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

23. May 2006 William Davis (0)
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.
Tags :

Add comment

Loading
Do stents prevent reversal?

Do stents prevent reversal?

27. January 2007 William Davis (3)
I've seen this phenomenon several times now: A highly-motivated Track Your Plaque participant with a stent in one artery will do all the right things--lose weight, achieve 60:60:60 in basic lipids, identify and correct hidden lipoprotein disorders, take fish oil, correct vitamin D, etc.

Follow-up heart scan shows dramatic reduction in scoring in the two arteries without stents--30% per artery. But the artery with the stent will show marked increase in scoring above and/or below the stent. (It's impossible to tell what happens in or around the stent itself from a calcium scoring standpoint, since steel looks just like calcium on a CT heart scan.) In other words, there is marked plaque growth in the vicinity of the stent, despite the fact that dramatic reversal of atherosclerosis has occurred in other arteries without stents.

Should we take this to mean that a stent destroys the opportunity for atherosclerotic plaque reversal in the stented artery? I don't know, but I fear this may be true. What dangers does this different sort of plaque pose? Is it the result of the injury imposed at time of stent implantation, some modification of flow or biologic responses as a result of the presence of the stent?

These are all unanswered questions. But I believe that it is yet another suggestive piece of evidence that the best stent is no stent at all.
Tags :

Comments (3) -

  • neil

    1/29/2007 4:38:00 AM |

    While I certainly enjoyed your book and am extremely grateful for your generous sharing in your daily blog, I am very troubled by this blog entry. Over the last day I have been thinking quite a lot about it off and on, and that would be because I have three stents implanted; two Cypher and one Taxus.

    Since my dates in the hospital cath lab in early 2004 I have been following along with TYP principles carefully with the hope of being additional plaque neutral or even a bit of regression, but I see from this entry my hopes might be dashed.

    Your statement in the blog entry "I've seen this phenomenon several times now", does this mean it happens most always, or sometimes, or occasionally? What is the game plan now for these patients? Do they (or did) have any similarities that might be contributing to their plaque growth (LPa, diabetes, vit. D, BMI, gender, etc), or are their lipoproteins and assays corrected to perfection?

    Thanks again for all that you do, your program and willingness to share is unique and very special to many of us. If you could follow up sometime on this situation with a future blog entry or observations, I would be most appreciative.

    With concern,

    Neil

  • Dr. Davis

    1/29/2007 1:29:00 PM |

    Neil--
    All this means is that the presence of a stent may modify the potential for reversal ONLY IN THE VICINITY OF THE STENT. Other areas, meaning the majority of your other arteries' lengths, are still subject to your control and the benefits of your prevention program.

    Keep in mind that this is an experience involving just a handful of patients. To my knowledge, there are no formal published experiences like this to compare to. All patients had their patterns corrected to perfection by Track Your Plaque standards and don't seem to be distinguished by any one single lipoprotein pattern.

    My "gut sense" is that the sort of plaque growth that we see around stents and tracked by heart scanning does not carry the same implications that non-stent associated plaque does.

  • Anonymous

    2/27/2008 12:43:00 AM |

    I just found your site recently and have been reading through the posts.  I find it very educational.  Thanks!  

    I'm curious.  Were the stents medicated stents (since it is my understanding that they prevent this kind of thing)?

Add comment

Loading
Bait and switch

Bait and switch

24. July 2008 William Davis (0)
"When banks compete, you win.”

The TV ad opens with a 60-something man sitting in his living room, talking to a three-piece suit-clad, 30-something banker. The older man is explaining to the dismayed younger man why he’s going to use Lending Tree loan service for a home loan.

“But Dad, I’m you’re son!” the younger whines.

Many of Lending Tree’s clients have collaborated in filing a multi-million dollar class action suit against the company, claiming “bait and switch” tactics. They claim that home buyers are lured by low interest rates or low closing costs on a home loan. Once the buyer concludes the hassle of filling out numerous forms, the suit accuses Lending Tree of making a switch to a costlier loan.

