Heart catheterization: Strange, but true

It's a couple of years old, but this post from March, 2008, remains relevant.

It details the curious origins of heart catheterization, the procedure that has saved some lives, but also been responsible for the proliferation of unnecessary heart procedures.



The modern era of heart disease care was born from an accident, quirky personalities, and even a little daring.

The notion of heart catheterization to visualize the human heart began rather ignominiously in 1929 at the Auguste-Viktoria Hospital in Eberswalde, Germany, a technological backwater of the day. Inspired by descriptions of a French physician who inserted a tube into the jugular vein of a horse and felt transmitted heart impulses outside the body, Dr. Werner Forssmann, an eager 25-year old physician-in-training, was intent on proving that access to the human heart could be safely gained through a surface blood vessel. No one knew if passing a catheter into the human heart would be safe, or whether it would become tangled in the heart’s chambers and cause it to stop beating. On voicing his intentions, Forssmann was ordered by superiors not to proceed. But he was determined to settle the question, especially since his ambitions captured the interest of nurse Gerda Ditzen, who willingly even offered to become the first human subject of his little experiment.

Secretly gathering the necessary supplies, he made his first attempt in private. After applying a local anesthetic, he used a scalpel to make an incision in his left elbow. He then inserted a hollow tube, a catheter intended for the bladder, into the vein exposed under the skin. After passing the catheter 14 inches into his arm, however, he experienced cold feet and pulled it out.



One week later, Forssman regained his resolve and repeated the process. Nurse Ditzen begged to be the subject, but Forssmann, in order to allow himself to be the first subject, tricked her into being strapped down and proceeded to work on himself while she helplessly watched. After stanching the oozing blood from the wound, he threaded the catheter slowly and painfully into the cephalic vein, up through the bicep, past the shoulder and subclavian vein, then down towards the heart. He knew that simply nudging the rubber catheter forward would be sufficient to direct it to the heart, since all veins of the body lead there. With the catheter buried 25 inches into his body, Forssmann untied the fuming Ditzen. Both then ran to the hospital’s basement x-ray department and injected x-ray dye into the catheter, yielding an image of the right side of his heart, the first made in a living human.

Thus, the very first catheterization of the heart was performed.

An x-ray image was made to document the accomplishment. Upon hearing of the experiment, Forssmann was promptly fired by superiors for his brazen act of self-experimentation. Deflated, Forssmann abandoned his experimentation and went on to practice urology. He became a member of the Nazi party in World War II Germany and served in the German army. Though condemned as crazy by some, physicians in Europe and the U.S., after hearing of his experience, furthered the effort and continued to explore the potential of the technique. Forssmann himself was never invited to speak of his experiences outside of Germany, as he had been labeled a Nazi.

Many years after his furtive experiments, the once intrepid Dr. Forssmann was living a quiet life practicing small town medicine. He received an unexpected phone call informing him that he was one of three physicians chosen to receive the 1956 Nobel Prize for Medicine for his pioneering work performing the world’s first heart catheterization, along with Drs. André Cournand and Dickinson W. Richards, both of whom had furthered Forssmann’s early work. Forssmann remarked to a reporter that he felt like a village pastor who was made a cardinal.

Strange, but true.

Comments (1) -

  • Ed Seas

    4/4/2010 3:19:47 AM |

    One of the most amazing stories that I have ever read - medical or otherwise - should be made in to a movie!

Loading
Gastric emptying: When slower is better

Gastric emptying: When slower is better

When it comes to the Internet and Nascar, speed is good: The faster the better.

But when it comes to gastric emptying (the rate at which food passes from the stomach and into the duodenum and small intestine), slower can be better.

Slower transit time for foods passing through the stomach leads to lower blood sugar, lower blood glucose area under-the-curve (AUC), i.e., reduced blood glucose levels over time. Lower postprandial (after-eating) blood sugars can reduce cardiovascular risk. It can lead to a reduction in net calorie intake and weight loss.

Strategies that can slow gastric emptying include:

--Minimizing fluids during a meal--Drinking a lot of fluids, e.g., water, accelerates gastric emptying by approximately 20%.

--Cinnamon--While the full reason to explain Cassia cinnamon's blood glucose-reducing effect has not been completely worked out, part of the effect is likely to due slowed gastric emptying. Thus, a 1/4-2 teaspoons of cinnamon per day can reduce postprandial blood sugar peaks by 10-25 mg/dl.

--Vinegar--Two teaspoons of vinegar in its various forms slows gastric emptying. The effect is likely due to acetic acid, the compound shared by apple cider vinegar, white vinegar, red wine vinegar, Balsamic vinegar, and other varieties.

--Increased fat content--Fat is digested more slowly and slows gastric emptying time, compared to the rapid transit of carbohydrates.

Not everybody should slow gastric emptying. Diabetics with a condition called diabetic gastroparesis should not use these methods, as they can further slow the abnormal gastric emptying that develops as part of their disease, making a bad situation worse.

However, in the rest of us with normal gastric emptying time, a delay in gastric emptying can reduce blood sugar and induce satiety, effects that can work in your favor in reducing cardiovascular risk.

Comments (18) -

  • Anonymous

    2/21/2010 10:17:43 PM |

    What about fiber?  

    For what it's worth, I recently discovered Chia seeds, which are high in Omega-3 and fiber.  Mixed 15 grams with 8 oz water, and you get a gel that's easy to slurp down.  The taste is neutral, too.

  • Anonymous

    2/21/2010 11:21:09 PM |

    I wonder what kind of effect supplemental digestive enzymes what have in gastric emptying.

  • Dr. William Davis

    2/22/2010 12:46:00 AM |

    Hi, Ted--

    Great results! there are some data on fenugreek, but we have not used it in any systematic way. Perhaps we should give it a try,.

  • Seedeater

    2/22/2010 3:06:08 AM |

    Chia is a remarkable food.  3:1 n3 to n6 ratio, and absolutely complete protein, missing no amino acids.

