“Too many false positives”

“Do you really think I need a heart scan?” asked Terry.

“My doctor said that heart scans show too many false positives. He says that many people end up getting unnecessary heart catheterizations because of them.”

At age 56, Terry was becoming increasingly frightened. His father had suffered his first heart attack at age 53, Terry’s paternal uncle had a heart attack at age 56, his paternal grandfather a heart attack at age 50.

Is this true? Do heart scans yield too many false positives, meaning abnormal results when there really is no abnormality?

No, it is not. What Terry’s doctor is referring to is the fact that, in the decades-long process that leads to heart attack, heart scans have the ability to detect early phases of developing coronary atherosclerotic plaque.

Let’s take Terry’s case, for example. Given his family history, it is quite likely that he does indeed have coronary atherosclerotic plaque. Will it be detectable by performing a stress test? Probably not. In fact, Terry jogs and feels well while doing so. While a stress test abnormality that fails to reach conscious perception is possible, it’s fairly unlikely given his exercise routine.

Will Terry’s coronary atherosclerotic plaque be detectable by heart catheterization? Very likely. But why perform an invasive hospital procedure just as a screening test? Should a woman wishing to undergo a screening test for breast cancer undergo breast removal? Of course not.

Is waiting for symptoms a rational way to approach diagnosis of heart disease? Well, when symptoms appear, it means that coronary blood flow is reduced. Stents and bypass surgery may be indicated. The risk of heart attack and death skyrocket. Sudden death becomes a real possibility.

In the 30 or so years required to establish sufficient coronary plaque to permit the appearance of symptoms or the development of an abnormality detectable by stress testing, there were many years when the disease was early--too early to generate symptoms, too early to be detectable by stress testing.

That’s when heart scans uncover evidence for silent coronary atherosclerotic plaque.

Should we call this a “false positive” just because it doesn’t also correlate with “need” for a catheterization, stent, bypass operation or result in heart attack within the next few weeks?

The detection of early plaque is just that: early disease detection.

Imagine, for instance, that the breast cancer that will grow into a palpable nodule or mass detectable by mammogram is detectable by a special breast scan 15 years before it becomes a full-blown tumor, metastasizing to other organs. What if effective means to halt that earliest evidence of cancer could put a stop to this devastating disease decades ahead of danger? Is this a “false positive” too?

In my view, this is the knuckleheaded thinking of the conventional practitioner: “Don’t bother me until you’re really sick.” Prevention is a practice that has become fashionable only because of the push of the drug industry. Nutrition is an afterthought, a message conceived through consensus of “experts” with suspect motivations and allegiances.

So, no, heart scans do not uncover “false positives.” They uncover early disease--true positives--years before it is detectable by standard tests or by the appearance of catastrophe. But that is the whole point: Early detection means getting a head start on prevention.

Do heart scans lead to unnecessary heart catheterizations? Yes, sadly they do. But not because heart scans are false positive. It happens because of unscrupulous or ignorant cardiologists who use the information wrongly. In my view, heart scans should NEVER lead directly to heart catheterization in an asymptomatic patient. Heart scans, as helpful as they are, do not modify the standard reasons for performing heart procedures.

If a car mechanic is dishonest and fixes a carburetor that didn't need fixing, should we condemn all car mechanics? No, of course not. We only need to develop the means to weed out the bad apples. The same applies to heart scans.

Comments (6) -

  • steve

    9/4/2008 2:43:00 PM |

    why even bother with expense of a heart scan and radiation exposure when detailed Lipoprotein analysis may be all you need?  If you have many small LDL particles isn't that enough to say you probably have CAD and should address it; while if your LDL particles are mostly large your probably ok

  • Anonymous

    9/4/2008 5:41:00 PM |

    Small LDLs alone may or may not mean one has plaque. Likewise, someone that doesn't have too many small LDLs might have plaque.

    Plus, like Dr. Davis likes to point out, the most important heart scan is not the 1st heart scan but the 2nd heart scan. You see, if someone has any plaque (above zero), then after they take the necessary steps to try and slow down, stop and even reverse the plaque they have NO WAY to know if the steps they took are enough whithout the results from the 2nd scan (which is usually taken 1 year after the lipoproteins have been corrected).

    The amount of radiation is about the same as several chest x-rays:

    http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2007/06/ct-scans-and-radiation-exposure.html

  • MedPathGroup

    9/5/2008 7:48:00 AM |

    Hi there. I am just dropping by. I came across this blog when i was researching about coronary bypass surgery. Very informative stuffs I can add in to my research. Thanks for sharing this information. I will keep on visiting this blog for more interesting posts.

  • joel oosterlinck M.D.

    9/5/2008 8:30:00 AM |

    firs of all this blog is really interesting I am a french family practitioner with specialisation in hyperbaric and gynoaecology.
    My question is heartscan is not a mainstream test in my area  where 64 slices scan machines arrived 2 years ago some of my cardiologists advised for 64 slice angiogram for screening . I read in european literature that there is an unresolved problem with  false negatives  in heart scan can you please elaborate with this false negative issue ?

  • Tony Romeyn

    12/2/2008 5:08:00 AM |

    My story, sorry it is a bit long.
    For many years I have been dealing with medium to high cholesterol levels. High cholesterol is only one part to the danger of plaque buildup in the arteries and an eventual possible heart attack. Other risk factors such as, Smoking, Hypertension, Diabetes, Obesity, Inactivity, Stress and Family history all play a role in High Cholesterol.

    It was approximately 10-15 years ago that my Doctor suggested that I go on medication with one of the Statin drugs and Lipitor is what he suggested for me. With a great amount of reluctance I finally agreed, but I certainly was not happy with the potential side effects, as there are many. The worst side effect that could happen was a muscle tissue breakdown with severe muscle pain. Well low and behold within 10 days I have severe muscle tissue pain and took my Lipitor pills and dumped them down the toilet. When I told my Doctor what I had done he was not too happy but he could identify with what was happening.

    It was at that point that I started to ask that although my blood test showed that I had high cholesterol, did that necessarily indicate that I had clogged arteries. I continued to ask the same question over many years. My family Doctor continued to advise me that he would like to try another statin med called Zocor. Again I reluctantly agreed and started to research how others did with Zocor on the Internet. Again many reported of similar side effects as I experienced with Lipitor.

    That year during vacation time I picked up a newspaper……..I am a news junky……. and there was an article that hit me like a ton of bricks; Bacol by Bayer was being recalled due to a number of reported deaths and other severe side effects. At that point I took my Zocor meds and dumped them down the toilet also………….oops I probably polluted the drainage water………. determined never to do a Statin drug again.

    Years went by and tests were done from time to time, sometime showing medium to higher levels.

    Then came late February of this year 2008. Within three days of having a few dizzy spells I collapsed and had emergency surgery due to an ulcer which had perforated an artery. That is a whole story in itself, but just one note if you are taking a good number of Aspirin and Ibuprofen, you may, no you must check with your Doctor to see what is happening with your stomach.

    In that short period of time just before my surgery I had lost about 6 units of blood. During my healing process I was told I was lucky to be alive. A few weeks into the recuperation time I can to reflect on the fact that my heart must have to have been awfully strong to have dealt with significant blood loss. Then I began to re ask the same question, hey my arteries could not be blocked, otherwise my heart would never have kept up. I posed this question to my surgeon, and he confirmed that that is not necessarily true.

    Now we come to the time of a recent cholesterol test which showed numbers higher than ever before. The same answer you need to go on Cholesterol lowering drugs. I came to the point and said to my Doctor I want to get a test to see if my arteries have buildup and how do we do this. Without significant physical symptoms our medial system does not allow for such a test, which is either an Angiogram or a CT Scan.

    In recent years a new 64-Slice CT scanner became available, a non-invasive evaluation of arteries. But our medical system still does not allow  a scan to be done without significant physical symptoms.
    Now here comes into play the private diagnostic clinics. In consultation with my Doctor I looked into and booked to get a Heart Scan (Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring) done at the Canada Diagnostic Clinic in Vancouver. An appointment was available almost immediately and of course I would have to pay for this myself at a cost of $690.00, plus travel to Vancouver and an overnight stay. Quite costly and not affordable to everyone. (Please scroll down for details of the scan)
    NOW THE GOOD NEWS! My heart arteries only showed a very minor calcium build up at two points. My Calcium score was 19.

    NO NEED TO GO ON RISKY STATIN DRUGS, SUCH AS Lipitor, Zocor, Baycol or a more recent addition Crestor (here is what is mentioned on the Johns Hopkins Hospital website - "although the potency of Crestor appears to be fully established, its safety is not. Unless there is an overwhelming reason to take a very new drug, the best approach is to wait for some time to pass to allow unforeseen problems, if any, to be detected." WITH POSSIBILTY OF SIGNIFICANT SIDE EFFECTS

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 2:24:56 PM |

    In my view, this is the knuckleheaded thinking of the conventional practitioner: “Don’t bother me until you’re really sick.” Prevention is a practice that has become fashionable only because of the push of the drug industry. Nutrition is an afterthought, a message conceived through consensus of “experts” with suspect motivations and allegiances.