Bait and switch is among the oldest con games around. If you’ve ever bought a car from a car dealer, chances are you’ve had your own little brush with this deception. The ad promises the SUV you’ve wanted for only $299 per month. Only, once you get there, the salesman informs you that only a limited number of special deals were available and they’ve run out. But he’s still got a really good deal right over here!

Most of us recognize that we’ve been hookwinked. Yet we still go along and buy a car from the dealer.

What if it’s not a sleazy salesman behind the pitch, but a physician. If it’s hard to resist the sales pitch at the car dealership, it can be near impossible to ignore the advice of your doctor. But the truth is often loud and clear: in many instances, it is a genuine, bona fide, and fully-certified scam.

Among the most common bait-and-switch heart scams: Your cholesterol is high. The sequence of subsequent testing is well-rehearsed. “Gee, Bob, I’m worried about your risk for heart disease. Let’s schedule you for a nuclear stress test.”

The stress test, like 20% or more of them, is “falsely positive,” meaning abnormal even though there’s nothing wrong with you. Another 30% are equivocal, not clearly abnormal but also not clearly normal. Now up to 50% of people tested “need” a heart catheterization in the hospital to clarify this frightening uncertainty. You might end up with a stent or two, even bypass surgery. Your simple $20 cholesterol panel has metamorphosed into $100,000 in hospital procedures.

That familiar sequence is followed thousands of times, seven days a week, 365 days a year.
Tags :

Add comment

Loading
"Heart scans" are not always heart scans

"Heart scans" are not always heart scans

18. July 2007 William Davis (6)
Beware of the media reports now being issued that warn that "CT heart scans" pose a risk for cancer.

One report can be viewed at
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20070717/ct-heart-scan-radiation-cancer-risk.

This was triggered by a Columbia University study of risk for cancer based on the dose of radiation used in CT coronary angiograms. Theoretically, exposure to the radiation dose of CT coronary angiography can raise risk for cancer by 1 in 143 women if radiated in their 20s just from that single exposure.

If you've been following the Track Your Plaque discussion, as well as my diatribes in the Heart Scan Blog, you know that the media got it all wrong. The "heart scans" they are referring to are not the same as the heart scans that we discuss for the Track Your Plaque program.

A conventional heart scan (of the sort we refer to) exposes the recipient to 4 chest x-rays of radiation if an EBT device is used, around 8-10 chest x-rays of radiation if a 64-slice CT scanner is used. For the quality of information we obtain from these screening heart scans, we feel that it's an acceptable exposure.

The "heart scan" this study and subsequent reports refer to is not truly a screening heart scan, but a CT coronary angiogram, or CTA. CTAs are performed on the same CT or EBT devices, but involve far more radiation. CTA exposes the recipient to about 100 chest x-rays of radiation on a 64-slice device (more or less, depending on the way it is performed.) Just a couple of years ago, some centers were performing CTA on 16-slice devices, a practice I and the Track Your Plaque program vocally opposed, since up to 400 chest-rays of radiation were required! I even called a number of centers advising them that they were putting the public in jeopardy. CTAs also require injection of x-ray dye, just like any conventional angiogram.

CTA on 64-slice CT scanners require the same radiation exposure as a conventional heart catheterization, an issue glossed over in most conversations. In other words, the test that many of my colleageus so casually recommend poses a similar risk.

The message: the test I advocate for screening for coronary heart disease is a CT or EBT heart scan, not a CT coronary angiogram. CTA is a useful test and will get better and better as the engineers discover ways to reduce radiation exposure. But, in 2007, CTA is a diagnostic device, not a screening device. If you require an abdominal CT scan because your doctor suspects pancreatic cancer, or a CT scan of the brain because you might have a life-threatening aneurysm causing double-vision or seizures, it would be silly to not undergo the scan because of long-term and theoretical cancer risk.

