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
Heart attacks in your own backyard

Heart attacks in your own backyard

Two men from my community just died of heart attacks. Both were in their 40s.

What bothers me most about these all too frequent stories is that it is so preventable. You can bet that both had little or no symptoms prior to their deaths. You can also bet that they've had cholesterol panels taken by their doctors.

Followers of the Track Your Plaque program know that these are sure-fire paths to failure. The absence of heart disease symptoms should provide no reassurance whatsoever. High cholesterol, in-between cholesterol, low cholesterol--none are confident indicators in a specific individual.

Stress test? How about the patient I saw today who, until I met him, had been undergoing stress test after stress test, every year--all while the quantity of coronary plaque tripled. False reassurances provided by his cardiologist led him to believe that all was well--while this stack of oily rags was just waiting for the spark to ignite.

Too little time, too much money, too far away--there's a hundred excuses for not getting a heart scan. Or, you've had a heart scan and no one can tell you what to do about it. If you're reading this, however, you've found the most intensive source of information available on how your heart scan can serve as the start of a program of heart attack prevention for a life free of dangers.

It's not that tough. But it won't just go away on its own. I just have to look around me in my own community, watch the local news, talk to friends, and I'll heart about all the people just in my neighborhood who should be learning these lessons. I rant and rave about this but some people need to hear it from a friend, colleague, neighbor, rather than some crazy doctor bucking the standard line.

You, too, should be telling anyone who will listen about how heart disease can be identified and controlled.
Loading
Vitamin D and HDL

Vitamin D and HDL

Despite the paucity of scientific documentation of this phenomenon, I am continuing to witness extraordinary increases in HDL cholesterol levels with vitamin D supplementation.

I've touched on the interaction of vitamin D supplementation with HDL in The Heart Scan Blog previously:

Vitamin D: Treatment for metabolic syndrome?

HDL for Dummies


At first, I thought it was attributable to other factors. In real life, most people don't modify one factor at a time. They reduce
processed carbohydrates/eliminate wheat and cornstarch, lose weight, add or increase omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil, begin niacin, increase exercise and physical activity. All these efforts also impact on HDL.

Among the many things I do, I consult on complex lipid (cholesterol) disorders (complex hyperlipidemias) in my office. A substantial number of these people carry a diagnosis of hypoalphalipoproteinemia, a mouthful that simply means these people are unable to manufacture much apoprotein A1, the principal protein of HDL cholesterol particles. As a result, people with hypoalphalipoproteinemia have HDL cholesterol levels in the neighborhood of 20-30 mg/dl--very low. They are also at high risk for heart disease and stroke.

Encourage these people to exercise, attain ideal weight, eliminate wheat and cornstarch: HDL increases 5 mg/dl or so.

Add niacin, HDL increases another 5-10 mg/dl.

Perhaps we're now sitting somewhere around an HDL of 35-40 mg/dl--better, but hardly great.

Add vitamin D to achieve our target serum level . . . HDL jumps to 50, 60, 70, even 90 mg/dl.

The first few times this occurred, I thought it was an error or fluke. But now that I've witnessed this effect many dozens of time, I am convinced that it is real. Just today, I saw a 40-year old man whose starting HDL was 25 mg/dl increase to 87 mg/dl.

Responses like this are supposed to be impossible. Before vitamin D, I had never witnessed increases of this magnitude.

Not all therapies for raising HDL raise the important large (also known as HDL2b) fraction. With lipoprotein analyses, it appears that is principally the large fraction of HDL that rises with vitamin D supplementation.

Why? How?

That I can't tell you. But for those of you struggling with low HDL cholesterols despite your best efforts, vitamin D can make a world of difference.

An interesting corollary: If super-high HDL cholesterols are associated with extreme longevity, as they are with centenarians, does raising HDL to extraordinary levels with vitamin D lead to longer, healthier life, all the way up to age 110 years?

Again, no answers, but an interesting thought. And one I'd bet on. (And I'm not selling vitamin D.)

Comments (23) -

  • Stargazey

    8/19/2008 3:31:00 AM |

    If you don't mind, how much Vitamin D do these people take? Do they take it in divided doses or all at once?

  • arnoud

    8/19/2008 4:33:00 AM |

    Dr. Davis, very exciting info!  
    Could you comment on the typical time lag seen in improved HDL as a response to vitamin D supplementation?

  • Anonymous

    8/19/2008 11:34:00 AM |

    How do your observations jive with research showing that vitamin D inhibits apo-A1, which appears to confer greater protection against heart disease than HDL?