Loading
Slash carbs . . . What happens?

Slash carbs . . . What happens?

Cut the carbohydrates in your diet and what sorts of results can you expect?

Carbohydrate reduction results in:

Reduced small LDL--This effect is profound. Carbohydrates increase small LDL; reduction of carbohydrates reduce small LDL. People are often confused by this because the effect will not be evident in the crude, calculated (Friedewald) LDL that your doctor provides.

Increased HDL--The HDL-increasing effect of carbohydrate reduction may require 1-2 years. In fact, in the first 2 months, HDL will drop, only to be followed by a slow, gradual increase. This is the reason why, in a number of low-carb diet studies, HDL was shown to be reduced.--Had the timeline been longer, HDL would show a significant increase.

Decreased triglycerides--Like reduction of small LDL, the effect is substantial. Triglyceride reductions of several hundred milligrams are not at all uncommon. In people with familial hypertriglyceridemia with triglyceride levels in the thousands of milligrams per deciliter, triglyceride levels will plummet with carbohydrate restriction. (Ironically, conventional treatment for familial hypertriglyceridemia is fat restriction, a practice that can reduce triglycerides modestly in these people, but not anywhere near as effectively as carbohydrate restriction.) Triglyceride reduction is crucial, because triglycerides are required by the process to make small LDL--less triglycerides, less small LDL.

Decreased inflammation--This will be reflected in the crude surface marker, c-reactive protein--Yes, the test that the drug industry has tried to convince you to take statins drugs to reduce. In my view, it is an absurd notion that you need to take a drug like Crestor to reduce risk associated with increased CRP. If you want to reduce CRP to the floor, eliminate wheat and other junk carbohydrates. (You should also add vitamin D, another potent CRP-reducing strategy.)

Reduced blood pressure--Like HDL, blood pressure will respond over an extended period of months to years, not days or weeks. The blood pressure reduction will be proportion to the amount of reduction in your "wheat belly."

Reduced blood sugar--Whether you watch fasting blood sugar, postprandial (after-meal) blood sugars, or HbA1c, you will witness dramatic reductions by eliminating or reducing the foods that generate the high blood sugar responses in the first place. Diabetics, in particular, will see the biggest reductions, despite the fact that the American Diabetes Association persists in advising diabetics to eat all the carbohydrates they want. Reductions in postprandial (after-eating) blood sugars, in particular, will reduce the process of LDL glycation, the modification of LDL particles by glucose that makes them more plaque-causing.


You may notice that the above list corresponds to the list of common plagues targeted by the pharmaceutical industry: blood pressure, diabetes (diabetes being the growth industry of the 21st century), high cholesterol. In other words, high-carbohydrate, low-fat foods from the food industry create the list of problems; the pharmaceutical industry steps in to treat the consequences.

In the Track Your Plaque approach, we focus specifically on elimination of wheat, cornstarch, and sugars, the most offensive among the carbohydrates. The need to avoid other carbohydrates, e.g., barley, oats, quinoa, spelt, etc., depends on individual carbohydrate sensitivty, though I tend to suggest minimal exposure.

Comments (20) -

  • Emily

    3/26/2010 4:17:02 PM |

    you forgot one more benefit- effortless wieght loss! at least for many of us...

  • Tony

    3/26/2010 4:28:57 PM |

    I've eliminated almost all sugar, and all refined grains, but I still  eat brown rice, oatmeal, and whole spelt bread. On my recent VAP test, my triglycerides were 78, HDL was 63, and my LDL was Pattern A (large, buoyant LDL). Also, my Cardiac C Reactive Protein was .84. I'm concluding that some whole grains are appropriate for me, and I use the blood glucose monitor to monitor postprandial glucose.

    By the way, thank you for all the info.

  • JustJoeP

    3/26/2010 4:47:04 PM |

    Dr. Davis, following your advice as well as several other clarion voices in the nutritional wilderness, over the last 9 months I went from:
    HbA1C 6.6, Fasting glucose 125mg/dl, BP135/85, LDL nearly 200, HDL below 30, body weight 245 (6ft tall, 40 in waist) on a mainly carb diet, to:

    HbA1C 5.5, Fasting glucose 105mg/dl, BP115/70, LDL nearly in 1/2, HDL above 65, body weight 204 (still 6ft tall, but a 33 in waist) on a very low carb diet.

    I've got 4 friends - all males in their 40s - who have also moved their personal numbers in these directions by greatly reducing carbs.  I'm trying to get my severely type II diabetic father to follow the same regimen, but his Medicare provided dietitian is fighting me every step of the way, with a diet based upon bread!  The struggle continues.

    Thank you for being a consistent, well informed, voice of reason.  You've helped more people than you know.  (linked to you here).  Be well.

  • Isaac

    3/26/2010 5:18:11 PM |

    And I'm so unimpressed with the lack of any good hard endpoint data associated with the insulin sensitizers and such.  These dietary options really need to be explored further but, sadly, won't so long as physicians aren't reimbursed for it.

  • Daniel

    3/26/2010 5:45:40 PM |

    I agree regarding fructose.  

    In people with impaired glucose tolerance, slashing starch too may indeed be beneficial.  But is there any evidence that slashing starch benefits people who have a healthy liver and pancreas?  In such people, I suspect slashing starch is just treating numbers and has nothing to do with health.  Otherwise, how do you explain Kitava, Peru, and Asia?

  • jandro

    3/26/2010 8:25:13 PM |

    Sometimes I think that the results given with these studies are mostly due to the reduction of grains (lectins) and refined sugar and not carbohydrates themselves. I want to believe it is as simple as reducing carbohydrates but it doesn't explain how populations like Kuna and Kitava have good health markers even though they eat a high carb diet. Dr. WD, do you have any ideas related to this specific topic?

    ** I am not debating the results of low carb (I personally do paleo), and if your metabolism is already damaged low carb is the only way, but what if it is not? (you were never obese, diabetic, started healthy habits at a young age, etc).

  • Anonymous

    3/26/2010 10:28:29 PM |

    Would these benefits also accrue to someone who does not get postprandial spikes in blood glucose on a low-carb diet - like the regular commentator "DrStrange"?

  • Ned Kock

    3/26/2010 10:57:59 PM |

    Actually, in the study reviewed in the post below, a 2-week replacement of refined carbs and sugars with dietary fat (mostly saturated) and cholesterol, led to a significant increase in HDL (14 percent increase in HDL from baseline for men).

    http://healthcorrelator.blogspot.com/2010/02/want-to-improve-your-cholesterol.html

    That was two weeks only.

    In my own experience, higher consumption of saturated fat and dietary cholesterol has immediate effects on HDL, and those effects are especially strong with elimination of refined carbs and sugars.

  • gindie

    3/26/2010 10:59:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    You mentioned Vitamin D.  I just got tested, level is 14.  However, I get episodes of calcium-based kidney stones (every 3-4 years or so).  How do you treat such patients?

  • Anonymous

    3/27/2010 12:15:47 AM |

    One thing I don't understand is if all these benefits are independent or if they are all linked to glucose level.
    If a particular carbohidrate causes little glucose spike will it still cause the other poblems?
    Or if carbohidrate intake is followed by intense physic actvity which seems to take BG down does it still causes all the other problems?

  • I Pull 400 Watts

    3/27/2010 12:32:49 AM |

    Just letting you know, very nice post!

  • Kim

    3/27/2010 2:53:35 AM |

    I totally agree.  I continued to struggle with my cholesterol the first year or so on a low carb diet.  After 3 years, my HDL has gone from 40 to 87 and my LDL has improved.  My blood pressure also improved over time.  My triglycerides were never high, but are usually in the 35 range now.  It's an awesome thing!

  • Stan (Heretic)

    3/27/2010 3:50:02 AM |

    Welcome to Low Carb Dr. Davis!  From now on, your life will never be the the same

    8-Smile

    In addition to what you have listed, which I can confirm in 100%, more beneficial effects will become apparent, such as:

    - self-healing of teeth with no need for dental intervention, and roughly twice as fast healing of broken bones.

    - healing of common cardiovascular diseases (arteriosclerosis, cardio myopathy and arrhythmia)

    - rapid self-healing of hepatic diseases (i.e post hep-C cirrhosis healed in 6 months),

    - improved kidney disease recovery (I heard of a patient  surviving on Optimal Diet without dialalysis with only 1/3 of 1 kidney left)

    - normalization of one's body weight (obese loose, underweight gain),

    - much stronger immune system (for instance, I never had a flu since yr 2000, before - twice a year)

    - stronger more benign reaction to stress, no more paralyzing panic, no more total body vascular contraction and probably related better resistance to cold temperature.  

    - no need to drink water frequently (fat metabolism releases water as an end product)

    - never feel hungry again, no need to snack, eating once or twice a day becomes the norm.   For me no breakfast, no supper, only lunch and dinner, typically.  

