Re: alternatices to statins
- From: "elgoog" <bjdefend-newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 15 Apr 2005 20:03:37 -0700
amatones wrote:
> There is equally compelling evidence to support Dr Paulding as well.I
> would not expect a "reputable" medical sight to carry and information
> that led to a cure or prevention that was not based on prerscription
> drugs.
So, I take it you ascribe to the pharmaceuticals conspiracy theory
where the drug companies influence and control not only politicians,
but researchers, government agencies, institutions of learning (like
Harvard), and independent studies? Yes, they are powerful. Of course,
it is interesting that these very same institutions (unreliable due to
their complicity with drug companies) were responsible for recognizing
Dr. Pauling in the first place and indirectly responsible for his Nobel
nomination and subsequent awards, and his patents.
> It would not be in their best interest. 35 years ago when
> cholesterol was first being measured routinely the acceptable amount
> was over 240.Now with the advent of statins they want it at 200. This
> allows many more people to take the drugs. And now it is being pushed
> to lower the acceptable levels to 180! More drugs. And statin have no
> proof of curing or preventing heart disease. Over 65% of statin
> patients have one more surgeries AFTER being on the drug.
> Only you and your body can know what's best for you.
I agree that drugs are over prescribed.
> If taking
> prescription drugs makes you feel better and gives you some security,
> then by all means take them. Nothing myself or anyone else say will
> matter.
I am not fully persuaded that megadoses are ineffectual, nor that they
are everything that some claim.
> I just know for myself the effects statins had on my body for
> alomst 4 years is unacceptable to me. I'm not going to continue to
put
> my liver, hormone levels, muscles and nerve endings at risk any
longer.
I don't fully trust long term medication either.
> I have found a treatment that has been working gradually over the
past
> year and the results are the true test.
I am glad for your improvements, and sincerely hope that you continue
to improve your health. I hope you also realize that I respect you as
an individual and for your personal triumphs and the knowledge you
share with us.
> http://www.healthvision2020.com/heartdisease.html
>
> http://www.healthvision2020.com/msg9.htm
>
> http://vitamincfoundation.org/statinalert/
I find the evidence on these sites to be compelling, but incomplete. It
is curious that they should at once proclaim the unreliability of
sources tainted by the greed of the powerful drug companies, and then
quote studies by the same purportedly corrupt and unreliable sources as
proofs of megadose therapy. If the "reputable" sources are corrupt and
have a hidden agenda, then these sites too have their own agendas (and
something to sell).
Who to trust? Well, I trust you and your anecdote; but, there is much
about both that I do not yet know. It is possible that the megadoses of
vitamin C and l-lysine were effective in your case. It is also possible
that there were other contributing factors in your particular case.
I hope you continue to post updates on your case.
You might find this opinion piece by Thomas H. Lee, M.D. interesting,
Vitamin E Supplements: Rest in Peace,
http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/EMIHC254/35320/35324/417689.html?d=dmtHMSContent
.
- References:
- alternatices to statins
- From: amatones
- Re: alternatices to statins
- From: elgoog
- Re: alternatices to statins
- From: amatones
- alternatices to statins
- Prev by Date: Re: This is annoying - results of nuclearr stress test
- Next by Date: Re: This is annoying - results of nuclearr stress test
- Previous by thread: Re: alternatices to statins
- Next by thread: Re: alternatices to statins
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading