugs, but by giving them a structured programme of diet and exercise.
    'The key is to cut out refined carbohydrates such as white flour and sugar. These foods push up your blood sugar level, and the body stores the extra sugar as fat.
      
    Foods high in potassium include potatoes, sweet potatoes, yoghurt, tuna, lima beans and bananas
    'Eating carbohydrates that haven't been refined, such as brown rice and wholegrains, smoothes out the sudden spikes and troughs of blood sugar that come with sweets and pastries.'

    The American study showed, raising your potassium is important. But there is another pair of minerals involved in controlling blood pressure in the same way as the sodium in salt and potassium do - calcium and magnesium.

    While calcium tightens the blood vessels, magnesium relaxes them. The recommended daily allowance for magnesium is 300 to 400mg and it is found, together with potassium, in green leafy vegetables, nuts and seeds. One of the effects of diuretics can be to flush magnesium and potassium out of the body.

    Relaxation techniques such as meditation can help, too. Anxiety pushes up your blood pressure by raising levels of hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol.

  • P

    4/3/2009 7:28:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis, can you suggest a good omega-3 capsule? I know you have previously mentioned that one can use any omega-3 we get at Costco. I used Naturemade (or Nature's own, I do not remember the name right now) omega-3 capsules. HOWEVER, they have started smelling fishy these last few days! Obviously the oil in them has gone rancid! The capsules are not supposed to expire till 2011, so its really bothering me that they turned bad so soon. I store them in my pantry which is cool and dark, so the capsules were not exposed to harsh sunlight.

  • Anonymous

    4/3/2009 7:56:00 PM |

    Dr.Davis

    This is very informative.
    What is the best base level of Iodine daily to promote thyroid health?

    Thanks for you great blog!

    Aaron

  • David

    4/3/2009 8:10:00 PM |

    So iodine aside, I'm curious as to your take about the whole salt issue. Taubes touches on it in Good Calories, Bad Calories, and essentially looks to insulin --not salt-- as the villain in blood pressure problems. NHANES III seems to help things along in that direction as well: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18465175

    I would grant that high salt intake might be a problem for a certain percentage of sensitive individuals, but I kind of doubt that percentage is all that high. I also wonder if sodium sensitivity in some people has more to do with other factors, such as magnesium deficiency (since magnesium regulates sodium) than with sodium actually being malicious in and of itself. *shrugs*

    Some say that the chemically processed, straight sodium chloride is what causes the problems, and that a good full-spectrum sea salt is the way to go, as it contains all the original trace minerals to balance things out. I use Redmond RealSalt (I love the taste). I've known three people now who have gotten on the RealSalt (in large quantities) only to have their blood pressure go down. With no other changes. I don't really understand it, but it's interesting, and helps to further my skepticism about the supposedly universal salt/BP connection.

  • Sabio

    4/4/2009 2:55:00 AM |

    Loved this entry (a fellow paleo) -- thank you for your blog. I added my own libertarian take on it.

  • xenolith_pm

    4/4/2009 3:38:00 AM |

    Eat two Egglands Best eggs a day and you'll get your daily allowance of iodine.

    Or, just a pinch of dry sea kelp in your tea will do the same.

    Or, just a single daily serving of seafood (any of the wild finfishes, roe [fish eggs], crustaceans, or mollusks) should do the trick too.

    Unfortunately, sea salt (unless it's been purposely iodized) has only a small, insignificant trace amount of iodine.

  • Braesikalla

    4/4/2009 8:52:00 AM |

    Iodine seems to upregulate the sensitivity of steroid receptors. There is anecdotal evidence that in the case of diabetes the amount of injected insulin (which is a steroid hormone) has to be drastically reduced to avoid severe side effects like hypoglycaemia ( http://www.healthy-eating-politics.com/diabetes-iodine.html ).
    Since vitamin d is actually a steroid hormone, too, could it be that the recommended range of sufficiency (60-80 ng/dl) has to be adjusted for someone who is on iodine supplementation and therefore likely has increased steroid receptor sensitivity?
    Any thoughts?

  • Dr. William Davis

    4/4/2009 12:42:00 PM |

    Mike V--

    Admittedly, "avoid salt" is a generalization.

    There are genetic types who gain little by minimizing salt. Then there are people at the other end of the spectrum who gain visibly and dramatically with salt restriction, e.g., drops in systolic BP 30+ mmHg, weight (water) reductions of many lbs, even changes in blood electrolytes.

    Salt is one of those things that is handled in dramatically different ways among different humans.

  • Kismet

    4/5/2009 11:18:00 AM |

    David, I believe there's also increased stomach cancer risk with salt...

  • Anna

    4/5/2009 8:25:00 PM |

    It's easy to avoid salt imbalances if one avoids processed foods, as processed foods contain lots of sodium, very little potassium and magnesium.

    Eating real foods one prepares at home may be salted with sea salt with little worry of taking in too much salt.  I tend to think that the association of disease with salt is a marker for malnutrition and poor nutrition from a crappy SAD diet, too high in carbs, too low in protein and natural fats, and deficient in multiple micronutrients.  

    Taubes wrote a great article in Science a few years back on the soft (political) science behind the salt restriction advice.  That's eventually what moved him to investigate the fat/cholesterol hypothesis, because the most influential salt restriction theorist was such a "bad" scientist and bragged so much about his influence that Taubes' skepticism went on high alert.

  • David

    4/5/2009 10:29:00 PM |

    Kismet,

    I won't argue that point, but I would question it, just because I think more information would be helpful. A lot of the studies on salt and stomach cancer that I've seen are observational in nature. Observational studies are useful as far as they go, but they're not good at proving causality. In other words, perhaps it's true that people who get stomach cancer eat a lot of salt. But is the salt actually causing the cancer? People who eat a lot of salt also eat a lot of nitrates-- in fact the two often go together. So which is it that causes the cancer? Salt or nitrates? We can't tell from the observational studies, because there are still too many variables to narrow down the relationship.

    Maybe lots of salt does cause stomach cancer. I honestly don't know what to think. But I do think that caution is needed when evaluating observational studies for the purpose of establishing causality, especially when they are so often contradictory (see another study on salt and stomach cancer here that shows an opposite conclusion from the mainstream: http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/reprint/1/7/607.pdf)

    David

  • freecicero

    4/7/2009 12:37:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis:

    What do you think of the ideas of those who advocate drastically increasing iodine intake to Japanese levels?

    Examples:

    http://www.optimox.com/pics/Iodine/opt_Research_I.shtml

    Radio inteviews Dr. Stan, Dr. Blaylock, Dr. Flechas:

    http://curezone.com/ig/f.asp?f=1723

  • Anonymous

    4/8/2009 4:56:00 PM |

    Lack of iodized salt may not be as big an issue as lack of iodine in store bought baked goods. We absorb only 10% of the iodine in salt but 90% of the iodine in baked goods. Bakeries used to condition doughs with iodine but now use bromine which competes with iodine. We are now under-Iodiniated and over-Brominated.

  • Anonymous

    4/8/2009 4:58:00 PM |

    Braesikalla, insulin is not a steriod hormone, it is a peptide.

  • Trinkwasser

    4/12/2009 2:13:00 PM |

    I've seen localised clusters of goiters in Europe but hadn't realised you had such a large zone of iodine depletion.

    Here (UK) we have localised areas of other mineral shortages, animal farmers have to put out salt licks or add magnesium, manganese etc. to the feed, and some arable and vegetable farmers need to mineralise their soil. There are large areas deficient in selenium (and I believe in some parts of China it is at near toxic levels) your local farmer may be someone to ask about your local conditions.

    They told me to eat less salt and my BP kept going up, plus I started getting leg cramps. I ate less carbs and it came back down, they didn't tell me that one! I believe the population of salt sensitive hypertensives is quite low, yet they tell the rest of us to avoid it as well.

    Strangely when I was chomping sodium bicarbonate (acid reflux) I started getting leg cramps again, that time adding magnesium sorted them (and my electrolytes came back spot on) the interrelationship can be complex.

  • Dane Miller

    4/16/2009 2:27:00 PM |

    Who avoids salt?  That seems ridiculous.  Especially if you exercise, you need even more salt.

  • fierce4nations

    5/24/2009 3:50:01 AM |

    High salt levels can build up in your body and chlorine (chloride from the sodium chloride aka table salt) can displace the nessesary iodine in your body especially from thyroid. This can cause health problems including goiters. Iodine can be relaced by consuming it in small amounts. One very effective way is by adding small amounts of Lugol's solution of iodine in your drinking water. A couple of drops per liter is enough. Pure iodine itself will not dissolve in water therefore you must have some type of iodine solution in order to properly intake it.
    You can easily make your own Lugol's Iodine. Here is the formula: (adjust it to your desired amount by multiplying or dividing the factors)
    10 grams of potassium iodide
    5 grams of pure iodine (crystals, prills, or flakes)
    85 mL of distilled water or drinkable (spring) water
    Mix the potassium iodide with the water first then add and stir the iodine until all is dissolves. This usually takes some time but can be speed up by heating the water a little.
    You can purchase iodine and potassium iodide at www.ushalogen.com

  • Dana Seilhan

    9/27/2010 3:02:43 AM |

    It might be better to think of the buy-local movement in terms of, "It's silly to buy foods from elsewhere that we're perfectly capable of growing here," while still importing foods that contain nutrients that are deficient locally.  That's the whole point of trade, after all:  acquiring things you wouldn't have otherwise.

    Expecting foods grown in the ground to provide us with iodine when we've got perfectly good seafood in the oceans that give us the same thing is kind of silly.  Rather on the order of using tofu or seitan as meat substitutes when there are perfectly good cows and chickens running around out there.

    An alternative, too, is to completely avoid goitrogenic foods if you live far from the sea.  It's believed that this is why cruciferous vegetables taste bitter to some people but not others:  the genes responsible seem to have evolved in people who lived far inland.  They needed to maximize thyroid function, so a mutation that allowed them to detect foods that were most likely to mess with thyroid function came in very handy.  No reason we can't make conscious choices in that direction now--it's not like we can't live without any of the foods in question.

    Dealing with environmental pollution and avoiding chemical stressors is important too, as you know.  But every little bit that we ourselves can control right now, counts for something.

  • how to stop sweating

    2/22/2011 12:17:09 AM |

    Glorious post from skilled additionally it's going to probably be an exquisite know-methods to us and thank you numerous for posting this priceless info with us all.

Loading