More reason to AVOID statins

[Thaiexpat]

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/bill-sardi/tell-truth/

Easy, fast read. Keep in mind, what the author is referring to about study reporting: even now drug companies can "play" with the numbers, never publish less-than-favorable tests or not at all. Its a shell game and the regulators don't help either. Meaning: if I do 10 studies and only 3 are favorable, I am only required to show the results of the good results (prior to the dates mentioned). Therefore, since most medicines in use today are older and based upon those older studies, I can claim effectiveness of a drug. This puts the public at risk for adverse effects which might never be reported. This is what we are seeing now with these analysis of many studies (meta-analysis). Upon review of unpublished or published studies, we can see the faults in the drug.

ATP is produced in the mitochondria of a cell. The heart has usually over 5,000 of these organelles per cell. They are extremely sensitive to nutrient and oxygen levels and can easily be damaged. As this report says, statins actually increase the incident of damage. It is a dangerous combination when you take said drugs and never consider your nutrient intake and overall oxidative stress.

Cheers and to your health....

[tankdude]

I'm still a believer in the say that "Big Pharma creates customers, not cures." 

You're right on the money - as usual - doc. All of us really live and die at the cellular level - even sub cellular if you look at the mitochondrial poisoning and oxidative stress tie. If you can keep your mitochondria and cells working at high level - your tissue remains healthy. If the tissue remains healthy, then the organ will maintain health.  Of the organs can maintain health, the system will be healthy.  It's like a building - the smallest components of the building blocks have to be strong or the building will tumble.

I posted this in another post and thought It would bear repeating.

Pyrroloquinoline quinone (PQQ) has been shown to activate cell signaling pathways which can cause the cell to actually create new mitochondria. PQQ can also protect the brain against neurotoxins - including mercury!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrroloquinoline_quinone

I've just started on 10 mg a day - going to try it for 90 days and see how things go.  I really believe that this coupled with a redox supplement to help reduce the oxidative stress in the body could be a good one-two punch for my immune sytem and overall health. 

[Thaiexpat]

Good post TD (as usual). Keep me posted on this stuff-email me what you find.

People need to understand a bit about the whole drug approval process. It isn't what most  think. As I mentioned prior, studies can be "fixed" to show any result you want to get out of it. The best analogy is this: You claim you can randomly flip a coin that will produce 4 heads up in-a-row. Now, we all know if you flip the coin enough times you will eventually achieve your goal. Never mind, you had to flip the coin 500 times, you got your 4 heads in a row. This is similar to many drug studies. They are permitted to omit "bad results" and many of them are never published. So docs and regulators never learn of the true results (like all the side-effects or no clinical improvement) Also, since most drugs are older, the rule should be that you test a newer drug against the effectiveness of the older drug. You have to show a significant difference in the new stuff. Otherwise, why bother using a new drug if it really doesn't work any better than the older and CHEAPER drug? But, that is not reality. Studies are mixed, using population groups which will produce the most favorable results. There are even CRO's which are done in other countries (because it is cheaper and far less regulatory restrictions), which test the drugs on local people which might not reflect the population of the folks the drug will be marketed for (Does the average Indian person have the same lifestyle/health issues as a westerner?). Many drugs are tested against "surrogate end results". This means, looking at 1 marker (lets say cholesterol levels) and judging the drug to be effective even if lowering cholesterol doesn't translate to reduce heart disease or stroke incidents in the real world. It a big ball of confusion, smoke-and-mirrors and everyone thinks that the system is there to bring the BEST drugs on to market for their health issues.

As a doc, I never learned this in med school. I was taught it was the epitome of science, not fraud and schemes to make a ton of money.

Dunno, just saying....Peace

[Sage449]

Yowza heavy duty reading, but I got most of it. I'll be interested TD on your results in taking PQQ. Yours are as clinical as what pharma is doing based on the reads.

Otherwise happy easter gents.