    - improved ability to hold breath longer when diving, generally we also naturally breath less frequently,

    - different (improved) mood, subtle changes in the way one thinks, solves problems and react to life events, as no doubts, you will find out...  8-Smile

    Regards,
    Stan (Heretic)

  • Lori Miller

    3/27/2010 1:59:21 PM |

    Daniel, I've tested my own blood glucose before and after meals and it's normal. However, I cut way back on all carbs a couple of months ago, and now eat around 47 grams of carbs per day. Results: I find that I don't need Sudafed or acid blockers at all now and I rarely take ibuprofin (an anti-inflammatory). The twinge in my shoulder and knee are gone. I've lost 10 pounds while working out *less.* I seldom get headaches, and when I do, they're mild. I also need a lot less sleep.

    Should anyone care for details, I've chronicled my experience in my blog.

  • Stan (Heretic)

    3/27/2010 3:26:56 PM |

    jandro - it is a very good question.  I wonder too but the studies I am reading (see for example Lancet. 1996 ) seem to indicate that carbohydrate reduction is beneficial in all cases, including healthy rural young populations.  

    I see it now in the same light as for example alcohol consumption: if you are healthy and young, a  harm may be minimal and some wine  (in moderation) may even provide you with some calories and micronutrients (i.e. resveratrol), but why bother consuming all that starchy and sugary plant food that we are not that well adapted for, that is useful only if we have nothing else to eat and that was probably meant for us only as a temporary food to get us over some rough periods of fauna decline.

      Since there is so little modern research done specifically on this subject we are still largely in the domain of hypotheses and theories. However not all that is speculative.  For example existing archaeological research does show us that paleolithic human diet consisted typically over 2/3 of meat!  We are talking about millions of years of human adaptation.

    ---

    Dr. Davis,  I forgot to add to my above list of benefits the following point:

    - reliable improvement (in almost every case) in treating the autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, eczema, psoriasis etc,

    - intestinal disease (Crohns, IBS , very high fat only!).  

    - Multiple sclerosis (not 100% especially if nerve damage is too advanced but improvement in most cases)

    There is a lot of patient cases (hundreds) of the above disease reported by Dr. Jan Kwasniewski, from his medical practice in the 1980-ties, described in his books, especially "Homo Optimus" and "Optimal Nutrition".  

    I think you will find those books extremely interesting, highly recommended.  

    Stan

  • Ellen

    3/27/2010 8:03:15 PM |

    Um Heretic.. I think Dr. Davis has been low carb for quite a while now. No need to welcome him to something he's already quite familiar with Smile

  • jandro

    3/27/2010 10:55:06 PM |

    Stan, thanks for your response:

    I read the abstract of the study you link and don't see how it is related to what I mentioned. It is comparing a vegetarian population with one that eats around a pound of fish a day. Seriously, is there a question there as to which is healthier? I also don't think they are healthier primarily because they consume less carbohydrates, but rather because they consume a pound of fish a day compared to no animal fat/flesh in the other group.

    If you read my original post again you will notice I am not saying a vegetarian diet (in fact, I eat over a pound of meat a day), I am just questioning whether the true problem is carbohydrates or if it is lectins, assuming you have a generous amount of animal fat and protein. I personally eat around 20% carbs, mostly coming from tubers and squashes as I find fruits too sweet (I agree that fructose should be reduced). Generally eat one piece of fruit a day.

    I also don't see any evidence to your claim that humans are not adapted to plant foods. We are omnivores, and that's how we have succeeded. We are adapted to a diet similar to what equatorial hunter gatherers have, since we evolved in a similar environment. People bring many archeological references of sites located outside of Africa not realizing that the environment outside of Africa is nearly as new to us as grains are. Most HGs living in Africa have plant food present on their diet. The information you tell yourself claims 2/3 of our diet was meat, what happened to the other 1/3?

  • Anonymous

    3/29/2010 8:33:04 AM |

    And what if someone goes really lowcarb (mostly meat) and his LDL rises up to 500? No info on the the LDL size. The remaining bloodwork results are  really good. Is this something to be worried about?

  • scall0way

    4/21/2010 7:21:12 PM |

    Hmm, well I eliminated wheat and all glutens from my diet in January 2009. I eliminated sugar at the same time. I also eliminated high Omega-6 vegetable oils. I basically eat low carb. I love to use coconut oil. Smile I've lost over 100 pounds.

    But my cholesterol just goes UP and UP! At least total and LDL - HDL remains in the 58-62 range and triglycerides remain in the 60-70 range. But Total cholesterol went from 229 6 months ago to 279 3 months ago, to 280 today, and LDL went from 165 6 months ago, to 190 3 months ago, to 206 today.

    And I can't understand why! Of course my doctor is rabid to put me on stations and crazy with me that I refuse, and looks at me cross-eyed when I request an NMR/VAP test for LDL particle size.

    But it still bothers me that it continues to go up and up and up, as I feel like I'm doing all I can to lower it. I was also diagnosed with Hashimoto's 6 months ago and put on 50 mcg of Levoxyl. Then three months ago it was upped to 75 mcg. Today it was upped to 88 mcg.

    Slashing carbs eliminating the bad stuff sure is not helping my total numbers, which means a huge argument with the doctor every visit, and I hate to argue. :-(

  • julianne

    9/7/2010 1:42:40 AM |

    I'm so glad I found this post!. I've had a group of clients take on paleo eating as a 6 week trial, doing so has naturally decreased their carbs. I had each person do before and after blood tests and I was concerned that 80% had a reduction in HDL. They also had reductions in Triglycerides and LDL and blood pressure and significant weight loss - but couldn't figure this one out. Thanks so much for keeping us informed of what goes on for your clients, so I know what is happening with mine is normal.

    Julianne
    By the way here are some of the results in people's own words
    http://paleozonenutrition.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/6-week-paleo-trial-results/

Loading
The key to losing weight

The key to losing weight

I saw three people this past week, all of whom set off on an effort to lose substantial quantities of weight. And all seriously needed to.

All three started with at least 70 lbs. excess weight; all showed substantial weight-sensitive lipoprotein patterns like low HDL, small LDL, high triglycerides, VLDL, and pre-diabetic levels of blood sugar. They also all shared high blood pressure.

All three also had high heart scan scores. Kate’s score was just over 1200. Tom, a 58-year old real estate developer, had a score of nearly 600. Susan, the youngest of the three at 52, had a heart scan score of 377¾99th percentile at this age. Losing weight was an absolute requirement for their plaque control program. Because their lipoprotein abnormalities and pre-diabetic patterns were triggered by weight, weight loss would provide powerful correction. Each and every one of them would need to lose much of their excess weight¾at least 50 lbs¾if they hoped to halt the relentless progression of their heart scan scores.

All three of them returned after 6-8 weeks, and all had lost between 17-24 lbs: spectacular results.

There’s no secret to weight loss. Each of them achieved their weight loss in slightly different ways. But they also shared several critical ingredients in their weight-loss efforts:

1) All three dramatically slashed their intake of wheat flour-containing foods and other processed carbohydrates and did so consistently. All also avoided the usual high-fat, high caloric-density foods like butter, margarine, fried foods, greasy foods, nuts roasted in oil, etc. They concentrated on vegetables, salads, raw nuts, lean proteins (inc. turkey, chicken, fish, lean red meats, low-fat cottage cheese and yogurt).

2) They stopped using food as a reward or as a consolation tool.

3) Exercise for one hour a day at least 5 days a week. The exercise in 2 of 3 of these people was just walking. It wasn’t strenuous, it wasn’t expensive. The women both liked walking with friends or their spouse. Tom followed a more common male path of more strenuous work on his treadmill, elliptical, and biking at the fitness club. But they all did it religiously and missed rare sessions.

4) They refrained from any and all alcoholic beverages. Yes, there are some advantages to 1-2 glasses of wine per day, but it stalls weight loss efforts.

5) They didn’t allow themselves any major indiscretions. There were no binges, major pig-outs at weddings, barbecues, or all-you-can-eat buffets. They did allow themselves an occasional “treat” but did so in small portions.

That’s it. But for most people, that’s simply too much. Adhering to an effort to lose dramatic weight requires day-after-day consistency. Nobody can lose the equivalent of 70,000 calories (20 lbs.) just by skipping a meal, a 20-minute walk, skipping the mashed potatoes at dinner.

It can be done. You’ve just got to be consistent about it.
Loading
I told you bread was bad

Comments (10) -

  • Lou

    2/26/2010 12:59:54 AM |

    Gee thanks for ruining my dinner! Lol.

    Anyway, I came across this article from Fox News website -

    "Low-Carb Diet Could Raise Bad Cholesterol Levels"

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,587393,00.html

    I don't know where to begin to point out why it's misleading...

    Frustrating when media does that and only to cause more confusion over low carb diet, high carb diet and such.

  • Nigel Kinbrum

    2/26/2010 4:02:43 AM |

    Lou.

    That Fox News article has already been covered HERE.

