An epidemic of heart disease reversal

10. January 2007 William Davis (3)
Heart disease reversal is nothing new in my office. However, I have to admit that it's not something that generally happens each and every day.

As our approach is refined, we are witnessing an unprecedented frequency of plaque reversal. Since Monday (today is Tuesday), I've seen four people who have regressed their coronary plaque and dropped their heart scan score.

Pat was the most recent addition to this list. At age 53, I was honestly surprised at the ease of dropping her heart scan score from 128 to 42 in the space of a year. I was surprised because among her lipoprotein patterns was the dreaded combination of lipoprotein(a) and small LDL, probably the most aggressive risk for heart disease I know of and also among the most difficult to gain control over. She also suffered a deep personal tragedy in her family, an emotional convulsion that can sometimes wipe out any hope of plaque reversal.

I'm hopeful that this virtual epidemic of heart disease reversal continues. And I hope that you participate in it.
Tags :

Comments (3) -

  • Bill, the songwriter

    1/30/2008 12:58:00 AM |

    Dr. Davis, I have been reading your site off and on for months. I guess only a doc can answer this.

    I am confused about the options a "reasonable person" would have upon learning that he has coronary heart disease (CHD). By that, I mean blockage in a major artery.

    Take me for example. (First, I'm doing fine now.) Two years ago, I had the "felt like a band tightening around my chest." 911 ambulance ride to the hospital. Bummer. My family history is terrible, all the men died of heart disease. I'm 54 now. I was disappointed and a bit apprehensive, although not "scared." I just figured they'd fix it. It usually works out that you don't die. (Although I lost a good friend on the bypass table who was seemingly healthy as could be the day before... routine physical and a stress test and they recommended bypass right away. He died on the table from the surgery!)

    Back to me... over the next few days, CHD confirmed. LAD had 99% blockage and a branch had 90%.

    I assume that my options at that time were...

    1. Get angioplasty and that's it
    2. Get angioplasty and a stent(s)
    3. Get bypass surgery
    4. Treat the heart disease with aggressive therapy. Which if you buy into the mainstream medicine way, it's drugs, low-fat diet, exercise, stress reduction. If you buy into alternative methods, it can include low-carb diet and powerful supplements.

    Confusion revolves around #4. My question is...

    >>>
    Do you think #4 is apropos for a person in this situation? (99% blockage in LAD)
    >>>

    I am confused because I'm thinking, okay, confirmed blockage. But it was the first sign I had ever had that I had heart problems.

    I realize that the percentage is a guess on the cardiologist's part, they don't measure it. But if it's 99% I tend to think... what is the risk of walking away to treat it without #1, 2 or 3? A blood clot that occurs for whatever reason hits that blockage and I could die. Could happen at any moment. Hours, days, weeks, months, years later.

    I also realize that there is risk in angioplasty, stents and bypass. Even discounting risk (of complication or dying on the table), restenosis is a common problem. And of course, you can have other blockages manifest themselves.

    But you could take the aggressive alternative therapy route and hope to stop the growth of plaque. At that time, I was not convinced that the blockages could be "reversed." Now, it appears that this can occur.

    I'll assume that you can reverse the situation and actually clean up your arteries. Is it a reasonable risk to opt for #4 or is this only for people who have less severe blockage? You're risking that you DON'T have a blood clot hit a blockage and kill you before you can achieve the artery-cleaning effect by your therapy, whatever it is.

    Seems I have read that stats are showing that #1, 2 or 3 do not necessarily beat #4 ... that #4 does just as well (lifespan) after the diagnosis.

    If quality of life was an issue, such as a person who has angina so severe or such difficulty breathing that a normal life was not possible, maybe that person is a definite candidate for #1, #2 or #3. But I wasn't there. I felt fine before AND after the event.

    As mentioned, I'm doing fine now. I love my low-carb diet, my lipids are great, I've lost weight, I exercise. This is just something that I would like to clear up for my own education. And who knows, a friend might ask me about this if s/he is diagnosed.

  • Dr. Davis

    1/30/2008 1:12:00 AM |

    You've made great changes in your lifestyle that will likely translate into much reduced risk for more struggles with heart disease. However, it is highly unlikely that you've put a stop to it, let alone reversing it.