    Check it out:

    http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/nut-and-seed-products/3061/2

  • mongander

    2/22/2010 3:34:36 AM |

    "If eating one gram a day of cinnamon reduces blood glucose levels 20 percent, then three grams or six grams will reduce it a lot more. Wrong.

    Researchers from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, including Dr. Richard A. Anderson, and Agricultural University, Peshawar, Pakistan, gave these doses of cinnamon to volunteers. Some 60 volunteers divided into six groups participated. Three of these groups got the three different doses and three groups received a placebo.

    They found that less than one-teaspoon—one gram—of cinnamon worked as well as higher doses."

    C Leigh Broadhurst, PhD explains how to make a cinnamon water extract.
    http://www.mendosa.com/cinnamon.htm

  • Anonymous

    2/22/2010 8:44:59 AM |

    Good thing too. Cassia is also high in toxins like coumarin.  I eat true cinnamon every day, I don't know if it works like Cassia, but it's so tasty it just must be doing some good!

  • 2 Quick

    2/22/2010 5:40:58 PM |

    Hi, Dr. Davis: I'm a long-time fan of your blog & LEF articles. I'm wondering if you can help. My husband (50 y.o., thin but muscular) is in extremely good health except for one thing: he is a very light sleeper (genetic, it seems). The insomnia is caused by his extremely fast transit time--exactly 12 hours, no more, no less--which means that if he eats more than one meal a day, it wakes him up in middle of the night. He doesn't drink during meals, he takes plenty of cinnamon, has taken apple cider vinegar (which, perversely, sped up his digestion), and because he is allergic to gluten, eats a high fat, high protein diet. He's tried adding fiber but that hasn't helped. (As you can imagine, his fast transit time leads to awkward social situations!) We're at wits end. Any help you can give us would be greatly appreciated!

  • DrStrange

    2/22/2010 8:30:15 PM |

    I have found that all of these work very well for some people and NONE of them works for everyone.  Some will great effect at lowering bg w/ some botanical while another person will have no effect whatsoever w/ same substance.

  • Anonymous

    2/24/2010 4:40:33 AM |

    2 quick - additional food intolerances?  has he tried a few weeks without fiber - counter-intuitive but could help.

  • 2 Quick

    2/24/2010 2:30:50 PM |

    Hi Anonymous,

    No, my husband does not suffer from any other food intolerance.

    That increase in fiber was a one-time, disastrous experiment. For the past several years my husband's diet has been free of fiber (except for the occasional bowl of berries and cream). This has helped his digestion tremendously but it has not slowed down his transit time...Frown

  • Dr. William Davis

    2/24/2010 6:40:30 PM |

    2 Quick--

    Sorry, but beyond wheat elimination, I have no specific insights.

    Occasionally, iodine deficiency will show up with odd gastrointestinal phenomena.

  • mongander

    2/24/2010 11:59:21 PM |

    You might try taking the probiotic, Culturelle, for a few weeks.  It causes your stools to bulk up.  It stopped a prolonged case of diarrhea for me. I know diarrhea is not your husband's problem but maybe Culturelle will normalize his digestion.

    Alternate day fasting might reset him.  I just started an alternate day fast.  Yesterday was my 1st day of fasting and it increased my transit time from 24 hr to 48 hr.  I know one day is too soon to make a judgment.
    http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/86/1/7

  • Anonymous

    2/25/2010 9:11:43 PM |

    What's the time frame arround meals in which luquids should be avoided? Does it include hot liquids like soup or tea and coffee?

  • Anonymous

    2/28/2010 8:14:24 PM |

    What a great resource!

  • Anonymous

    3/28/2010 7:17:29 PM |

    Smaller, more frequent meals is a better approach to limiting AUC and peaks. Slowing gastric emptying just invites acid reflux.

  • Anonymous

    6/1/2010 9:41:13 AM |

    Having trouble reconciling something on this topic:  Magnesium supplementation can supposedly be helpful in glucose control (as mentioned in past blog comments).  Yet my understanding is that it's mag's ability to *increase* the gastric emptying rate which causes the loose-stools side effects at high doses.

    I'm especially interested in any thoughts on this apparent contradiction because my pre-meal cinnamon supplementation seemed to lose its great benefit on postprandial glucose just about the time I triple my magnesium dose to 1200 mg (about 10 days ago).  Coincidence?

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 8:42:17 PM |

    Not everybody should slow gastric emptying. Diabetics with a condition called diabetic gastroparesis should not use these methods, as they can further slow the abnormal gastric emptying that develops as part of their disease, making a bad situation worse.

Loading
Why does fish oil reduce triglycerides?

Why does fish oil reduce triglycerides?

Beyond its ability to slash risk for cardiovascular events, omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil also reduce triglycerides.

There's no remaining question that omega-3s do this quite effectively. After all, the FDA approved prescription fish oil, Lovaza, to treat a condition called familial hypertriglyceridemia, an inherited condition in which very high triglycerides in the 100s or 1000s of milligrams typically develop.

The omega-3 fraction of fatty acids are unique for their triglyceride-reducing property. No other fraction of fatty acids, such as omega-6 or saturated, can match the triglyceride-reducing effect of omega-3s.

But why does fish oil reduce triglycerides?

First of all, what are triglycerides? As their name suggests, triglycerides consist of three ("tri-") fatty acids lined up along a glycerol (sugar) "backbone." Triglycerides are the form in which most fatty acids occur in the bloodstream, liver, and other organs. (Fatty acids, like omega-3, omega-6, mono- or polyunsaturated, or saturated, rarely occur as free fatty acids unbound to glycerol.) In various lipoproteins in the blood, like LDL, VLDL, and HDL, fatty acids occur as triglycerides.