    Nige.

  • Anonymous

    2/26/2010 4:25:25 AM |

    It says:
    "Both groups lost around 6 kilograms (13 pounds). But the individuals on the low-carb diet actually had an average increase of 12 milligrams per deciliter increase in their LDL levels, up from 109 milligrams per deciliter (less than 100 is considered optimal); the high-carb diet group showed a 7 milligram per deciliter decrease, down from 102."

    "The low-carb group also showed greater increases in their levels of free fatty acids, which are released into the blood when the body breaks down stored fat. High levels of free fatty acids make it more difficult for the liver to store glucose, which in turn ups sugar levels in the blood. Consistently high sugar levels define diabetes."

    So I guess the low carbers started burning fat from their guts as if that is bad and also would not be able to store glucose if they were eating any.

    Well duh...

  • Steve Cooksey

    2/26/2010 4:42:18 AM |

    Dr. Davis...that picture should be placed on every bag of bread...

    Agreed Lou. Smile

  • Roz Watkins

    2/26/2010 9:20:50 AM |

    Hey, what's the problem? The rat is by far the most nutritious part of that loaf!

  • Peter I

    2/26/2010 12:03:22 PM |

    Good one. Smile

  • jeffreyquick

    2/26/2010 2:59:14 PM |

    Uh, wouldn't that raise the protein level and make it less bad?

    At our farm, we have a rule: eat our food, and we can eat you. We draw the line at rats and mice though.

  • fourteeneightyeight

    2/26/2010 4:37:07 PM |

    The bread was definitely bad for the dead mouse!

  • Kevin

    2/27/2010 3:49:10 PM |

    I need to get my glasses checked.  I thought I was looking at a chunk of black mold til reading these comments.  When I took a closer look...yuck.  

    It almost looks like a contrived photo.

    kevin

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 8:47:59 PM |

    So I guess the low carbers started burning fat from their guts as if that is bad and also would not be able to store glucose if they were eating any.

Loading
The dreaded niacin "flush"

The dreaded niacin "flush"

As most anybody who takes niacin knows, it can cause a hot flushed feeling over the chest and face that is generally harmless, though quite annoying.

Many doctors are frightened by this response and will warn patients off from niacin. Some people who take niacin are so annoyed that they find it intolerable.

However, a very simple maneuver can relieve the hot flush in over 90% of instances: Drink water. Let me explain.

I usually instruct patients to take niacin at dinnertime. That way, food slows absorption modestly. I also ask them to drink water with dinner. If the flush occurs after dinner (usually 30-60 minutes later), then drinking two 8-12 oz glasses of water immediately breaks the flush within 3 minutes in the great majority of people. It's quite dramatic.

Doing this around dinner (lunch works just as well) allows sufficient time to clear the excess water from your body before bedtime and spare you the aggravation of disrupted sleep to urinate. Drinking plenty of water works most of the time. Only an occasional person will need to take a 325 mg uncoated aspirin to more fully break the flush. I generally suggest that patients keep the uncoated aspirin in reserve if the water doesn't provide relief within a few minutes.

Thankfully, the intensity of the niacin flush lessens, often disappears, with chronic use.

Why do some people develop the flush and other don't? It is believed that some people metabolize niacin more rapidly to a compound called nicotinuric acid, a niacin metabolite that causes dilation (relaxation) of skin capillaries--thus the flush. The rapidity of converting niacin to nicotinuric acid is determined genetically.

An occasional person really struggles with niacin to the point of intolerance. However, on the positive side, these people may also be "hyper-responders" to niacin, i.e., they show exagerated benefits in raising HDL, reducing small LDL, etc., from small doses such as 250 mg per day.

If you experience the hot flush of niacin, think water to put out the fire.

Comments (55) -

  • Anne

    5/18/2007 3:17:00 AM |

    I had a severe reaction to my first dose of niacin - wish I could remember what dose was prescribed. I not only had a flush, but I itched all over and my face and mouth swelled up. Was that an allergy or can the niacin flush get that bad.

  • Dr. Davis

    5/18/2007 11:29:00 AM |

    Hi,Anne--
    Your reaction is a rare variety that I've seen only a handful of times. There's no such thing as allergy to niacin itself, though someone rarely can be allergic to another component in the capsule. It is possible to take niacin after such a reaction, but you need to work with your doctor. I've re-introduced niacin after such reactions at very small doses of, say, 50 mg (immediate-release) and built up very slowly over months, even years. This has worked out well.

  • Anne

    5/19/2007 10:08:00 PM |

    Thank you for your answer. The niacin I was prescribed was Niaspan. I can ask my cardiologist if there is a gentler brand and a lower dose.

  • Kathy and Wes

    7/26/2007 10:42:00 PM |

    My reaction to 500mg of niaspan was burning from head to foot 2 1/2 hours after taking it. In addition, my heart was beating so fast I couldn't believe it.  If felt like I was being burned with a curling iron all over my body.  The only thing I could do to relieve it was to splash cold water all over me.  My Dr. wants me to try it again. taking a baby aspirin an hour before hand.   I only had this twice out of four times.  But I am very afraid to try it.  It lasts almost an hour.

  • Kathy and Wes

    7/26/2007 10:48:00 PM |

    My Dr. put me on 500mg of Niaspan. I have taken it 4 times and twice had the worst reaction.  I became beat red from head to toe, and my skin felt like I was being burned with a curling iron.  The only relief I could get was to splash water on my skin.  This lasted almost an hour.  My heart was also pounding at an excelerated pace.  My physician would like me to try it one more time with a baby aspirin, which I did once.  Are you sure that it is safe with a reaction like that?

    Thanks

    Kathy

  • Dr. Davis

    7/27/2007 12:05:00 AM |

    Plenty of water--meaning 16-24 oz, if okay with your doctor--with your niacin can be very helpful in the beginning. In my experience, people who live with chronic dehydration (there's lots) struggle the most with niacin.

  • Dr. Davis

    7/27/2007 12:07:00 AM |

    Kathy--

    I can NEVER offer medical advice online.

    I can only tell you that I've had many people navigate through these feelings just by paying attention to hydration. Only an occasional person is truly unable to tolerate it.

    Another option I use in my patients is to induce "tolerance" by accepting a small dose, e.g., 250 mg SloNiacin (Upsher Smith) for several months, and increase it very slowly. But you need to discuss this with your doctor.

  • Doris

    7/28/2008 3:50:00 PM |

    I have taken Niacin for over two years. By brother-in-law was in the emergency room with flushing. The doctor had given him Niacin and told him to take a big dose daily. I can't remember if it was 2000mg for sure, but I think it was. I began at 100 mg and on the fifth day went to 200 mg. After taking that for 4 days I upped it to 300 mg. You get the pattern. I eventually made it up to 3000 mg. I buy it at the health food store in the mall because the Niacin in the discount stores tend to be nonflushing. I still flush occasionally, but not severely. I enjoy the flush as I know, or pretend,that is where the little niacin crumbles are eating up the cholesterol. Ha. Good luck. I found this suggestion online posted by a doctor.
    btw, I have itched a bunch for maybe 10 minutes while it flushed. My flushes are not too severe to continue. I did go off Niacin and am restarting because I looked online for Niacin overdoses and I had some of the symptoms. I decided I had got too high on dosing.

  • Jenn

    8/22/2008 1:31:00 PM |

    Why is Niaspan considered a better medication (at least by my doctor) than over the counter niacin, when it causes so much more flushing? On regular Niaspan, I don't flush every day, but if I do, it's anywhere from 2-18 hours after I take it. My doctor started me on the Niaspan-Crestor combination, and I can set my watch by it- 8 hours after I take it, every day.
    It's hard to get ready for work, when my face is blotchy and puffy and it hurts to apply makeup or comb my hair. Is flushing connected to diet and exercise? That is, is it supposed to make you flush if you eat the wrong things or don't exercise? I can't understand why my doctor would insist on my using Niaspan unless he's trying to use the flushing as a behavior modification program.

  • Anonymous

    9/1/2008 9:22:00 PM |

    I had an odd reaction to Niacin.  After eight wonderful days of taking it, I woke up one evening with a feeling that my body was on fire from head to toe.  Remembering that I needed to take an aspirin when flushing had occurred, I went to the kitchen where I had a series of seizures.  Upon eliminating everything in me, we called an ambulance.  
    The ER physician said it was a normal reaction and to continue to take the medication as prescribed.  I called my family doctor the next morning and he said I did have a reaction, which I stopped at that moment.  
    So, did I have an allergic reaction to the medication or just a seizure out of no where?

    Thanks,
    Tina

  • Murf from WA

    10/13/2008 8:20:00 PM |

    this doc is cool but u guys are all a bunch of little whiners! Niacin flush is such a rush I can literally feel all the toxins leaving my body and it feels GREAT. so quit complaining. this "flush" is doing you good. I assure you. The whole point is to flush. calling the ER because you are flushing may be a sign that you are a hypochondriac. maybe u should see a therapist?