But undergoing a CT coronary angiogram for screening purposes is ridiculous with present technology. I've said it before and I will say it--shout it--again:

CT coronary angiograms are not screening procedures; they are diagnostic procedures that should be taken seriously and do indeed pose measurable risk for cancer, a risk that is presently unacceptable for a screening test.

You wouldn't undergo a mammogram to screen for breast cancer if it exposed you to 100 chest x-rays of radiation, would you? Screening tests should be safe, reliable, accurate, and inexpensive. CT coronary angiography is none of these things. Genuine heart scans--the kind the Track Your Plaque program talks about and relies on--is all of those things.
Tags :

Comments (6) -

  • Anonymous

    7/19/2007 12:16:00 AM |

    Dr. Davis, would you please specify the millisievert values you are assuming for chest x-ray, EBCT Ca score, MSCT Ca score, and CT angiogram? I just got a 64-slice Ca score and they told me I received an effective dose of 2 mSv. Would a CT angiography typically result in 20 mSv?

  • Dr. Davis

    7/19/2007 12:59:00 AM |

    Hi,

    Please see my Blog post, CT scans and radiation exposure at http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2007/06/ct-scans-and-radiation-exposure.html

    You may notice some differences. There's enormous variation in exposure, depending on how it's measured, how the scan is performed, type and manufacturer of scanner. However, you can get a good idea of ballpark figures from the table in the blog post.

  • Dr. Davis

    7/19/2007 1:02:00 AM |

    Let me try that URL again:

    http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/
    search/label/CT%20scans%20and%
    20radiation%20exposure

    Or, go to the left sidebar of Blog contents and see "CT scans and radiation"

  • JT

    7/22/2007 1:55:00 AM |

    I watch Fox news.  And with that statement I'm sure some are rolling their eyes.  Never before in the history of America has declaring what news channel one watches apparently pigeonholed one on their political views.  

    Like many I get my news from different locations: internet blogs, TV, radio, magazines, newspapers, etc, but in the morning I often watch Fox and Friends.  I do so for two reasons I suppose, the first being that I enjoy the joking around / humor on the set.  The second reason why I watch Fox is because it goes out of its way to present two sides of a debate.  It seems revolutionary what Fox has done to TV news - present two sides of a story.  Some people become terribly wound up over this.  On a personal note, I have an "ultra liberal" uncle, by his own definition, that in all honesty is so upset over Fox news and me watching it that he no longer communicates with me.  Uncle Gordon probably has never watched Fox News.  He only knows what he has heard.  And knowing him if he did watch he would only see the conservatives and not notice the liberal view point.  I hope one of these days he calms down and we can find ourselves on friendly terms again.  Change is hard for some to come to terms with.          

    When reading this blog, it disturbed me.  I wish that all news reporters tried harder to present two sides to a story. These high radiation reports would be easy to demonstrate as being only half true.  But instead, because of poorly researched, unprofessional reporting, there undoubtedly will be Americans that will decide to not have a life saving CT heart scan for fear of radiation poisoning.  And that is sad.

  • Dr. Davis

    7/22/2007 3:09:00 AM |

    Hi, JT--

    I couldn't agree more.

    If there's one theme that presents itself over and over lately, it is the struggle to discern the truth in the sea of information we're all presented with every day. I can only hope that we all zig-zag towards a real truth over time.

  • Darwin

    7/24/2007 6:34:00 PM |

    Re the CTCA - new study out concerning radiation exposure for young women.

Add comment

Loading
Heart Scan Blog Redux: Cheers to flavonoids

Heart Scan Blog Redux: Cheers to flavonoids

13. November 2009 William Davis (32)
Because in Track Your Plaque we've been thinking a lot about anthocyanins, here's a rerun of a previous Heart Scan Blog post about red wine. (Anthocyanins are among the interesting flavonoids in red wine, along with resveratrol and quercetin.)


The case in favor of healthful flavonoids seems to grow bit by bit.

Flavonoids such as procyanadins in wine and chocolate, catechins in tea, and those in walnuts, pomegranates, and pycnogenol (pine bark extract) are suspected to block oxidation of LDL (preventing its entry into plaque), normalize abnormal endothelial constriction, and yield platelet-blocking effects (preventing blood clots).