Of all lipoproteins, chylomicrons (the large particle formed through intestinal absorption of fatty acids and transported to the liver via the lymph system) and VLDL (very low-density lipoprotein, very low-density because they are mostly fat and little protein) particles are richest in triglycerides. Thus, we would expect that omega-3s exert their triglyceride-reducing effect via reductions in either chylomicrons or VLDL.

Indeed, that seems to be the case. The emerging evidence suggests that omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil reduce triglycerides through:

--Reduced VLDL production by the liver (Harris 1989)
--Accelerating chylomicron and VLDL elimination from the blood
--Activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-gamma)--Omega-3s ramp up the cellular equipment used to convert fatty acids to energy (oxidation) (Gani 2008)

Combine omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil with wheat elimination and you have an extremely potent means of reducing triglycerides. Read a previous Heart Scan Blog post here to read how a patient reduced triglycerides 93.5% from 3100 mg/dl to 210 mg/dl in just a few weeks using fish oil and wheat elimination.

Comments (9) -

  • Anonymous

    11/2/2009 12:34:35 AM |

    Very informative article.  Thank you for this posting. I better keep remembering to take my fish oil every morning!

    Diane Michel
    Founder GlobalMedicalResearch.org

  • Anonymous

    11/2/2009 4:55:48 PM |

    So much for the little boy with the loaves and the fishes, huh? I did not know that reduction of triglycerides involved the elimination of wheat products. I am not sure I am up to doing that part. I may just have to die.

  • Makoss

    11/2/2009 10:41:21 PM |

    Is DHA more favorable than EPA in lowering triglycerides?

  • Ellen

    11/3/2009 10:30:19 AM |

    Dr. Davis, my triglycerides are really low at 33 (and yes, I take fish oil). They are so slow that they are below the lab reference range.

    Is there such a thing as too low?

  • Dr. William Davis

    11/3/2009 12:41:57 PM |

    Makoss--

    To my knowledge, there are no data exploring the differential effect of DHA vs. EPA strictly for triglyceride reduction. Remember also that most data exploring cardiovascular risk reduction involve both, except for JELIS which showed event reduction with EPA alone.

    Hi, Ellen--

    In fact, your triglyceride level is what I believe to be the physiologically perfect level. So, no, not too low.

  • Kamila

    12/13/2009 2:52:33 PM |

    How do you respond to this Dr Davis.

    Q: Are fish oils good for you?

    Some of the unsaturated fats in fish are definitely less toxic than those in corn oil or soy oil, but that doesn't mean they are safe. Fifty years ago, it was found that a large amount of cod liver oil in dogs' diet increased their death rate from cancer by 20 times, from the usual 5% to 100%. A diet rich in fish oil causes intense production of toxic lipid peroxides, and has been observed to reduce a man's sperm count to zero. [H. Sinclair, Prog. Lipid Res. 25, 667, 1989.] Source:http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/unsaturated-oils.shtml

  • Kamila

    12/13/2009 3:10:00 PM |

    Another link:

    http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/fishoil.shtml

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 9:11:46 PM |

    Of all lipoproteins, chylomicrons (the large particle formed through intestinal absorption of fatty acids and transported to the liver via the lymph system) and VLDL (very low-density lipoprotein, very low-density because they are mostly fat and little protein) particles are richest in triglycerides. Thus, we would expect that omega-3s exert their triglyceride-reducing effect via reductions in either chylomicrons or VLDL.

  • reduce blood pressure naturally

    12/4/2010 4:28:52 PM |

    my heart skipped a beat! these are soooo beautiful! they aren't my fave style, but what you did with them is incredible. you are seriously talented, and never undervalue yourself just to make sales- know your worth in this world! the right customers always do come along, given time. and don't you want your pieces to go to the right people who will LOVE them and appreciate them like you do? of course ya do.

Loading
There's no such thing as a "no-carb" diet

There's no such thing as a "no-carb" diet

When I tell patients how I advise a wheat-free, cornstarch-free, sugar-free diet on the background of a low-carbohydrate diet, some people ask: "But can I live on a no-carb diet?"

Well, there's no such thing as a "no-carb" diet. Low-carb, yes. No-carb, no.

Here are the carbohydrate contents of various "low-carb" foods:

Gouda cheese--3 oz contains 1.65 grams carbohydrates
Mozzarella cheese--1 cup contains 2.89 grams carbohydrates
Walnuts--4 oz (56 nuts) contains 2.96 grams carbohydrates
Almonds--4 oz contains 1.38 grams carbohydrates
Sour cream--one-half cup contains 3.31 grams carbohydrates
Red wine--3.5 oz glass contains 2.69 grams carbohydrates
Eggplant--1 cup cooked contains 8.33 grams carbohydrates
Green pepper--1 medium-sized raw contains 5.52 grams carbohydrates
Cucumber--1 medium contains 4.34 grams carbohydrates
Tomato--1 medium contains 4.82 grams carbohydrates

(Nutrition data from USDA Nutrient Database)

In other words, foods thought to be "low-carb" actually contain a modest quantity of carbohydrates.

Such modest quantities of carbohydrates may not be enough to trip your blood sugar. But add up all the "low-carb" foods you consume over the course of a day and you can easily achieve 30 grams or more carbohydrates per day even without consuming any higher carbohydrate foods.

Comments (24) -

  • Belfast Biker

    7/26/2010 9:46:20 PM |

    ...and no-one on a low-carb diet will eat those.  There are much better alternatives.  No story here.

    May as well have put pasta on the list.

  • Food, flora and felines

    7/26/2010 11:22:38 PM |

    Yes looking at it like that you realise how a diet based on starchy veg, grains and fruits (not to mention all the processed cereals and refined sugars) can add up to one hell of a lot of carbs! No wonder we're such a sickly species.

  • bobby

    7/26/2010 11:45:36 PM |

    Dr. Davis: Where to you get adequate carbs when you are running long distances, including the marathon distance?