  • Anonymous

    10/18/2008 2:56:00 PM |

    I agree w/"murph" but not so aggressively--the flush is good, good, good.  You are just freaking out a little but because it's odd and unusual to you, at first.  You should be flushing, it's increased blood flow that is getting all the nasty stuff out of your system and after the pinkness subsides I have been asked about what I'm doing with my skin because it's glowing!  I swear my skin looks clearer and more youthful.  I take it when I wake up, before breakfast & a shower and by the time I get to work my pink is gone, I'm more awake & my skin is glowing.  LOVE IT, DON'T FEAR IT.

  • PinkyTink

    10/30/2008 4:37:00 PM |

    I used to work in a pharmaceutical - packaging niacin. I would have my hands gloved, my arms covered, my hair in a net and wearing scrubs with a lab coat over them - just inhaling the niacin while working with it in raw form left me very sensitized to niacin reactions, which I attribute more to a feeling of a bad sunburn for about an hour. I too have had difficulty breathing and swelling of my esophagus during a reaction after higher doses or inhalation during the time I worked in the lab.
    I do not feel those who are speaking here are hypochondriacs and unless you've gone through something, you should really not judge others their symptoms - clearly the seizure person would argue you that their issue was not in her mind, do you not agree?
    I personally just find the reaction plain annoying, but have had to adhere to my doctor's warning of being wary of certain forms and doses of niacin due to my persistent reaction post-contact... those who do not understand this, i have no worries; nor am I whining or complaining - facts are facts - they are what they are - I make no apologies for stating them. Enjoy your day Smile

  • New to Niacin

    11/6/2008 2:45:00 AM |

    I agree with PinkyTink that the feeling most like a niacin flush is like a sunburn. Here's my account for those interested in case studies. I tried niacin (250mg) for the first time two days ago and thought "well, this feels nice; it's kind of hot and tingly as if I were blushing over my entire body." If some is good, more is better, right? Wrong! Yesterday I tried 500mg, encouraged by the fact that the recommended dose is 1-2 grams, and determined to fix my cholesterol problem all in 1 day. Nope. I spent about 3 hours with what felt like the worst sunburn that I've ever had (and being a native to SoCal, I've had a few). The burn started on my face, which was fine since it doesn't touch anything. It then included my face, shoulders and upper torso, which was moderately annoying but I was able to continue working. At the 1 hour mark or so, the fire had engulfed my lower torso and my buttocks as well so I kneeled in front of my computer (the prickling and burning too intense to put pressure on) to work. About a half an hour after that, my entire body was on fire and I just gave up and paced around until the intensity was bearable at about the 2.5 hour mark. It was incredibly itchy from the 1.5-2.5 hour mark, and I did rub and put an ice pack on excessively itchy spots occasionally, which relieved a bit of the discomfort. (I didn't know about the dehydration fix, so I'll try that next time.) I am planning on continuing with niacin, but with a slower increase to get my tolerance up, YMMV. To those who don't think the flush is a big deal or pretty debilitating, we may be describing different levels of intensity.

  • headlightsonthehighway

    11/28/2008 6:28:00 AM |

    I've taken half of a 100mg dose and it usually causes just a bit of flushing for around 15 minutes. But tonight I decided to take the whole 100mg and my face not only felt like it was on fire, it went to my hands, then arms, neck, shoulders, then my legs. My face (mostly my nose and upper lip) swelled up and I looked like I had fallen asleep at the beach for 8 hours. My heart raced and I was afraid that maybe I was having an allergic reaction, but after about an hour, it subsided. I will only take the smaller doses from now on. The flushing isn't so bad, but the swelling scared me a little.

  • Anonymous

    3/17/2009 12:03:00 PM |

    I had an intense, long-lasting niacin flush similar to the worst mentioned on here. I also have some menopausal flushing (even with estrogen), rosacea, and migraines. People with any of those conditions should be careful about niacin. I don't think it is all that rare to have a very bad reaction to it, because there are a lot of people who have one or more of these conditions.

  • Kaylin

    5/1/2009 4:25:00 AM |

    I took 500mg of niacin today and had quite a flush!  It was a very good thing that I happened to be at my parents' house with my three young children instead of driving, because after my skin felt sunburn-hot and turned beet-red all over, everything started looking very bright and I would have passed out if my mom hadn't led me to a bed to lay down.  I am so thankful she was there because she had to take care of my kids while I laid on the bed for a couple of hours recovering.  Almost passing out is not a hypochondriac invention, people!  I thank the good doctor for his information as I am encouraged to continue taking niacin, but at much smaller doses until my body gets used to it.

  • Michele

    5/18/2009 3:03:00 PM |

    Hi. I was doing fine on 500 mg of time-released niacin twice a day for five months with only minor flushes. Yesterday, about four hours after taking the first 500 mg pill, my face flushed beet red and got very hot. Ditto for my upper back. Can this be due to the niacin, even though I didn't just start taking it and the flush occurred hours after I took one?

  • Anonymous

    5/29/2009 11:09:11 PM |

    I just bought a new multivitamin at a health store and didn't notice it's huge level of niacin and I had a severe reaction like some of you described...full body sunburn, itching, rash, burning, and swelling of upper lip. My heart raced. I had to run home from work and take a Clonidine that I had for rosacea flushes and a benedryl (probably a bad idea, but I was desperate for relief) and am still waiting for some relief. I would beware of the flushes...those of us with rosacea know, with every flush comes inflammation and capillary damage which can age you and ruin your complexion.

  • Cookie

    6/12/2009 2:43:40 AM |

    Be careful advising people that there is no such thing as a niacin allergy. I cannot even tolerate 2 bites of food that has been supplemented with it, without my lips swelling and burning and itching starting. I first discovered my allergy to it by taking it as a supplement by itself. I broke out in hives and itched terribly for a few days. I didn't want to believe it, so I took it again a month later. Repeat, only worse this time. I can't even take it in any form, energy drinks, cereal bars or B100. I drink 2 quarts of water daily, and as much as I can more,
    when I realize I have eaten it in something by accident. This is the most serious itching and welts I have ever experienced. Hoping this helps someone else, Laura

  • Dr. William Davis

    6/12/2009 7:37:47 PM |

    Cookie--

    You do NOT have a niacin allergy. If you did, you would not be alive. Niacin is required for human life.

    What you have is an unusual idiosyncratic reaction. This does not mean that niacin is safe. It means that you are among the rare exceptions in tolerance to greater than pellagra-preventing doses of this B vitamin.

  • Cookie

    6/20/2009 3:57:39 PM |

    Hi Dr Davis,
    I do believe you may be right that the allergy is not just Niacin alone. I have found I have severe reactions to Niacinamide, but not Niacin alone. I looked up the difference on Wikipedia and they are very close in their chemical makeup and definition. But, they are not the same. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niacinamide
    The bond is N,O,NH2

    Whereas, the bond for Niacin is N,O,OH.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niacin
    I am no scientist, but my body certainly knows the difference.
    I hope this helps someone else.

  • Anonymous

    7/26/2009 3:54:52 AM |

    A doctor told me to take a baby asprin and 500 mg of niacin for one week then increase it to 1000 mg.  Presently, I am on my third day of 500 mg, here is my experience with flushing.  The first day was no problem.  I took one baby asprin before my meal and the 500 mg of niacin after my meal. I felt like I had a bad sunburn, but everything was fine. I noticed I didn't turn red where I was sitting, but everywhere my skin was exposed was red and hot.  Day 2 - I took 2 baby asprins before my meal and 500 mg of niacin after my meal. The flushing was almost unbearable.  Quite different from day 1.  I stripped my clothes off because I couldn't stand anything on my skin, stood in front of a fan, and iced my body.  Then I remembered about yesterday the parts of my body that were covered did not have a bad sensation, so I put clothes back on and jumped in bed with covers.  That did help relieve the symptoms.  Today is day 3.  I was scared because I didn't want a repeat of yesterday.  I thought about reducing my dose, but I had a plan.  I took 2 baby asprins before my meal and 2 motrin and 500 mg of niacin after my meal. I put on long pants and a long sleeve turtleneck sweater, and had an ice pack ready for my face and hands. The flushing episode went really well. I didn't even have a bad sunburn feeling.  It was just slight.  I don't know if this will work for anyone else or on day 4.

  • Anonymous

    7/27/2009 1:54:58 AM |

    Day 4 - I did the same thing as day 3.  I took 2 baby asprins before my meal and 2 motrin and 500 mg of niacin after my meal. I put on long pants and a long sleeve turtleneck sweater.  I had very slight hotness in my hands and face.  That is it.  I didn't need an ice pack today. I don't know why this method works, but if it will help anyone else I'm glad I posted my comments.

  • Laxana's World

    8/7/2009 3:28:40 AM |

    I had never been told about any reaction to Niacin...I took it before dinner and thought I was on fire...I found this site and drank water and took aspirin...it helped, but a cool water bath w/ baking soda and time finally made it better (it's been three hours and my skin is still extremely sensitive and somewhat flushed)...this has been one of the more unpleasant side effects to any medication.  I want to continue to lower my cholesterol, and already take red rice yeast and fish oil...I don't know if I can continue the niacin...no fun.