[Thaiexpat]

You aint kidding, Sage. The games they get away with is mind-blowing. Changing result goals: I consider this outright fraud. All science is based upon a hypothesis-this is the problem and I think this can be the cause. Lets test the hypothesis and see if we are right. That is the goal of ANY experiment.  Pretty simple idea that is taught even in grade school. Nope! We run a trial INITIALLY to test our hypotheses, however things don't work out exactly as we hoped for. Therefore, we CHANGE the goal. The drug we have developed doesn't work like we want, but we find some other completely different result and publish that. It is an unintended consequence that is discovered. It becomes the stated goal of the study. But, you might say, that is fine because it works for something! However, the study was developed, designed and approved for testing the original hypothesis, therefore, the study cant be used no matter what results were found outside the stated original goal. This applies to both primary and secondary goals. Many times the secondary goal magically becomes the primary goal.

Sub-setting the data: If you divide anything enough times, you get a data set which shows effectiveness. For example, the drug, overall, showed no positive effect in the study UNLESS you are 58-65, Hispanic, middle-income, cross-dresser male! Then the drug showed marked improvement for that PARTICULAR sub-group, but is reported as "statistical significance" overall.  

Trials that ignore "drop-outs": If a subject drops-out of a trial for various reason, the starting number can be incorporated into the overall end results and/or they can use only the data collected PRIOR to the person leaving the study. Therefore, 5,000 people start, 50% drop-out (lets say: side-effects experienced) and 10% actually report a positive result. Its not 10% of 2,500. Its reported as 10% of the total-5,000. Also, those who did drop-out are not reported as "poor patient response". Their data can be eliminated completely in the final analysis except when considering the total persons of the study. Massaging the numbers defines this.

"seeding Trials": using small groups of clinics to run the tests. Smaller groups usually don't experience the problems as seen with large studies. But that actually isn't important. What's important is you are exposing a bunch of docs (running the study) to your drug. Think of this as marketing the drug to as many people as you can without it being considered marketing. Pre-marketing? Creating a demand BEFORE all the analysis is complete and the drug is truly safe. If you notice 5 other docs issuing a drug, it must be good. Create a demand!

And the list goes on... Hope I didn't confuse anyone, but this is the case with many of the drugs being issued. Don't get me wrong: some are great, life-saving therapies. But a lot are just a marketing ploy to make a mint off your health condition.

Dunno, just saying.....Cheers

[new york kevin]

On 3/23/2016 at 1:24 PM, tankdude said:

I'm still a believer in the say that "Big Pharma creates customers, not cures." 

You're right on the money - as usual - doc. All of us really live and die at the cellular level - even sub cellular if you look at the mitochondrial poisoning and oxidative stress tie. If you can keep your mitochondria and cells working at high level - your tissue remains healthy. If the tissue remains healthy, then the organ will maintain health.  Of the organs can maintain health, the system will be healthy.  It's like a building - the smallest components of the building blocks have to be strong or the building will tumble.

I posted this in another post and thought It would bear repeating.

Pyrroloquinoline quinone (PQQ) has been shown to activate cell signaling pathways which can cause the cell to actually create new mitochondria. PQQ can also protect the brain against neurotoxins - including mercury!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrroloquinoline_quinone

I've just started on 10 mg a day - going to try it for 90 days and see how things go.  I really believe that this coupled with a redox supplement to help reduce the oxidative stress in the body could be a good one-two punch for my immune system and overall health. 

Tank Dude: so how did that 10 day trial of PQQ go for you? Very interested either way it went. My latest concern is a alternative way to treat my high blood pressure and poor cholesterol numbers. The other day my wife rattled off a list of aches and pains, that I have,  that are associated with statins. OMG. There are to many articles found on google searches towards my goal, that change every week as to the latest and greatest alternatives are. Dr. Thaiexpat, what say you? Though my PCP, this last blood test result, did say my cholesterol numbers (HDL and LDL combined) are "perfect" . 

[tankdude]

I've actually been on PQQ for about a month now.  Noticed a few subtle things like a bit more energy and my short term memory seems a bit better (Which is good - I have a mild TBI that has somewhat effected that part of my brain function) One other thing I've noticed - it's spring her in Montana - and everyone is complaining about their allergies, except me.  So far I have had no sneezing fits, no runny nose, no itchy eyes - even on the days when the Aspen and Cottonwood trees we making it look like it was snowing here. I'm pretty happy about that. I only had a couple of days that I took over the counter stuff last year, but it looks like it will be even less this year.