Dr. Roger Corder is a prolific author of many scientific papers detailing his research into the flavonoids of foods, but wine in particular. He summarizes his findings in a recent book, The Red Wine Diet. Contrary to the obvious vying-for-prime-time title, Dr. Corder's compilation is probably the best mainstream discussion of flavonoids in foods and wines that I've come across. Although it would have been more entertaining if peppered with more wit and humans interest, given the topic, its straightfoward, semi-academic telling of the story makes his points effectively.

Among the important observations Corder makes is that regions of the world with the greatest longevity also correspond to regions with the highest procyanidin flavonoids in their wines.




Regarding the variable flavonoid content of wines, he states:

Although differences in the amount of procyanidins in red wine clearly occur because of the grape variety and the vineyard environment, the winemaker holds the key to what ends up in the bottle. The most important aspect of the winemaking process for ensuring high procyanidins in red wines is the contact time between the liquid and the grape seeds during fermentation when the alcohol concentration reaches about 6 percent. Depending on the fermentation temperature, it may be two to three days or more before this extraction process starts. Grape skins float and seeds sink, so the number of times they are pushed down and stirred into the fermenting wine also increases extraction of procyanidins. Even so, extraction is a slow process and, after fermentation is complete, many red wines are left to macerate with their seeds and skins for days or even weeks in order to extract all the color, flavor, and tannins. Wines that have a contact time of less than seven days will have a relatively low level of procyanidins. Wines with a contact time of ten to fourteen days have decent levels, and those with contact times of three weeks or more have the highest.

He points out that deeply-colored reds are more likely to be richer in procyanidins; mass-produced wines that are usually "house-grade" served at bars and restaurants tend to be low. Some are close to zero.

Wines rich in procyanidins provide several-fold more, such that a single glass can provide the same purported health benefit as several glasses of a procyanidin-poor wine.

So how do various wines stack up in procyanidin content? Here's an abbreviated list from his book:

Australian--tend to be low, except for Australian Cabernet Sauvignon which is moderate.

Chile--only Cabernet Sauvignon stands out, then only moderate in content.

France--Where to start? The French, of course, are the perennial masters of wine, and prolonged contact with skins and seeds is usually taken for granted in many varieties of wine. Each wine region (French wines are generally designated by region, not by variety of grape) can also vary widely in flavonoid content. Nonetheless, Bordeaux rate moderately; Burgundy low to moderate (except the village of Pommard); Languedoc-Roussillon moderate to high (and many great bargains in my experience, since these producers live in the shadow of its northern Bordeaux neighbors); Rhone (Cote du Rhone) moderate to high, though beware of their powerful "barnyard" character upon opening; decanting is wise.

Italy--Much red Italian wine is made from the Sangiovese grape and called variously Chianti, Valpolicella, and "super-Tuscan" when blended with other varietals. Corder rates the southern Italian wines from Sicily, Sardinia, and the mainland as high in procyanidins; most northern varieties are moderate.

Spain--Moderate in general.

United States--Though his comments are disappointingly scanty on the U.S., he points out that Cabernet Sauvignon is the standout for procyanidin content. He mentions only the Napa/Sonoma regions, unfortunately. (I'd like to know how the San Diego-Temecula and Virginian wines fare, for instance.)

The winner in procyanidin content is a variety grown in the Gers region of southwest France, a region with superior longevity of its residents. The wines here are made with the tannat grape within the Madiran appellation; wines labeled "Madiran" must contain 40% or more tannat to be so labeled (such is a quirk of French wine regulation). Among the producers Dr. Corder lists are Chateau de Sabazan, Chateau Saint-Go, Chateau du Bascou, Domaine Labranche Laffont, and Chateau d'Aydie. (A more complete list can be found in his book.)