  • Phil5115

    8/22/2009 9:55:04 AM |

    I get the itching and burning as well, but the worst is a swelling sensation in my ears.  Not pleasant, but my triglycerides are improving.

  • Anonymous

    8/31/2009 6:56:12 PM |

    Being flushed is nothing.  I took an over the counter niacin tablet and besides turning as red as a lobster (no exaggeration--I was the color of a stop sign) my blood pressure fell fast and I landed on the floor unconscious.  There are those of us with a severe reaction to niacin supplements; it is not trivial and it is well worth thinking about.  Having such a precipitous drop in pressure is dangerous.

  • robert

    9/2/2009 11:08:39 PM |

    Hmmm...I take niacin like this - 0500- 500mg SloNiacin; 0900- 500 mg Miacin; 1200- 500 mg Niacin; 1600- 500mg Niacin: I rarely flush and when I do, it is extremely mild and does not even register. I don't know what all the fuss is about. Maybe I am taking it incorrectly?

  • Kris

    10/17/2009 12:59:22 AM |

    The only time I get a flush is when I have eaten garlic and then taken the niacin.  It is not pleasant and scared me very badly the first time.  I do not know why this happens.  Has anyone else had a similar experience?

  • Anonymous

    10/26/2009 7:26:52 PM |

    My experience was extreme. I have been taking the Niacin with Crestor for 3 days. When I sat down to lunch today I suddenly felt warm and took off my sweater. within 2 minutes I was burning in agony from head to foot and my body was shaking. I was itching, shaking and burning while my heart was racing. I was beyond beat red and it was far more painful than any sunburn I had ever experienced. I was in tears and scared witless. I am a 40 year old ex football player. I am not afraid of a little pain, this was torture! I felt like someone was burning every inch of skin from my body all at once and I could do nothing but lie down and scream. My Wife called the doctor who said it was normal and would pass. My triglycerides were about 108 but my doctor wants to see them at 80. For those who think it's just whining, I hope you never have to experience what I have just gone through! I wouldn't put that on anyone no matter how cluless they were. Until you've experienced a severe reaction, do not even try to minimize the pain. It is beyond belief. That was 4 hours ago and I am still itching.

  • Doug

    11/17/2009 7:24:50 PM |

    I have used Efudex and fluoruracil for treatment of Actinic Keratosis with the last treatment 2 years ago.  Since then, my arms barely show any signs of damage, but my legs still showed the damage which would be more prevalent when I got hot and sweaty.  I took my first 500 mg dose of Niacin 4 days ago at night.  I only felt a little flushing and tingling, and didn't think it was bad at all.  The next day, my legs looked as bad as they did after using the fluoruracil for 4 weeks.  I have not taken another dose of Niacin and my skin has not improved at all.  I think the Niacin is telling me that the Actinic Keratosis was not destroyed on my legs.  Do dermatoligists use Niacin to make AK's more pronounced so that they can find them?  Will my current condition get better?

  • John

    12/20/2009 2:18:28 AM |

    Hello, all! I have been taking Niacin daily for more than 30 years. I don't take it for cholesterol but rather as a treatment for Meniere's Disease but that's another story entirely. I believe because of the length of time that I've been a Niacin user that I have more experience with it than perhaps anyone, anywhere. I can go months without a flush and then I can experience a mild flush eveery day for a week. I flush much more with non-timed release forms than with timed release forms. Some times I experience a really bad flush. I mean REALLY bad. Not just the feeling that's akin to the worst sunburn that I've ever experienced but the feeling that the skin on my face weighs many pounds more than it possibly could and if it gets REALLY bad, my stomach tightens up as though it wants to screw itself into a tiny, tiny ball, nearly doubling me over. Twicee in my life I have come perilously close to passing out during a flush. Once while driving and the second just about an hour ago tonight. Tonight's was the worst that I have ever experinced by far. It got so bad that I actually feared that I was on the verge of dying. This flush lasted far longer than any before it. Usually they pass in 15-20 minutes for me but tonight's effects have drawn out for more than an hour. As I type this post, my hands are still shaking as I am "coming down" from the flush. The thing of it is though that I knew it was going to be bad tonight, just not this bad. You see, I usually take my Niacin in the form of a timed-release caplet (Slo Niacin) early in the morning and if I forget to take it early in the day, the likelihood of a bad flush increases the later that I take it. Yesterday I realized at 3PM that I hadn't taken my Niacin so, fearing the severee flush, I simply didn't take it at all. Today, I once again forgot to take it early and risked taking it at 4PM. The flush didn't hit me until 7 but when it did, it grew slowly and to a height I had never experienced. WOW!I'm just about back to normal after an hour and a quarter!!! I just read the advice about taking an aspirin and I will keep some on hand in case it gets this bad again. I also think I'll make a SERIOUS effort to remember to take it first thing in the morning from now on!

  • Bram

    1/26/2010 1:50:43 AM |

    Hi,

    I really had to post a comment too.
    After reading John's post I felt a lot better. I also had the worst flush ever today. Normally i take 1000 Mg Niacin twice a week, but last week I skipped my doses, just to give my body a little time for itself. Normally the flush starts after 1-1.5 hours and than slowly my body starts to feel a little bit hot from top down, not too bad, kind of nice even. Today after 20 minutes or so, in one second my head became SUPERHOT, my lips and my facial muscles felled paralized, my heart started racing (maybe because of the new strange experience) I looked in the mirror and my complete face was hanging down. I've never seen this before so my heart started beating faster and I started hyperventilating. At that moment I really thought it was the end of my life. It was really bad. But now I know I'm not alone so we'll see what happens next time;
    Maybe a smaller dose, this was really scary.

  • Anonymous

    1/30/2010 9:07:17 PM |

    I started taking niacin yesterday (250 pil per day), no flush, but today I experienced it.  Ears got hot, then face then upper body.  Slight itching.  it lasted about 30 minutes.  Nice.
    I wonder if it is ok to have a glass of wine while taking niacin pills?
    thanks

  • Anonymous

    2/17/2010 3:48:50 AM |

    Anonymous don't drink wine.  I had the swelling of the lips, face, I looked like my face was about to explode, it was tightened and my face looked like a 20 year olds skin, I itched for 2 hours scratching my arms raw.  I laugh about it now when I read your post, but I was scared.

  • Barbara

    3/28/2010 10:05:40 AM |

    So my cardiolgist told me to take 1 325 mg aspirin 30 minues before bed & 2 Niaspan at bed time.  twice now I have been up for 3-5 hours with the flushing reaction from hell. The thing is I get hives when I get hot. The itching from the flush coupled with the itching from the hives caused by the heat is unbearable. I burn from  head to toe & even went outside to cool off, in just a tank top, in Colorado, with a foot of snow on  the ground. Still burning. The water does seem to be helping. From now on I'll eat at bedtime & dring 24 oz of water to help. I have to work 7 hours today with no sleep.  This stinks.

  • Anonymous

    7/4/2010 10:40:02 PM |

    Hey, I have no problem with the niacin flush (actually feels good -- and I feel great afterwards). However, I stupidly tried the non-flush niacin (because the pharmacist recommended it) which also contained inositol... I had an allergic reaction for the first time in my life (lasted six hours). Had to go to the hospital. Never touching no-flush or inositol supplements again. Real niacin only (you have to ask for it over the counter here).

  • Anonymous

    7/4/2010 10:47:47 PM |

    To continue previous post: I would avoid Niaspan or extended-release niacin or inositol if you have the allergic reactions as posted above (unbearable hives, itching and heat). Real niacin effects lasts about a half an hour and feel good -- and if you don't like that feeling just use an aspirin half an hour before taking it. The actual allergic reaction I experienced with inositol or "no-flush" niacin (as others above obviously have) is hell. Besides, scientifically, only real niacin works for cholesterol or depression (no-flush and time-release are an upselling marketing scam). There is a HUGE difference between the allergic reaction (to inositol, no-flush, and time release) and the normal real niacin flush.

  • Anonymous

    7/4/2010 10:56:53 PM |

    Addendum to previous two posts: the allergic reaction I had started a few hours after I too the no-flush/inositol. The redness and hives covered my entire upper torso, the unbearable itching appearing in random places. The hives and itching became so bad I jumped in a cool shower for over 2.5 HOURS because I was worried that just scratching myself would leave scars. I finally went to the hospital and was given benadryl. Took another hour to go away. Avoid no-flush or inositol or time-release if you have the allergic reactions.

  • Anonymous

    7/20/2010 9:32:53 PM |

    I was taking a rather small dose, a 100mg mega B vitamin. I got the flushing red response, but then my breathing got rather weak and I had to lie down. I tried another pill a week later and exactly the same thing happened. I got really light headed and was forced to lie down.