  • Anonymous

    7/27/2010 12:02:01 AM |

    Would like to see what Dr. Davis' opinion is about coconuts and their products.

    It the picture in the head of the blog and there no single post about it!

  • Anonymous

    7/27/2010 12:41:11 AM |

    There are those who seek to achieve a no carb diet - see this forum for details: http://forum.zeroinginonhealth.com/

  • Cheryl

    7/27/2010 12:41:56 AM |

    Here is a forum that talks about achieving zero carb - http://forum.zeroinginonhealth.com/

  • Leptin

    7/27/2010 1:13:37 AM |

    ...and those 30 grams of carbs would mean you were on a very low carb diet indeed.  As a percentage of 2,000 calories, it would be 6%.  The other 94% would have to come from protein and fat.  Since too much protein taxes the kidneys and will turn to glucose if needed, your only choice in this very low carb scenario would be to go ~ 80% fat.

    Just clarifying that this is the intent of the 30g example.

  • Lori Miller

    7/27/2010 1:24:40 AM |

    Are these total carbs or net carbs? My understanding is that carbs that are fiber aren't digested.

    This is quite a bit of food, too.

  • Drs. Cynthia and David

    7/27/2010 1:56:57 AM |

    To answer bobby's question, you don't!  I routinely run 50K events and just ran the San Francisco Marathon on very-low carb, pre-race, during the race, and post-race.  If you're adapted to a low-carb diet and fat-burning, you don't need carbs at all for fueling muscle activity.  In fact running fat-fueled gives you more stable long-lasting energy, no highs and lows, no bonking, and you can go much longer on no added fuel at all.

    David

  • kellgy

    7/27/2010 2:33:33 AM |

    I would think the opened coconut is not dissimilar in representing plaque build up in our vessels.

    Funny though, because I believe coconut is beneficial in many ways. I started cooking with it recently due to its high tolerance to heat, my perspective change in saturated fats and exploration of Indian foods.

    BTW, I have cut out wheat, rarely eat corn starches and keep sugar usually in the single digits g/day while eating 70% of the items posted in Dr. Davis' on my low carb regimen. Some of the benefits so far are 40+ pounds lost and a decrease in BP. Systolic is now normal (reducing the resting pressure is a bit more challenging). Looking forward to what the next two months bring . . . .

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/27/2010 3:46:08 AM |

    Bobby and Drs. Cynthia and David-

    I have seen the gamut of carbohydrate needs with elite levels of endurance exercise, from those who need to use a glucose source, such as bananas or Goo with exercise, to those who need nothing but water.

    There seems to be individual variation in glucose needs during extreme endurance exercise, though needs clearly diminish the longer you follow a low-carbohydrate restriction.

    Think of how hunter gatherers of eons ago ran tens of miles on empty stomachs.

  • Patrik

    7/27/2010 9:13:28 AM |

    Well, when you eat a no-carb diet you avoid those low-carb foods. Instead, you only eat food containg no (or very close to zero) carbs: meat, fish, egg, clarified butter (ghee), and coconut oil.

    If you are liberal, you may add ordinary butter and some cheese. Giving you no more than 1-2 grams of carbs per day. Wink

    Here you can find Swedish guy, Michel Blomgren, that eats almost no carbs, and train hard: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://michelblomgren.blogspot.com/p/vad-jag-ater.html&sl=sv&tl=en

  • Alex

    7/27/2010 12:20:05 PM |

    There's a body builder at my gym who's in his 60s, and he's been eating a very low carb diet for 15+ years. While his musculature is great, his skin looks saggy and old. It makes me wonder if his skin might look better if he'd had greater intake of Vit C (for collagen) and other phytonutrients (antioxidants).

  • Anonymous

    7/27/2010 12:27:52 PM |

    I have a friend who is a recognized authority on sports medicine.  He's generally opposed to all processed foods, especially high fructose drinks but endorses the consumption of such drinks during extreme aerobic competitive exercise saying they give a huge quick boost in energy.

  • Anonymous

    7/27/2010 1:01:01 PM |

    "Think of how hunter gatherers of eons ago ran tens of miles on empty stomachs."

    I find it difficult to use such examples as good/valid reference points. In my opinion there is s big difference between running by choice and running because you have to for survival.

  • PJNOIR

    7/27/2010 1:08:26 PM |

    Belfast Biker is way off the mark - those all legit foods to eat - veggies some fermented diary (cheese), small amounts of seeds and nuts- Pasta is not even close to being sensible for that list.

    Dublin pjnoir.

  • Kevin

    7/27/2010 1:50:42 PM |

    My understanding is there's an obligate requirement for sugar in the Krebs cycle.  If the body runs low on stored carbs it makes its own through gluconeogenesis. But that means catabolising muscle tissue.  In 50 and 100 mile races I eat all the potatoes and sugary sweets available at the aid stations but for daily diet I stick with low carb.  For my Sunday long runs I often run out of glycogen.  At that point my pace falls from 9 to 12mph.

    kevin

  • malpaz

    7/27/2010 3:41:52 PM |

    HOW HEALTHY IS IT TO BE IN CONSTANT KETOSIs though?? There are no long term studies, no hunter gatherer was ever in constant ketosis. he/she was in and out. i understand low carb for glucose problems but it seems to be managing te problem not fixing it. eventually a low carb diet leads to a VLC diet leads to a ZC diet like the crazy people at zeroing in on health. the more you drop your carbs the more insulin resistance you force upon yourself.

    Just eat real food, and real fat

    about coconut stuff...IMO unless your a kitavan person you dont really need it. does anyone know ANY existing data not supported or sponsored by the coconut industry? i dont think it is all it is cracked up to be. no one has been consuming it long enough, unless again you are a kitavan and also eating like 70% sweet potatos.

    there arent coconuts over in africa where we originated

  • rdyck

    7/28/2010 12:14:14 AM |

    Carbohydrates are not an essential macronutrient. Fat and protein are. There was a study done on two men who ate nothing but meat for a year. The results may suprise some. See Nothing but meat for a year

  • Anonymous

    7/28/2010 6:06:41 PM |

    Dr Davis

    After starting fish oil and vitamin D3 and eliminating sugar/wheat/pasteurised milk my hunger seems to have ratcheted up! i wonder whats going on here? Is this normal?
    There is no dearth of calories in the diet!