How does this all figure into the Track Your Plaque program? Can you succeed without red wine? Of course you can. I doubt you could do it, however, without some attention to flavonoid-rich food sources, whether they come from spinach, tea, chocolate, beets, pomegranates, or red wine.

Though my wife and I love wine, I confess that I've never personally drank or even seen a French Madiran wine. Any wine afficionados with some advice?
Tags :

Comments (32) -

  • Anne

    11/13/2009 12:55:39 PM |

    Well that is lovely to know as we drink a glass of Languedoc red wine every day with our evening meal ! We're lucky enough to have a house in the Languedoc and we load our car up with red wine when we return home to the UK so we always have enough to keep us going between trips.  Just ordinary coteaux du languedoc, nothing fancy, comes in a 'bag in box', just what the locals drink every day and it doesn't cost a lot. Our current favourite 'cave' is at the village of  Montpeyroux.

    My little icon is a photo of the Lac du Salagou nearby.

    Santé,
    Anne

  • Anne

    11/13/2009 1:03:03 PM |

    PS - clicking my name takes you to my blogger details and link to my Web Page of photos of the Languedoc....and some vineyards Smile

  • Bill

    11/13/2009 2:02:36 PM |

    It was Dr. Corder's book that set me on the right track with my diet, back in 2006.
    Here in the UK, Madiran is available at around $15 a bottle, but discounted to around $8 periodically. I had discovered that if I drank only full bodied red wine, I didn't gain weight. Beer piles the weight on for me.
    I progressed from a mediterranean diet to a paleo diet.
    I would recommend you look for Argentinian high altitude heavy red wines.(Malbec) They are considerably cheaper and more available in The USA.
    I fully support the flavinoids mantra.
    Green tea and 90% cocoa dark chocolate are staples in my diet. Red wine 2-3 times a week.

  • John Fisher

    11/13/2009 3:22:56 PM |

    Good post. Now we can have a healthy heart and enjoy drinking red wine as well. One issue that is missing from your post is the frequent and widespread contamination of (red) wine with pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and artificial fertilizers.
    I am living near a wine region and I know that the grapes get sprayed regularly with all this, as much as 10 times per year.

    The alternative is certified organic wine, which is hard to come by.

  • Reise Rachid Jaudy

    11/13/2009 5:34:22 PM |

    Gostei do blog tanto da cor, estrutura, como do conteudo em geral. Parabéns

  • Anonymous

    11/13/2009 6:41:49 PM |

    I thought the fructose in pomegranate juice (or any juice) was very unhealthy? do the benefits of the flavonoids outweigh the costs of the fructose?

    Dave

  • Adam Wilk

    11/13/2009 9:29:51 PM |

    I'm not a wine drinker at all, but I wonder if cooking with it gives the same benefit at all, since my wife cooks with red wine alot--it makes everything even more delicious, and hopefully healthier, too!

    As far as cocoa goes, I add a teaspoon of organic cocoa to my morning coffee, with the hope that I am 'supercharging' my morning brew! (In addition to a packet of Truvia, a dab of coconut oil, and organic cream...)

    Yes, life is good... Wink
    Adam

  • Anonymous

    11/13/2009 9:46:11 PM |

    From some research I've seen the Southern US muscadine grape has the highest levels of anthocyanins (especially resveratrol).  The skins on the grapes are super thick and this variety is rather impervious to mold, rot, etc.

  • Flowerdew Onehundred

    11/13/2009 11:00:43 PM |

    I would also like to know how Virginia wine fares since we drink so much of it, but it's all produced by pretty small operations, so I would imagine it varies.

    Actually, most of what I buy is from two vineyards.  I guess I could just ask the winemakers how long the reds have the seeds and skins in the fermentation.

  • Suresh

    11/13/2009 11:21:35 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    Would eating plain red grapes bring out the same benefits as red wine ? I have read the reserveterol is present in red grape skins.

    Thanks!

    -Suresh

  • Rick

    11/14/2009 3:55:51 AM |

    Red wine always makes me feel sick, though I can drink white wine. Is there any reason to think that procyanidins are the cause of this? Any other differences between red and white wine that could be the reason?