    Allergy? I see you guys trying 1000mg... how can I react so strongly to 100?

  • Newton Kinglsley IV

    9/29/2010 3:39:50 PM |

    You're probably right about that water. I took 200 mg today with breakfast, a dose that usually doesn't cause me grief. But damn was I baked today. Felt like I was being burned alive and my skin filleted off with razor sharp steel wool dipped in acid.

    But I drank 16 oz of water and that sure seemed to help. Usually I drink a few glasses of water but today I didn't and I bet that's what did it.

    I also took some asa but there's no way that was absorbed quite so quickly. The worst of the flushing stopped in 5 minutes. It's still present, but tolerable.

  • Venkat

    10/1/2010 10:21:57 PM |

    I had been asked to have 500mg Niacin with 350mg asprin first once a day for 2 weeks then twice a day. I never felt much other than a stuffy nose which I didn't know was related but then one night I woke up feeling hot and uncomfortable. Drank water and had an asprin and slept. I stopped taking it after that. My doctor recommended I continue so I started today by having the slow release Niacin in the morning around 10am after breakfast. At 2:30pm while I was driving suddenly I felt hot in the face, hands, body and legs. I realized I was having the flush but didn't know how to control it hence I looked up online and I am glad I stumbled on to this blog. Can't believe that it is just a vitamin causing all this. Side effects seem to be worse than most drugs.

  • Anonymous

    10/22/2010 12:18:26 PM |

    Thanks folks...I have been taking Niaspam for a while now...6 months...working up to 1500 mg a day (taken at night with aspirin). What's funny is in general I tolerate it okay, with only minor flushing, but today I had an ATTACK like many of you describe that was so debilitating I felt like jumping out the window to get our of my own skin. Even getting the water into my system wasn't so easy because I was so uncomfortable. Between the water and aspirin, I'm back to the managable "light sunburn" itch level. I think 1500 mg may just be too large a dose for me and I may need to cut back to 1000 mg. Also, I do occassionally drink, and since I know the reaction between alcohol and niacin is bad, I don't take it on nights where I've had a couple. Anyway, it's some relief to know that the reaction I had today isn't that uncommon, miserable as it is. I appreciate the tips on dealing with this strange medication and will continue to follow posts here...

  • Anonymous

    10/28/2010 4:51:40 AM |

    Great article Doc, thanks. I just flushed now, felt like a bad sunburn, and your water trick helped!

    I have been on Niaspan for a while, usually avoiding the flush with some tips from my heart Dr. He recommended two things that help me: take at bedtime, so if the flushing happens I am probably asleep, and also take my daily aspiring about 30 minutes before the Niaspan, which he says helps avoid the flush.

    Problem is, I usually end up taking the aspirin at the same time as the Niaspan for convenience, and that might not give thye aspirin enough time to help. Tonight, I took the pills at bedtime as usual, but ended up staying up later.

    One time when first on Niaspan, my heart raced like crazy with the flush, like another writer had. Anyway, thanks for great info.

  • Lemia

    12/20/2010 10:12:47 PM |

    Dr. Davis,
    Po"tay"to, Po"tah"to, with regards to allergy or sensitivity.  Particulary with lay people, if it causes an anaphalactic reaction (or even Hives, for that matter), might as well call it an allergy.  People also naturally need iodine in their bodies, and while "technically" you would say I have an iodine "sensitivity", that does not (and did not) stop me (nor many of my patients in the Cath Lab) from having an allergic reaction to IV iodine (and forget about topical betadine!)  

    To argue with someone about whether it is called an allergy or not, may give a non-medical person the idea that a sensitivity to something naturally occurring is therefore nothing to worry about.  In my case, and many others, it would mean death.  I think the nomenclature should be changed personally - if something can end up causing an anaphalactic reaction it SHOULD be called an allergy.

  • Lemia

    12/20/2010 10:14:34 PM |

    Correction: I meant to say "Anaphalactic reaction" and not "Allergic reaction"

  • Lemia

    12/20/2010 10:25:59 PM |

    As a side note:  I recently had what would be seen as a typical "allergic" reaction after taking just 250 Niacin - (this was Slo-Niacin) which I have been taking for years - as a matter of fact, I have gone down from 500mg.  Never had a problem with it before today.  Throat, tongue and lip swelling, wheezing, hives and a raised rash over full head and torso, front and back.

    My curiousity is over whether high levels of HDL itself may be a factor in such a severe reaction.  I already have an extremely high HDL and wondering if increasing an already high HDL was the culprit.  I would like to hear your thoughts on that and if you know of any such studies.  My own physician would like me on a statin, which besides giving me many side effects (all of them), I am doubtful as to their need with a normal ratio.  Despite having a high total cholesterol (ranging any given time from 275 to 325) , my ratio is absolutely fine.  Again, I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the subject.
    Thanks greatly.

  • Anonymous

    2/3/2011 3:49:55 AM |

    I am so relieved to read about others' experiences. I have been taking Niaspan 500mg for about 6 months with fairly mild flushing. Last night I had a severe reaction. I turned bright red, rapid heart rate, shortness of breath. I was burning up from the top of my head to the top of my thighs ( my legs were fine ). I am a RN and worked ER for 20 years and never knew that these symptoms could occur after many months of the same dosage. It was a relief to hear that it was not just me! I will continue to take the Niaspan but am taking the night off tonight!

  • Elizabeth Dugan

    2/27/2011 3:44:45 AM |

    I took Niacin (500mg) for a couple of days and am going insane with the itching.  I haven't taken it for 2 days now but I am still itching.  Does anyone know how long the Niacin stays in one's system?  Thank you.

  • Anonymous

    3/15/2011 4:25:50 AM |

    im twelve and my dad made me eat a little..now i feel like im right in front of a 450 degree oven and i also feel like theres spikes protruding out of my body and my heart is beating like 5 time per secend

  • Anonymous

    3/30/2011 8:06:04 PM |

    The first time I took straight Niacin, not in a B-Complex, I got the flush severely. It actually started INSIDE my chest, it suddenly felt like there was cold water suddenly inside of my lungs, and I burst into a coughing fit. From there it spread. If it had stayed on my skin, it would have been fine. But it was inside my ears, and my whole sinuses puffed up so much I could barely breathe. I got VERY dizzy. I was on my way to the gym, and walked up 3 flights of stairs. By the time I got to the top of the stairs, my blood pressure had dropped so much I didn't make sense when talking, and then I promptly passed out. An ambulance was called, and after I came to and threw up, my BP was at some ridiculously low rate, like 55/40 or somewhere around there. VERY bad reaction, will not be taking again.

    And for those of you dismissing extreme reactors as "hypochondriacs", the flush is subjective, and how is passing out hypochondria?

  • Anonymous

    4/8/2011 12:26:17 AM |

    I have been taking niacin for years...I have found it to be the cure to brain farts...you know when you brain goes on vacation for like 3 seconds. I can't have that, I play bullet chess for several hours on end. That is where the whole game is played in a minute or less. Three seconds is an eternity. Anyway, I just had a massive flush; it happens once a year or so.  What usually triggers it for me is eating something with white bread.  They add niacin to it.  It is just enough to push me over the edge and instant beet.  You have to wait a few hours before having any white bread after taking niacin. Burger buns and pizza crust are the worst. It was Pizza this time. Intense exercise can also trigger it. But burger buns that is the biggie. I don't drink, so I have no familiarity with that interaction.
    One thing I did not see here is that afterword for a few days I feel really run down.  I either get the flush or not and when I do it is head to toe fire and itch, and I need several aspirin (I am 290 lb with a good deal of muscle)and lots of water and like three or more hours before it goes down.  I don't get a racing heart rate though. I don't want to cast any aspersions, but that sounds like panic ;). Oh, and scratching makes it worse for me, when it starts. I avoid that. I also sit down and do some mental relaxation exercises. I get dizzy if I stand up so I don't ;) I also think the shivering is just from having so much blood at the surface...it just pulls the heat from the core. I only shiver if I sit in front of a fan...still...I prefer the fan and shivers to fiery skin. But when I have not had access to a fan or cold water, I haven't had a shiver. I am not suggesting people take a lot of aspirin that is just me.
    Hmm, I like the dehydration explanation. When I exercise I do so intensely and for at least an hour...I suppose dehydration could be the reason exercise can trigger it in me.  I'll have to try extra water an hour before exercise. I may have been a little dehydrated this morning too as I awoke with both arms asleep and I was not sleeping on them. When that happens or if I have cramps when sleeping or on getting up, I have made the connection that I am generally dehydrated.