So - looking at the blood pressure - first I have to say that I'm not practicing medicine - I'm offering advice based on research (hope that satisfies the lawyers) and make sure you consult with your doctor if you act on any of this advice. 

First let's talk diet. I think that's the most important place to start (and I'msure Thaiexpat will agree with me there).  A ketogenic diet has been shown to lower blood pressure and improve lipid levels.  That's because it actually helps control insulin levels, which is really what can cause a rise in your cholesterol. Contrary to popular belief - it's starches and sugars that are the real sulprits, not the fats in the diet.  Here is some scientific backing.

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=201882&rel=1

And a good site to find out more about the carb-insulin-cholesterol connection.   http://www.diagnosisdiet.com/food/cholesterol/

Some other things to look at would be your magnesium level.

"Magnesium status has a direct effect upon the relaxation capability of vascular smooth muscle cells and the regulation of the cellular placement of other cations important to blood pressure - cellular sodium:potassium (Na:K) ratio and intracellular calcium (iCa(2+)). As a result, nutritional magnesium has both direct and indirect impacts on the regulation of blood pressure and therefore on the occurrence of hypertension."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15692166

Another possibility is L-Arginine - but make sure you talk to your medical professional about this one. It can actually have some interactions with some medications.  Here is some more info on that.

http://www.rxlist.com/l-arginine-page3/supplements.htm

And finally - my area of interest/emphasis - REDOX biology. The entire vascular system is regulated and repaired by REDOX reactions.  They not only maintain balance, but are vital to survival itself.

For arteriosclerosis, there are 2 key areas that REDOX molecules play a key area - system regulation and inflammation.  A little bit about each.   Here is the site I'm taking this information from:  http://www.theredoxdoc.com/redox-physiology/cardiovascular/

 

"System Regulation–At the root of autonomic process of the cardiovascular system we find REDOX reactions; auto-regulation of blood pressure, heart rate, and vascular tone. RE­DOX signaling molecules send input to cellular receptors that control each of these.

Our cardiovascular system (like all systems of the body) works best when we are young, at a normal body weight, staying hydrated, eating well, and exercising. But stress, illness, and an unbalanced lifestyle trigger trouble signals and set the stage for oxidative stress. Uncorrected, this can cause chronic cellular damage. Hypertension, atherosclerosis, heart attack, and stroke are all possible results.

Inflammation—In the presence of illness, injury, or another stimulus, the body produces inflammation. REDOX signaling molecules, the “masters” of cellular messaging, call for an infusion of immune cells as part of the body’s natural healing process. The trouble is, as the body addresses the issue, swelling occurs, “bad” cholester­ol is deposited, and vessels can harden and narrow. Correcting this “sickness”-signaling is the way to restore cardiovascular health.

Looking at these factors—and mitigating them—is now becoming a trend in health sci­ence. Strategies to prevent oxidative stress and inflammation are at the forefront. To truly be ahead of the game, it’s going to take thinking beyond simply detecting imbalances. It has to start at the cellular level with the critical REDOX messaging that goes on there. The more we understand REDOX signaling molecules, the more we’ll understand the basis of cardiovascular health."

You can also use your favorite search engine - like Google - and do a search on "oxidative stress and high blood pressure".  In fairly simple terms - Oxidative stress is when the REDOX molecules in the body are out of balance (homeostasis) and the cells are under attack by either inflammation or oxidation.  http://www.theredoxdoc.com/ does a good job of simplifying it in my mind.

On that note -In a recent trial conducted by David C. Nieman, DrPH, FACSM, of Appalachian State University, 106 women consumed four ounces of a Redox Supplement per day for 90 days. The participants showed significant results, experiencing reduced oxidative stress biomarkers.  In particular, they experienced a lowering of the oxidized form of LDL cholesterol, suggesting that the Redox Supplement may contribute to the reduction of oxidative stress and support cardiovascular health. It was also  associated with lower 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine (8-OHdG), an oxidized nucleoside of DNA and biomarker of generalized, cellular oxidative stress. (In other words - the cells weren't working as hard to repair themselves.)

There's my   Hope I at least gave you some direction to do some research.  If you want more information in the Redox Supplement, shoot me a message.