  • Hampers

    11/14/2009 7:24:44 AM |

    Your blog looks wonderful with info on  how do various wines stack up in procyanidin content? It was nice going to know about it. you seems to be informative and resourceful.

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/14/2009 1:50:37 PM |

    Hi, Anne--

    A fellow Telemann fan!

    I envy your easy access to Languedoc. They are only occasionally available here.

  • Bill

    11/14/2009 1:52:02 PM |

    A link to Roger Corder's wine rating page.
    http://the-red-wine-diet.com/id1.html

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/14/2009 1:53:48 PM |

    Hi, Suresh--

    No, grapes and wines are different due to the process of fermentation. Obviously, wine has alcohol, which raises HDL. Beyond this, flavonoids undergo changes as wine ages. This is actually an active area of research in wine technology.

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/14/2009 1:54:31 PM |

    Hi, Rick--

    I do not believe it's the flavonoids that make you ill. Otherwise, other flavonoid sources like cocoa or green tea might do the same.

  • Ana Wire

    11/14/2009 4:33:35 PM |

    Hello Dr. Davis,
    yes, the question still is: what´s about the fructose? Isn´t a harm here? Great blog, Ana

  • pmpctek

    11/14/2009 7:26:37 PM |

    I've read elsewhere that other  good sources of procyanidins that have yet to be listed are:

    red delicious apples (skin)
    granny smith apples (skin)
    macintosh apples (skin)
    raspberries
    wild blueberries
    cranberries
    bilberries
    black chokeberries
    peanuts (skin)
    cinnamon
    black currant

  • Dave

    11/14/2009 7:39:52 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    Since Pine Bark extract is 95% oligomeric proanthocyamis, do yout thing that would qualify as a viable alternate to red wine.

  • Carl H

    11/16/2009 3:21:34 PM |

    http://www.winecountry.com/writers/w001/122707_savvy_redwine.html

    Another synopsis of the wine diet.  I noted that old-vine zinfandel from California and mountain-grown old vine malbec from Argentina offer acceptable amount of procyanidins, and these are a lot easier for me to find locally.  

    One of my favorite sources for both these wines is Patrick Campbell of Laurel Glen/CA.  He offers 'REDS' a very affordable and tasty zin 'field blend'.  This is my house wine:

    http://www.laurelglen.com/laurelglen/catalog/view_product.jsp?product_id=1039&cat_id=1005

    and for a step up - Za Zin old vine zinfandel:

    http://www.laurelglen.com/laurelglen/catalog/view_product.jsp?product_id=1040&cat_id=1005

    He also offers an affordable, tasty old vine malbec from Argentina:

    http://www.laurelglen.com/laurelglen/catalog/view_product.jsp?product_id=1038&cat_id=1008

    The winemaker knows his job & these are all tasty, very affordable and well made.  I have no interest in said winery, just know what I like - and can afford.

    Let me also recommend both concord grape juice and cranberry juice as reasonable sources to augment 'the good stuff'.

  • David

    11/18/2009 10:59:07 PM |

    I love red wine and I adore procyanidins! Corder is exactly right- these are the most bioactive compounds in wine, clearly more important than the weak resveratrol content. And I have 2 quick solutions for problems here:

    1) If you want much higher levels of procyanidins than any wine without the alcohol, sugars and/or pesticides, check out Apple Poly, the richest procyanidin pure fruit extract. Blueberries and hawthorn berries are also good sources.

    2) It turns out the wine tasters had the right idea. Resveratrol (but not procyanidins) are absorbed best in humans via buccal (cheek, gum) tissue- up to 100 times better than swallowing! So be sure to swish. Procyanidins are too large for this method, but they're well-absorbed when swallowed, especially the water-soluble apple skin variety.

    Thanks again for posting this, Doc. Procyanidins are little miracles for your heart, your brain, your colon, and your cells!