  • Anonymous

    7/28/2010 6:29:52 PM |

    After starting fish oil and vitamin D3 and eliminating sugar/wheat/pasteurised milk my hunger seems to have ratcheted up! i wonder whats going on here? Is this normal?
    There is no dearth of calories in the diet!


    My weight has always been good and I work out (hard) regularly and have so for the last 30 years (I'm 53). My cholesterol is also good. I  didn't eat much processed food before but in the last 9 months have cut it out completely. No sugar, no white flour, no bread, less of all other grains and now I can't stop weight loss. I am below my desired weight and it keeps coming off. If I even walk too fast I lose weigh!! I tried adding more tubers with no luck. I added larger portions of quinoa...no help. I have now resorted to eating soaked brown rice which hasn't helped yet. I get roughly my bodyweight in protein per day. I am always hungry and I'm eating about every hour. I consume around 3000 calories per day. I'm 5'10 and went from my fighting weight of 183 to 168 as of this morning.  I need to get back to at least 173-175 but it won't happen unless I add back some more grains. I will now start increasing the portion sizes of the grains I'm eating but I am already up to close to 2 cups per serving!!! I have now added rice/quinoa to lunch meals also.

  • Anonymous

    7/29/2010 9:47:18 PM |

    you can train athletically on a low carb diet.  our bodies are highly efficient.  if you don't give it sugar, it will make energy from stored fat.  (and we all have fat, even thin people.)  the best training i ever did and strongest i ever was involved a low carb (vegetable) and hi protein diet.  After a few weeks, your body produces fuel differently.  if you're used to gooing or sports liquid, your body will have to acclimate to training without it.  But one you do, you'll notice your lactic threshold will be higher and you'll bonk much less.  Cashews are great instead of the goo...

  • Ed Terry

    7/29/2010 10:24:14 PM |

    The USDA National Nutrient Database for Windows is a great little tool is you're very serious about restricting the total number of carbs eaten in a day.  Combine that with weighing your food, and you can get a very good idea of all the nutrients going into your body.

    The aren't many studies showing the benefits of coconut oil.  However, in my case, adding coconut oil to me diet sent my HDL from 32 to 52.

  • Dr Eric Berg

    8/2/2010 4:37:23 PM |

    good luck to those who try this no-carb diet.

Loading
Coronary arteries aren't what they seem

Coronary arteries aren't what they seem

Why do stress tests so often fail to detect coronary atherosclerotic plaque? Why do even heart catheterizations--the "gold standard"--fail to disclose the full extent of plaque within the walls of coronary arteries?

We owe much of the explanation of these phenomena to Dr. Seymour Glagov, retired professor of pathology at the University of Chicago.



When studying the coronary arteries of people who died, he observed that people commonly had plenty of atherosclerotic plaque lining the artery wall, yet it did not necessarily impinge on the artery "lumen," or the internal path for blood to flow.

The only time the lumen became obstructed by plaque was when either 1) plaque grew to overwhelming levels and was severe and extensive, or 2) when a plaque had "ruptured," meaning its thin covering had been penetrated and eroded by the underlying plaque tissue like a volcano emerging from the surface and erupting.

This groundbreaking observation, now dubbed "the Glagov phenomenon," explains why someone can have a normal stress test on Tuesday but erupt a plaque on Wednesday.

The Glagov phenomenon also explains why heart scans can detect plaque when both stress tests and heart catheterizations fail to do so. Many physicians will then interpret this to mean that the heart scan was wrong. With the Glagov phenomenon in mind, you can see that the heart scan is not wrong, it is simply detecting coronary atherosclerotic plaque at a stage that is not yet detectable by the other methods.

In the illustration, you can see that the lumen of the vessel is maintained--despite the artery on the left having minimal plaque, the artery on the right containing moderate plaque. If either artery were examined by a test that relies on blood flow--stress test or heart catheterization--both would appear normal. But a test that examines the artery wall, such as a heart scan, would readily detect the artery on the right and probably even the artery on the left.




I am very grateful to Dr. Glagov and his insight into this important process. Otherwise, we might still be floundering around trying to understand the apparent discrepances between these tests that simply provide different perspectives on the same problem.

Comments (5) -

  • Anonymous

    11/13/2007 1:04:00 AM |

    I saw a new small 2 pound ultrasound machine for detecting plaque in neck arteries just hit the market place.  Article was at: http://www.newstarget.com/022212.html

    It sounds exciting that something like this would be easily accessible - as the author speculates.  Do you think this new small devise will be helpful - if one has plaque in neck arteries does that typically also mean plaque in the heart?

  • Dr. Davis

    11/13/2007 2:54:00 AM |

    Actually, I purchased one of these devices about 7 years ago. The data is reasonably well worked out: carotid ultrasound for a measure called intima-media thickness is a reasonable second choice to coronary plaque measurement. It can be useful to augment information from direct coronary scoring, or when heart scanning is impossible, e.g, some people after bypass surgery.

  • Anonymous

    11/13/2007 7:11:00 PM |

    You've been concentrating a lot on coronary arteries, and the effect of plaque build up. What about the valves of the heart? Can plaque build up on, or otherwise affect them?

  • Dr. Davis

    11/13/2007 10:08:00 PM |

    This blog and the accompanying website, www.trackyourplaque.com, are intended to focus on coronary issues.

    However, I have been seeing aortic valve disease actually improve with vitamin D. Please see my blog post, Valve disease and vitamin D at http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Valve%20disease%20and%20vitamin%20D.