    Wehmeier K, Beers A, Haas MJ, Wong NC, Steinmeyer A, Zugel U, Mooradian AD (2005). "Inhibition of apolipoprotein AI gene expression by 1, 25-dihydroxyvitamin D3". Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1737 (1): 16–26. PMID 16236546.

  • Missbossy

    8/19/2008 11:35:00 AM |

    You might not be selling vitamin D... but these guys are!

    For Vitamin D, Drink Schlitz!

    Perhaps you could work this into your daily vitamin protocol...

  • Shreela

    8/19/2008 12:48:00 PM |

    I just noticed that I've been taking a Vit D and fish oil gel cap every time I read one of your posts about them, to make up for my 'forget' days 8^)

  • Stephan

    8/19/2008 4:26:00 PM |

    Just wanted to say thanks for your observations, that's very interesting.  Maybe someone will catch on and do a clinical trial.  Perhaps vitamin D will be the long-awaited HDL-raiser.  

    Hopefully some drug company will create an analog they can patent.  Just kidding.

  • Anonymous

    8/20/2008 12:41:00 AM |

    Because I have high LP(a)I take Niacin,exercise,mostly lean meats and veg/fruit diet. I have kept acurate blood draw records since 2002.Starting HDL was 50,had risen to mid 60's by 2007. Added 2000mg Vitamin D oil base gel caps 07 and 08. Last blood draw HDL was 85. I know it worked for me. It had no affect on LP(a)unfortunately remaining at 30 - 40. Thanks Dr Davis for making this known on your blog, it should help many.

  • The Girl

    8/20/2008 2:48:00 AM |

    I have HDL of 103, how common is this? I can't find much information about HDL levels this high...

  • Anonymous

    8/20/2008 12:07:00 PM |

    Missbossy -- funny! Yeah, a comedian (?) used to joke that he took vitamins with his beer so that while he was tearing himself down he was also building himself up. Smile

    I have been taking 6000 units Vit D3 daily to achieve measured blood vitamin D level (25-OH-vitamin D3) of 60 ng/ml.  Your mileage may vary.

  • Stuart Buck

    8/20/2008 2:23:00 PM |

    What about getting some sunshine?  Does that work?

  • Anonymous

    8/20/2008 3:13:00 PM |

    I'm also interested in your response regarding  vitamin D inhibiting apo-A1. It appears contrary to improved HDL.

    In my own case, vitamin D hasn't done anything for my HDL. I started with a D level at 21 and my HDL has hovered in the 27-34 range. Raised my D levels to 54, and my HDL sunk near the low point of 27

    I also had my Apo A1 tested separately, but my doctor isn't entirely sure how to read the data. My Apo A1 is in the reference range provided by the lab, although a bit towards the lower end. I have no way in determining if it's truly decent or not though.

  • Anonymous

    8/21/2008 2:19:00 PM |

    I started with a "D" level of 17 and an HDL of 63, started taking "D" supplements and raised my "D" level to exactly 60 and my HDL went down to 56.

  • Anonymous

    8/22/2008 2:27:00 AM |

    I too started with a low HDL of 35, added Vitamin D3, 3-4,000iu/daily and my HDL went to 71! I am a firm believer of Vitamin D>

  • Anonymous

    10/20/2008 7:44:00 AM |

    I'd like too see a reference to published research linking D3 supplementation to greater HDL.  I think D3 does have anti-atherosclerotic properties - despite what it does at a high dose.  When high doses are given to animals on a high fat diet, vitamin D3 actually induces atherosclerosis.  This is a common model for atherosclerosis in the lab which might account for why so many doctors seem to have missed the clinical benefits for D3 in heart disease.  Since D3 induces self-tolerance (partly via IL-10) and atherosclerosis has recently been described as an autoimmune condition caused by underfunctional regulatory T-cells, at a normal dose D3 probably has a protective effect against atherosclerosis.

  • Avon

    6/4/2009 7:11:31 PM |

    I would appreciate if anyone can help answer as to what is the daily dosage(in I.U's) of Vitamin D required to have an effect on raising the HDL number?

  • Anonymous

    9/10/2009 5:29:02 PM |

    I was actually trying to google why my HDL is so high and what it means (110 and double checked two years in a row), my LDL is 68.  I'm 47, walk 2.5 miles 4 or 5 days a week but other then that not sure what I'm doing.  I take a womens one a day vitamin and a caltrate.