  • Jon K

    12/9/2009 2:59:18 PM |

    I was fortunate to grow up in Agen, and Madiran wines were often on our table. As were wines from Cahors (Cahors are among the darkest wines in the world). They are usually very good wines.

    Jon Kjölstad, Sweden

  • Carl H

    1/8/2010 1:17:11 AM |

    Doctor Davis, scanned a wine article by an online wine writer that I enjoy.  He was touting several 'velvety reds' and I noted one w/tannat - like the Madirans mentioned above - and some nice Malbecs.  I've found over the years that my tastes coincide well with his, if he likes a bottle I probably will too.  
    Thought you might have better luck finding something like these:  

    http://www.examiner.com/x-2207-Denver-Wine-Examiner~y2010m1d7-Sweet-dreams-of-velvety-reds?cid=examiner-email

  • Anonymous

    3/20/2010 4:28:40 AM |

    As a wine collector and a resveratrol researcher I found Corders book rather flat.  The wines with the highest none Resveratrol content worldwide are Malbecs from the Andes in Mendoza. And if you want to read a great scientific review of the cutting edge science of David Sinclair in this arena read the The Longevity Factor by Joe Maroon MD.  That book has guts.

  • Carl H

    5/11/2010 10:44:36 PM |

    A recently released bargain Malbec suggestion.  The "Black Box" folks now carry a Mendoza Malbec box wine.  Retail $25 or so for 3 liters, I just bought some on sale for $17.  At full retail it's $6ish per 750ml bottle of dark, (flavonoid-laden) and tasty juice.  At my price, $4.25/per.  I don't think I can find a better buy on a high-altitude grown dark wine - tho' there aren't a lot of tannins.  I think it tastes great.  

    http://winecentric.blogspot.com/2010/04/black-box-mendoza-argentina-malbec-2008.html

  • Dr Mashego from Revup31

    7/25/2010 5:50:57 AM |

    Hi, I am a general practitioner from South Africa and I wanted to thank you for the informative post. I will look up "The Red Wine Diet"
    I am not a wine drinker but I have been researching resveratrol for a new product RevUp31.

    I am intrigued by the sheer amount of research done on wines, wine preparation and natural compounds to prevent disease.

    I am tired of being a "legal drug pusher" and rather want to help my patients stay healthy and enjoy life.

  • Dena

    7/27/2010 11:34:36 AM |

    Thanks for your informative blog. Have been looking into Resveratrol Vitamins, an anti-oxidant which is found in the skin of red grapes.

    Do you think a sensible one glass of red wine per day can have the same benefits as Resveratrol vitamins for heart disease.

    Please keep updating, I will keep reading.

    Dena

  • Max

    8/29/2010 6:23:32 AM |

    It's amazing to me that with all of the people trying to find the next great supplement or whatever, that red wine still just trumps them all in terms of antioxidants and all sorts of goodies. Great post, really would love to get more into this.

  • Piper

    10/28/2010 4:43:25 AM |

    Red wine, their diet, and their active lifestyle are the primary reason why the French lives long. Red wine contains natural resveratrol, when consumed regularly, it regulates the heart and kills the cancer cells, therefore, giving them longevity.

    But, other than consuming red wine, there are places where you can buy resveratrol by the capsule, which contains more resveratrol than wine itself.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 10:15:47 PM |

    Wines rich in procyanidins provide several-fold more, such that a single glass can provide the same purported health benefit as several glasses of a procyanidin-poor wine.

  • HERBCYCLOPEDIA

    4/30/2011 10:13:10 AM |

    Flavonoids are great, many fruits contain flavonoids but not only fruits, even cocoa contains flavonoids, that´s why dark chocolate is able to lower cholesterol levels.

  • mike

    7/29/2012 1:20:10 PM |

    Don't like the plastic liner in the black box wine. BPA leaches out into the wine. I do recall in the book that turning leaf and private selections robert mondavi cabernet sauvignons were given 2 hearts and 3 hearts respectivly with 5 hearts being the best and 1 the least.

Add comment

Loading