  • buy jeans

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

    When studying the coronary arteries of people who died, he observed that people commonly had plenty of atherosclerotic plaque lining the artery wall, yet it did not necessarily impinge on the artery "lumen," or the internal path for blood to flow.

Loading
Why do I need a prescription for Olava?

Why do I need a prescription for Olava?

Imagine this:





What is OLAVA?

Olava is prescription olive oil. It is the purest, highest concentration of olive oil available.




Why Do I Need a Prescription for OLAVA?

Studies show that olive oil contains essential fatty acids, "good" fats that:



--Contain natural compounds your body needs for good health but can't produce on its own.

--Has antioxidants that may provide protection from heart disease.



So, it is common for people to ask why they need a prescription for OLAVA if it is made from a natural ingredient--olive oil. It's time to get the facts about OLAVA. Learn why OLAVA is different from olive oil you can buy at a store.



OLAVA Is an FDA-Approved Medication

OLAVA is the only FDA-approved medicine made from olive oil that's proven, along with diet, to reduce risk for heart disease


The FDA enforces standards to make sure that prescription medications like OLAVA are safe, effective, and quality controlled.


The way OLAVA is manufactured is reviewed and approved by the FDA.


OLAVA uses a 10-step purification process that helps remove lead and other environmental toxins that can be present in olive oil.


Each 1-gram capsule of OLAVA contains 1000 mg of pure olive oil.


The FDA-approved dose of OLAVA is 4 capsules per day. It could take up to 2 tablespoons per day of regular olive oil to provide the same amount of active ingredients proven to lower heart disease risk.




What Else You Should Know About Olive Oil

Regular olive oil has not been approved by the FDA to treat any specific disease like heart disease.



Olive oil doesn't have specific dosing information; it has a food label.



Olive oil does not go through an FDA-approved manufacturing process.





Talk to Your Doctor About OLAVA

If you have very heart disease, you may need a prescription medicine, along with diet, to treat your condition. Talk to your doctor about OLAVA. Print a trial offer to use on your first prescription of OLAVA.

Loading
Normal fasting glucose with high HbA1c

Normal fasting glucose with high HbA1c

Jonathan's fasting glucose: 85 mg/dl
His HbA1c: 6.7%

Jonathan's high HbA1c reflects blood glucose fluctuations over the preceding 60-90 days and can be used to calculate an estimated average glucose (eAG) with the following equation:

eAG = 28.7 X A1c – 46.7

(For glucose in mmol/L, the equation is eAG = 1.59 × A1C - 2.59)

Jonathan's HbA1c therefore equates to an eAG of 145.59 mg/dl--yet his fasting glucose value is 85 mg/dl. 

This is a common situation: Normal fasting glucose, high HbA1c. It comes from high postprandial glucose values, high values after meals. 

It suggests that, despite having normal glucose while fasting, Jonathan experiences high postprandial glucose values after many or most of his meals. After a breakfast of oatmeal, for instance, he likely has a blood glucose of 150 mg/dl or greater. After breakfast cereal, blood glucose likely exceeds 180 mg/dl. With two slices of whole wheat bread, glucose likewise likely runs 150-180 mg/dl. 

The best measure of all is a postprandial glucose one hour after the completion of a meal, a measure you can easily obtain yourself with a home glucose meter. Second best: fasting glucose with HbA1c.

Gain control over this phenomenon and you 1) reduce fasting blood sugar, 2) reduce expression of small LDL particles, and 3) lose weight.  

Comments (24) -

  • Mark

    3/23/2010 5:56:04 PM |

    So what is the basic recommendation here?
    Eat meat, nuts, vegetables, no starch, no fruit? A ketogenic diet?

    It looks like the recommendation is to avoid blood sugar spikes primarily. I would think that insulin is less of a worry because insulin doesn't necessarily mean that sugar is in the system (dairy for example).

    Some clarification would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

  • Anonymous

    3/23/2010 6:44:31 PM |

    Dr. Davis, my husband has the opposite problem, can you (or anyone else) explain it?  His 1-hour postprandial glucose never exceeds 90 and yet he has an HBA1C of 5.9.  We have checked his glucose at different times and it never goes over 100.  He is on a very low carb diet.  

    His HBA1C indicates an average blood glucose of 123, but we never see readings this high.  Is there something else that can glycating hemoglobin and thus show an elevated HBA1C reading?

  • Anonymous

    3/23/2010 7:03:19 PM |

    What would be considered an optimal (or at least good) HbA1c level? And same for fasting glucose?

    I have noticed my fasting glucose tends to vary, between 80-95, with my HbA1c at 4.6.

    Curious also if there is any data on HbA1c correlating directly with triglyceride levels.

    My own trig values are higher than I like, around 125-150, yet I limit carbs, use fish oil, and think my HbA1c number is relatively decent.  So wondering if carbs/glucose isn't my problem, what else raises triglycerides?

  • Jake P.

    3/23/2010 10:30:18 PM |

    Dr Davis, do you have any recommendations on blood glucose test meters, as far as brand/model? Also, I'd prefer something that doesn't require a prescription, if possible.

  • Dr. William Davis

    3/24/2010 1:41:43 AM |

    Anon--

    The only two causes I am aware of are 1) iron deficiency anemia, and 2) hemoglobin variants.

    Also, are you confident of the accuracy of your blood glucose meter? You can check it by running side-by-side glucoses with a blood draw.

  • Dr. William Davis

    3/24/2010 1:42:31 AM |

    I've had good experiences with One Touch Ultramini, Aviva, Relion, and Accuchek meters. All are available without prescription.

  • Anonymous

    3/24/2010 5:26:17 AM |

    This is exactly why everybody should have a blood glucose meter, and know their numbers.

    While I have not been diagnosed as having type 2 diabetes, I was darned close.  My meter, and the information found here and in the blogs that link to and from it, have helped me to lose about 3 pounds per week for the past 6 months, and not be hungry or feel deprived.