  • Helene

    4/4/2010 6:15:35 PM |

    I found this web site because I was looking for an explanation why my HDL level jumped to 115 from a 2-year earlier level of 97.  My diet is the same, year round.  The only thing different is the increased amount of vitamin D (1400 IU/daily).  I have been diagnosed with osteopenia and the doctor suggested increasing my calcium and vitamin D intake. Conversely, my LDL is 79.

    Helene

  • RufusG

    8/27/2010 8:34:36 AM |

    Lack of exposure to sunlight, and therefore lack of Vitamin D, is implicated in over 60 illnesses.
    - including Heart health

    More at:

    www.grassrootshealth.net
    www.vitamindcouncil.org
    www.vitamindwiki.com
    www.vitamindandcholesterol.com

    I have posted a Personal Action Plan that explains testing and dose size at:

    www.rufusgreenbaum.com
    - see Downloads

    .

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 2:26:25 PM |

    The first few times this occurred, I thought it was an error or fluke. But now that I've witnessed this effect many dozens of time, I am convinced that it is real. Just today, I saw a 40-year old man whose starting HDL was 25 mg/dl increase to 87 mg/dl.

  • mobani

    12/11/2011 5:21:36 PM |

    I have ahistory of consistently lower HDL, around 30. In my recent blood test, it is idicated that my Vit D level is also low (22.6 ng/ml). I have been taking D-3 2000 IU. I n reecnt months  may have taken it irregularly. A month ago, I had the blood test and the same old results. I am not sure if I took D-3 daily. I will start taking it regularly for two months and do the test again. Do I need to raise the dose to 4000 IU instead of 2000/day? I jog every other day for 40 minutes. Diet consists of very low fat, and also take fish oil caaplets daily.
    My reecnt blood test results:
    Fasting cholesterol = 152 mg/dL
    HDL cholesterol = 32 (L)
    LDL cholesterol = 84
    Total Cholesterol / HDL ratio = 4.8 Cool
    TGL = 180 Cool
    Non-HDL cholesterol = 120

    I also have a throat problem. I do get clear mucus secretion in throat abnormally. Constantly spit out. Allergy medicine helps a bit but does not go away. I do not know if these three problems have  a common root. Any suggestions??? Appreciate your help.

  • mobani

    12/11/2011 5:33:32 PM |

    Interesting! How is this going now? I am looking for a solution like that. My posting added to the blog today is as follows:
    mobani says:

    December 11, 2011 at 11:21 pm


    I have ahistory of consistently lower HDL, around 30. In my recent blood test, it is idicated that my Vit D level is also low (22.6 ng/ml). I have been taking D-3 2000 IU. I n reecnt months may have taken it irregularly. A month ago, I had the blood test and the same old results. I am not sure if I took D-3 daily. I will start taking it regularly for two months and do the test again. Do I need to raise the dose to 4000 IU instead of 2000/day? I jog every other day for 40 minutes. Diet consists of very low fat, and also take fish oil caaplets daily.
    My reecnt blood test results:
    Fasting cholesterol = 152 mg/dL
    HDL cholesterol = 32 (L)
    LDL cholesterol = 84
    Total Cholesterol / HDL ratio = 4.8 Cool
    TGL = 180 Cool
    Non-HDL cholesterol = 120

    I also have a throat problem. I do get clear mucus secretion in throat abnormally. Constantly spit out. Allergy medicine helps a bit but does not go away. I do not know if these three problems have a common root. Any suggestions??? Appreciate your help.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/14/2011 2:51:04 AM |

    Please read the vitamin D posts here, Mobani, and you will see that we achieve 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels of 60-70 ng/ml. Then wait about two years and HDL generally shows its full rise.

  • John Cross

    11/13/2013 5:22:19 AM |

    You may have reflux; 20% of reflux suffers don't get heartburn; feels like congestion. I know, I'm one of the 20%.

Loading
Chocolate peanut butter cup smoothie

Chocolate peanut butter cup smoothie

Here's a simple recipe for chocolate peanut butter cup smoothie.

The coconut milk, nut butter, and flaxseed make this smoothie exceptionally filling. If you are a fan of cocoa flavonoids for reducing blood pressure, then this provides a wallop. Approximately 10% of cocoa by weight consists of the various cocoa flavonoids, like procyanidins (polymers of catechin and epicatechin) and quercetin, the components like responsible for many of the health benefits of cocoa.