  • Anonymous

    4/9/2011 4:52:51 AM |

    I have been taking Niaspan for about 4 months. At first I had anxiety and flushing.  Now I just have the flushing and not daily. My doctor recommended that I take it with applesauce or apricots.  Pharmacist told my to take it with a low dose aspirin. Spicey food also seems to cause a reaction. I don't always get a flush and it only lasts about 20 minutes. My doctor also suggested I not use the aspirin because I won't get the full benefits. I am being monitored with blood tests and cholesterol is better. I also take Crestor.  I am a 51 year old post menopausal female with a family history of heart problems which I would like to avoid

  • Robin Ireland

    3/14/2012 3:34:40 PM |

    I stumbled upon a cure for the flush a few years ago. I was searching online and wound up at a drug reps site. Apparently one of their companies was doing a study on the Polyphenol Quercetin, and its natural ability to stop flushing. There were talks of combining Niacin with Quercetin to prevent it. So, being that it is a Polyphenol, and good for you, I thought I''d try it. It worked the very first time, and has worked for years since. I''ve been on up to 2G of Niaspan a day, and I take 2.5 G of Quercetin about 20 minutes beforehand and I almost never flush at all. If I do I just take a couple 500mg capsules of Quercetin and it goes away within 20 minutes. So, while I get a great dose of healthy Polyphenols I fight the flush too. I wish more people knew about this. Smile Just a word of wisdom though. Get the Quercetin alone. Some brands package it with Bromelain, which I found to upset my stomach over time.

  • Dr. William Davis

    3/16/2012 12:32:57 AM |

    Excellent find, Robin!

    You sure you need that much niacin, however?

Loading
Why an RDA for vitamin D?

Why an RDA for vitamin D?

The Food and Nutrition Board (FNB) of the Institute of Medicine is charged with setting the values for the Recommended Daily Allowances of various essential nutrients. However, when it comes to vitamin D, the FNB decided that "evidence is insufficient to develop an RDA and [an Adequate Intake, AI] is set at a level assumed to ensure nutritional adequacy."

The National Institutes of Health Office of Dietary Supplements lists the AI's for various groups of people:

14-18 years
Male 200 IU
Female 200 IU

19-50 years
Male 200 IU
Female 200 IU

51-70 years
Male 400 IU
Female 400 IU

71+ years
Male 600 IU
Female 600 IU


A reconsideration is apparently being planned in near-future that will (hopefully) incorporate the newest clinical data on vitamin D.

My question: Who cares what the FNB decides? Let me explain.

I monitor blood levels of 25-hydroxy vitamin D to assess the 1) starting level of vitamin D without supplementation, and 2) levels while on supplementation, preferably every 6 months (during sunny weather, during cold weather). I have done for the past 3 years in over 1000 people.

The requirement for vitamin D dose in adults, in my experience, ranges from as low as 1000 units per day to as high as 20,000 units per day, rarely more. The vast majority of women require 5000 units per day, males 6000 units per day to maintain a blood level in the desirable range. (I aim for 60-70 ng/ml.) A graph of the distribution of vitamin D needs in my area (Milwaukee, Wisconsin) is a bell curve, a curve more heavily weighted towards the upper vitamin D dose range.

Need for vitamin D to achieve the same blood level is influenced by age, sex, body size, race, presence or absence of a gallbladder, as well as other factors. But needs vary, even among similar people. For instance, a 50-year old woman weighing 140 lbs might need 4000 units per day to achieve a blood level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D of 65 ng/ml. Another 50-year old woman weighing 140 lbs might need 8000 units to achieve the same level, and 4000 units might increase her level to only 38 ng/ml. Two similar women, very different vitamin D needs. The differences can be striking.

Being a hormone--not a vitamin, as it was incorrectly labeled--vitamin D needs to be tightly regulated. We should have neither too little nor too much. I would liken it to thyroid hormones, which need to be tightly regulated for ideal health.

Now the FNB, in light of new data, wants to set new AI's, or even RDA's, for vitamin D for the U.S. This is an impossible--impossible--task. There is no way a broad policy can be crafted that serves everyone. It is impossible to state that all men or women, categorized by age, require X units vitamin D. This is pure folly and it is misleading.

The only rational answer for the FNB to provide is to declare that:

It is not possible to establish the precise need for vitamin D in a specific individual because of the multiplicity of factors, only some of which are known, that determine vitamin D needs. Individual need can only be determined by assessing the blood level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D prior to initiation of replacement and periodically following replacement to assess the adequacy of replacement dose. Continuing reassessment is recommended (e.g., every 6-12 months), as needs change with weight, lifestyle, and age.

Sure, it adds around $100-150 per year per person for lab testing to assess vitamin D levels. But the health gains made--reduced fractures, reduced incidence of diabetes, reduced colon, breast, and prostate cancer, less depression, reduced heart attack and heart procedures--will more than compensate.

Comments (10) -

  • Jake

    1/24/2009 5:18:00 AM |

    Amen

  • Anonymous

    1/24/2009 3:13:00 PM |

    Great great article. My mom  (here in Wisconsin) has no gallbladder and has been suffering for years with chronic issues and never tested for D until I suggested it as result of your blog.
    Her doc "went along with it" and she came in around 20ng - is now supplementing but still not enough of course but I'm passing this to her. (She is without major episodes since taking the D)

    She had just about every specialist and every test except the D over the past 5 years; scans and scans and measurements of potassium, etc...

  • Grandma S.

    1/26/2009 12:01:00 AM |

    From reading your blog I had mine tested and started taking 2,000 a day and now it is 75.  What would be too high a level?
    Thank you.

  • Anonymous

    1/26/2009 2:15:00 AM |

    Interesting. My results were 48 and my doc did not say a word about it. I have no idea how much totake to get to the 60ish you suggest. If my doc doesn't help, who do I turn to?
    Stevie

  • StephenB

    1/26/2009 6:31:00 PM |

    Stevie wrote:
    "If my doc doesn't help, who do I turn to?"

    No doctor needed. Get the vitamin D test kit from vitamindcouncil.org, or a blood test from lef.org. It's a great investment.

  • Grandma S.

    1/27/2009 4:55:00 PM |

    Anonymous, My Vit D results were 44 and am now taking 1000 x 2 (Vit D gelcaps). My results are now 75.

  • Lisa

    12/28/2009 5:18:44 PM |

    Hi,
          I am The assistant editor with disease.com. I really liked your site and I am interested in building a relationship with your site. We want to spread public awareness. I hope you can help me out. Your site is a very useful resource.

    Please email me back with your URl in subject line to take a step ahead an to avoid spam.

    Thank you,
    Lisa Hope
    lisa.disease.com@gmail.com

  • Dave, RN

    7/28/2010 6:05:10 PM |

    I work for a cardiac home care agency, and we're trying to come up with some standard for measuring and testing. There doesn't seem to be any consensus and what the protocol should be. Suggestions?

  • Jim

    7/29/2010 9:10:29 PM |

    My former doctor wouldn't order a Vitamin D or VAP test for me because I'm she "had no reason, you're a healthy, young man."  I went to another doctor who ordered the tests, and my Vitamin D was 31.  Coincidentally, my HDL was not as high as I expected considering I eat Paleo and take an Omega3 supplement 3x a day.

    I started taking 4,000 iu of Vitamin D per day and very curious to see how that will affect both my Vitamin D levels and my HDL.

    One question:  Is it recommended that pregnant women take smaller amounts of Vit D?  I'm sure my wife also has low Vit D levels, but we're expecting a baby.  Of course there's no magic number for all people (as this article states) but is 2,000iu generally too high for pregnant women?

    Thanks!

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 6:34:21 PM |

    While body composition certainly isn't a prerequisite for being part of a classic comedy team, I couldn't help but notice that Stan had the makings of a skinny-fat bean pole checking in at 5' 10" and only 148 pounds. Those stats make him sound like a diehard distance runner or a chain smoker.

Loading
Sudden death in athletes

Sudden death in athletes

A recent report in the Journal of the American Medical Association details how a group in the Veneto region of Italy cut back on the incidence of sudden cardiac death in athletes by a simple screening program.



You can read the abstract of the article at http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/296/13/1593.

Although sudden death in athletes is still a rare event, it is especially tragic when it happens. In this population, the incidence was 3.6 deaths per 100,000 athletes aged 12 to 35 years. By implementing a simple screening program that involved only a physical examination and an EKG, an astounding 89% reduction in sudden death was documented.

What lessons does this hold for those of us interested in coronary plaque reversal? Beyond the obvious lesson of pointing out the great benefit of simple screening of athletes, I believe that it tells us the value of simple screening tools for heart disease in general. It is my strong belief that, if we were to implement CT heart scans among the broad population of men 40 years and over, women 50 years and over--without regard to cholesterol or other relatively lame risk identifiers--we could slash the risk for heart attack and death 90% or more. Putting CT heart scans into the hands of the public makes your coronary risk obvious. It takes the guesswork out of risk predictors like cholesterol and high blood pressure.

But heart scans are already available, you say! Yes, of course they are. But the lack of insurance reimbursement continues to be a restricting factor for many people, despite the number of lives that could be potentially saved and the money that would be saved in the long run by reducing need for major heart procedures. The continuing resistance to prevention by my cardiology colleagues and the persistent ignorance of primary care physicians also remain major impediments.

But it's getting better. You don't have to be chained by ignorance. Put your CT heart scan to good use.
Loading