    I was like Jonathan.  Until 6 months ago my fasting glucose was always under 100.  Now that I am managing to keep my average BG reading, including post prandial readings, under 95, I have stopped suffering from the inflammatory symptoms I've had for a decade.

    My meter and initial 100 test strips was the best under $50 purchase I've ever made.

    Thanks for the USEFUL information I get at The Heart Scan Blog.

  • Alfredo E.

    3/24/2010 2:52:07 PM |

    Hi All. I eat a low carbs diet and I have the a high fasting glucose, 95-105, but a low postprandial, 85-100.

    I also exercise everyday and do Intermittent Fasting.

    What could be the mechanism working here?

    Thanks for your ideas.

    Alfredo E.

  • Anonymous

    3/24/2010 3:20:00 PM |

    David Mendosa has a good blog/site/comments... on diabeties for many things A1C, food, low carb, etc. Check him out at www.mendosa.com
    Look under "health central" or

    http://www.healthcentral.com/diabetes/c/17/75106/david-guide-a1c-6-0

    For A1C guidance.

    He seems to lean away from strict AHA, ADA, and government things that do not work for him.

    His meter data is getting a little dated, and he does not specify exact things like he states vitamin D, as opposed to stating: D3. And he seems to be a little soft about major statements, possible law suit shy.

  • Anonymous

    3/24/2010 4:01:15 PM |

    I'm curious why you believe that gaining control over postprandial glucose will result in lower *fasting* glucose.  Is there a mechanism for this?  I've found that my fasting glucose hasn't fallen since I started the TYP diet 3 months ago; it's still in the mid to high 90s -- even though my one hour glucose is rarely much higher than that.

  • Anonymous

    3/24/2010 6:40:34 PM |

    Responding to Dr. Davis' comment:
    "The only two causes I am aware of are 1) iron deficiency anemia, and 2) hemoglobin variants.

    Also, are you confident of the accuracy of your blood glucose meter? You can check it by running side-by-side glucoses with a blood draw."

    I don't think he has iron deficiency anemia unless high ferritin level indicates that?  His ferritin level was 320 at the time he got the HBA1C of 5.9.  What are hemoglobin variants?

    We have the Accuchek meter and have also had fasting and post-prandial lab tests done and the meter seems to be in the ballpark.

    Thank you very much for your reply.

  • Anne

    3/24/2010 9:28:20 PM |

    My fasting was below 100. My A1C was 6.5. A OGTT spiked at 202. My doctors told me as long as my fasting BG was good, I did not have to worry as I only had insulin resistance not diabetes. That was 10 yrs ago.

    A year ago I bought a glucometer and started eliminating foods that spike my BG. My last A1C was 5.5.

    I wish I could get a hold of the results of my OGTT from 40 yrs ago. I was told it was slightly abnormal but I did not have diabetes. How much damage has been done from elevated postprandial blood sugars?

  • Anonymous

    3/25/2010 12:20:28 AM |

    Dr. Davis,

    Would you anticipate that a healthy 25 year old would obtains similarly high postprandial sugars to those meals?  Or do young, healthly, slim people have high glucose tolerance, and hence low postprandial responses to sugar?  I've seen many articles featuring sports stars who subsist on high carb, low fat diets, such as rafael nadal, roger federer, tiger woods... I find it hard to believe they exceed 120 mg/dl postprandially...

    David

  • mikyy748

    3/27/2010 5:31:11 AM |

    Please help with an explanation ! My last meal of the day (with NO carbs) is around 4PM. At 9-10PM, my glucose test shows about 100-105. But... in the morning the test shows 125-130. How is it possible?!

  • Anonymous

    4/10/2010 4:37:12 AM |

    Veeerrrrry interesting!

    I have been on an extremely resrricted carb diet for several months.  My One Touch (and my wife's, she's T1 on a pump) my glucose levels never vary from 100-120 with the vast majority right around 110-113. Tests are run about once a day at various times including 1-2 hours post prandial.

    At my PCP's office (she's also an endocrinologist) today, her office machine complained of an HbA1C of 20+ and wouldn't give a reading, while it did report my other lipid levels, most moderately elevated as usual.

    Tubes were drawn for processing by a lab.  Of course it's the weekend and I'm obsessing about it... sigh.
    I worry that my low carb lifestyle might be masking what would be high glucose readings which is not very logical, or if something is wrong with my blood such as anemia.  A quick google and here I am.

    I wonder if this is common for extremely low-carber diabetics?

    Am on low doses of Diovan, HCTZ and colchicine...

    Thanks to all for any thoughts.
    -Ron

  • Anonymous

    4/13/2010 2:26:58 PM |

    Thanks to all who commented ;)

    Lab work came back with an HbA1C of 5.9, so the office machine was just being stupid as hoped/mostly expected.

    Good luck to everyone else.

  • mongander

    4/27/2010 11:22:25 PM |

    This MedScape article doesn't make sense.  It claims that <6 may be too low...That >7 has a better all cause mortality.
    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/720391

  • William A. Ryan

    7/15/2010 1:32:59 PM |

    FYI, another possible cause of abnormally high HbA1c is Vitamin B12 and/or folate deficiency.  This causes anemia with low red blood cell turnover, so any given Hb molecule is floating around longer, and thus has a higher probability of glycation.

  • Helena

    9/29/2010 11:01:56 PM |

    So.. I just started testing my blood sugar again today... first reading was 90
    Then I had lunch. Rice and curry with coconut milk (probably loaded with sugar) and it went from 156 to 258 to 124 in 2.5 hours after that meal... I am a little concerned.

    Think I will go back on my low carb diet ASAP!