    I would refer you to the website that this blog accompanies, www.trackyourplaque.com. Please keep in mind that I nor any other responsible physician can diagnose or offer individualized medical information over the net.

  • Bill, the songwriter

    1/30/2008 2:03:00 PM |

    Thanks for answering. I didn't mean to infer I am asking about me in particular for a present situation, I just used me as an example because that's what I know. I was asking about a hypothetical person.

    I've read much on your site but I'll go back again.

    IMO, 99% (at least) of all people who get a recommendation from a cardiologist to undergo an invasive procedure... they do it. And I'm curious about one taking another approach.

    Oh well, thanks again, Doc.

Add comment

Loading
Statin agents and muscle aches

Statin agents and muscle aches

11. October 2006 William Davis (2)
How common are muscle aches with the statin drugs?

It depends on who you ask. If you ask the drug manufacturers, they will tell you no more than 2% of people who take them. They back this up with the experience in tens of thousands of people in published clinical trials.

What if we ask people who take them outside of clinical trials. How many then? I estimate, from my large experience, over 80%! In other words, muscle aches are inevitable in nearly everyone who takes them. The longer you take them, the higher your dose, the more likely muscle aches are going to be.

Why the disconnect between published data and real-world experience? I really don't know. In some instances, the differences are dramatic. The ASTEROID trial, for instance, in which Crestor, 40 mg, was given for two years, only resulted in 8% of people dropping out because of side-effects. My experience: everybody--nobody can tolerate this dose for any length of time.

Let me qualify what "muscle aches" mean. It means achiness and/or weakness, usually mild, occasionally moderate to severe, worse upon awakening and less with use. It can affect many muscles or it can involve only one. Rarely is it incapacitating but it is commonly annoying and frightening. It commonly shows up as gradually diminishing strength with exercise. Strength usually returns promptly upon stopping the offending drug.

"Rhabdomyolysis", or true muscle destruction is, fortunately, very unusual in otherwise well people. People with abnormal kidney function, diabetes, and other concurrent illnesses are somewhat more prone. But in reality, rhabdomyolysis is unusual. I've personally seen it twice, both in people sick for other reasons.

Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) supplementation has been a godsend for us. At least 4 out of 5 people who require statins and develop muscle aches respond favorably, but it requires 100 mg per day. The preparation must be oil-based to work, not powder in a capsule which exerts no effect. Some people get by with less; some require as much as 300 mg per day. I've had favorable experiences with the CoQ10 from Sam's Club, GNC, Vitamin Shoppe, and Life Extension (www.LEF.org).

The Track Your Plaque target for LDL cholesterol is 60 mg/dl. Many people do indeed use statins to achieve this level, the level of LDL that amplifies your chances of heart disease reversal, i.e., reduction of heart scan score. The only drawback that I'm aware of with CoQ10 replacement is cost. Beyond this, it's a benign supplement that even supplies higher energy for some people who take it.
Tags :

Comments (2) -

  • Terri SL

    10/11/2006 10:11:00 PM |

    Statin side effects are, in my personal experience, vastly under-reported.  What Dr. in practice takes the time to fill out FDA complaint forms or contacts independent researchers about a pts. side effects?  What pt. even knows that they can do so, whether their Dr. wants them to or not?  No surprise about that 80% if you've taken statins!

    I've personally taken two different statins (Pravachol, Zocor/Vytorin) and developed horrendous muscle aches even while taking CoQ-10 200 mgs. daily in divided dose.  I also experienced mental fuzziness, gait instability and near complete GI shutdown, when Dr. doubled statin dosage against my protests.  Stop the drug = complete reversal within ~three days!

    What seems to be consistent is the dosage of the statin... the higher the dose, or the more potent the statin (Lipitor, Crestor), the greater the chance of adverse side effects.  The other consistency is that Drs. out there in practice are _not_ recommending CoQ-10 to their patients on statins, or at least that has been my experience.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 6:52:24 PM |

    "Rhabdomyolysis", or true muscle destruction is, fortunately, very unusual in otherwise well people. People with abnormal kidney function, diabetes, and other concurrent illnesses are somewhat more prone. But in reality, rhabdomyolysis is unusual. I've personally seen it twice, both in people sick for other reasons.

Add comment

Loading