  • Helena

    9/30/2010 3:22:01 PM |

    Let me correct my numbers... I didn't have them in front of me when I wrote the previous post so here they are:

    Lunch was Rice, shrimp, coconut milk based curry pot

    Blood levels:
    60 min after - 193
    90 min after - 217
    130 min after - 258
    2.5 hrs after - 140

    This morning I had a reading of 89 and after having my protein shake with cream and water it was 106...

    Def going to go back to my low carb diet asap!
    Thanks for a great blog full of valuable information and help to get back on track.

  • Anonymous

    10/15/2010 2:05:41 PM |

    This is a recent day of testing. 90 minutes after eating 50 grams of processed brown flax, my BG was about 117, but it also depends on what I eat the night before. 2 hrs after eating 8 oz hummus with tahini, my BG was 101. 1 hr after eating a 143 gram (quick rolled) oat cake with 95 grams chocolate syrup with a lot of sugar and water, my BG was 120. Next day fasting BG was 120. Carbs do a good job of BG stabilization, although I'm trying to decrease some carbs and lower my fasting BG. I will try soymilk, and less carbs.

  • H Saleem

    11/22/2010 9:04:14 PM |

    Hi, Let me add my 2Cs. The objectives for diabetics and pre-diabetics are poles apart and confusing the two can  lead to irreparable loss for the pre-diabetics and those with insulin resistance.  

    For diabetics, when the disease is well established, the focus is on minimizing the harm i.e. to minimize the blood sugar level. Elevated blood sugar does so much harm in the long run that it should be kept under control through any means possible: diet, exercise, medicine, weight loss etc. When one plan and/or drug regimen fails to control the blood glucose level, it is replaced by another, all the time focusing on maintaining optimum blood glucose levels resulting in normal (for diabetics) readings on fasting glucose, HbA1C etc. I am not fully aware but possibly there is no mainstream healthcare regimen or drug that focuses on  reversing the disease or trying to minimize diabetes damages (other than those caused by high blood glucose) like destruction of pancreatic cells.

    For pre-diabetics and those with insulin resistance, the focus should NOT be on lowering blood glucose level DIRECTLY. For pre-diabetes, it is possible to keep on "travelling" towards diabetes in reality but assuming otherwise just because some "local" interference does not let the blood sugar rise. So if you start taking any alpha-glucidase, your postprandial reading will not rise much. But this does not mean that you have controlled pre-diabetes. The causes are all there like being over-weight, lack of exercise bla bla. And your body's normal ability to regulate blood sugar keeps on deteriorating ultimately leading to a point when the alpha-glucidase alone will not be sufficient. So when pre-diabetes is treated like diabetes, it can lead to actual diabetes. This is because here the focus should not be on lowering blood glucose levels or "treating" the condition but REVERSING it. In other words the goal should be to transform the body back to the point where it can naturally process the foods while keeping the blood glucose levels and HbA1C levels in normal range. All this without the help of any drugs or special diet or aids. And for this the usual solutions are already well known: weight-loss, exercise etc.

    The moral of the story is that if you are pre-diabetic, you can keep yourself happy by eating almonds, vinegar or psyllium with meals to "show" you that your post-prandial glucose levels are in range. This can be done by eating a low-carn diet or taking diabetes drugs. But if keep the same weight, continue the same eating habbits, and do no exercise then you are possibly doing nothing to prevent a preventable disease.

  • H Saleem

    11/22/2010 9:04:58 PM |

    Hi, Let me add my 2Cs. The objectives for diabetics and pre-diabetics are poles apart and confusing the two can  lead to irreparable loss for the pre-diabetics and those with insulin resistance.  

    For diabetics, when the disease is well established, the focus is on minimizing the harm i.e. to minimize the blood sugar level. Elevated blood sugar does so much harm in the long run that it should be kept under control through any means possible: diet, exercise, medicine, weight loss etc. When one plan and/or drug regimen fails to control the blood glucose level, it is replaced by another, all the time focusing on maintaining optimum blood glucose levels resulting in normal (for diabetics) readings on fasting glucose, HbA1C etc. I am not fully aware but possibly there is no mainstream healthcare regimen or drug that focuses on  reversing the disease or trying to minimize diabetes damages (other than those caused by high blood glucose) like destruction of pancreatic cells.

    For pre-diabetics and those with insulin resistance, the focus should NOT be on lowering blood glucose level DIRECTLY. For pre-diabetes, it is possible to keep on "travelling" towards diabetes in reality but assuming otherwise just because some "local" interference does not let the blood sugar rise. So if you start taking any alpha-glucidase, your postprandial reading will not rise much. But this does not mean that you have controlled pre-diabetes. The causes are all there like being over-weight, lack of exercise bla bla. And your body's normal ability to regulate blood sugar keeps on deteriorating ultimately leading to a point when the alpha-glucidase alone will not be sufficient. So when pre-diabetes is treated like diabetes, it can lead to actual diabetes. This is because here the focus should not be on lowering blood glucose levels or "treating" the condition but REVERSING it. In other words the goal should be to transform the body back to the point where it can naturally process the foods while keeping the blood glucose levels and HbA1C levels in normal range. All this without the help of any drugs or special diet or aids. And for this the usual solutions are already well known: weight-loss, exercise etc.

    The moral of the story is that if you are pre-diabetic, you can keep yourself happy by eating almonds, vinegar or psyllium with meals to "show" you that your post-prandial glucose levels are in range. This can be done by eating a low-carn diet or taking diabetes drugs. But if keep the same weight, continue the same eating habbits, and do no exercise then you are possibly doing nothing to prevent a preventable disease.

  • KDL

    12/12/2010 9:50:40 PM |

    I have a 16 year old daughter who HBA1c is 11.7 (yes very high).  I have been working with her especialist to bring it down.  The problem is her daily readings are normal for a type 1 diabetic. I know the monitors can be cheated however I am pretty confident that most of the time she does the right thing.  I also know that sometimes she does not.  However I am wondering if there are any other things that can cause this annomoly?

Loading