Ingredients:
1/2 cup coconut milk
1 cup unsweetened almond milk
2 tablespoons cocoa powder (without alkali)
2 tablespoons shredded coconut (unsweetened)
1 tablespoon ground flaxseed
1 teaspoon almond extract
1 1/2 tablespoons natural peanut, almond, or sunflower seed butter
Non-nutritive sweetener to taste (stevia, Truvia, sucralose, xylitol, erythritol)
4 ice cubes

Combine ingredients in blender. Blend and serve.

If you plan to set any of the smoothie aside, then leave out the flaxseed, as it absorbs water and will expand and solidify if left to stand.

For an easy variation, try adding vanilla extract or 1/4 cup of sugar-free (sucralose) vanilla or coconut syrup from Torani or DaVinci and leave out the added sweetener.

The compromise I draw here is the use of non-nutritive sweeteners. Beware that they can increase appetite, since they likely trigger insulin release. However, this smoothie is so filling that I don't believe you will experience this effect with this recipe.

Comments (18) -

  • Anonymous

    3/18/2011 11:28:11 PM |

    This is very good - just mixed up a large glass full (minus the flaxseed).  And, that's my question, do you use finely ground flax seed?  I also tossed in a fist-full of blueberries - should be able to tolerate them well; I just had a very intense resistance training session

    I'd love to see more recipes for some ideas.  I disagree with those who wrote in on the earlier post, characterizing smoothies as "not real food."  I'm a big fan for time-challenged mornings and post-workout nourishment.

    Bill

  • praguestepchild

    3/19/2011 12:11:34 AM |

    I can't believe you passed up a perfectly good opportunity to embed a cheesy 80's Reese's commercial in this post.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJLDF6qZUX0

  • Dr. William Davis

    3/19/2011 1:36:19 PM |

    Anon--

    Yes, I used a finely-ground flaxseed.

    The berries are a great idea, provided quantity is small.

  • Kathryn

    3/19/2011 6:33:41 PM |

    Just a cautionary note -

    Sucralose/Splenda can have severe reactions.

    I seem to respond/react to things severely.  Sucralose has caused both allergic reaction (swollen mucus membranes) and severe migraine for me.  In fact, as a frequent migraine sufferer (tho much less now that i've removed gluten and sulfites), the migraine i got from sucralose was by far the worst i've ever had.  

    Personally, i am of the belief that if it effects me so strongly, it is probably not good for anyone, but the damage it does is much less pronounced in other people.

    I stick to stevia for a no-calorie sweetener.

  • Geoffrey Levens

    3/19/2011 8:43:16 PM |

    http://jstevens.wordpress.com/2008/02/20/how-sucralose-aka-splenda-is-made-and-why-you-want-to-avoid-it/

    "How Sucralose (aka Splenda) Is Made And Why You Want To Avoid It

    ...I wanted to comment on Splenda.  Splenda, also known as sucralose, was created accidentally when some chemists were trying to produce an insecticide.  Here is the process by which they produce the formula sold in stores:

    “1.  Sucrose is tritylated with trityl chloride in the presence of dimethylformamide and 4-methylmorpholine, and the tritylated sucrose is then acetylated with acetic anhydride.

    2.  The resulting sucrose molecule TRISPA is chlorinated with hydrogen chlorine in the presence of tolulene.

    3.  The resulting 4-PAS is heated in the presence of methyl isobutyl ketone and acetic acid.

    4.  The resulting 6-PAS is chlorinated with thionyl chloride in the presence of toluene and benzyltriethylammonium chloride.

    5.  The resulting TOSPA is treated with methanol in the presence of sodium methoxide to produce sucralose.”  (Note that methanol, wood alcohol aka paint remover,  is one of the questionable ingredients in aspartame.)

    In addition, the bags and packets of Splenda commercially available are not pure sucralose.  They also contain bulking agents.  All artificial sweeteners use bulking agents.  Do you know what they use?  Sugar.  Dextrose, sucrose, and maltodextrin.  (Maltodextrin is corn syrup solids composed primarily from fructose and glucose in a starch form.)   All sweetener packets are at least 96 percent sugar.  Splenda is 99% sugar.

    The packets are labelled calorie free as a result of manipulating a loophole in the food labeling laws.  The product can be described as sugar free if a serving contains less than 5 grams of sugar, and calorie free if a serving is less than 5 calories.  So they set the serving size on bags at .5 grams  and the packets contain a serving of 1 gram.  A one gram packet contains 4 calories.   This can be confirmed on the manufacturer’s website in the FAQ section:  â€œLike many no and low calorie sweeteners, each serving of SPLENDA® No Calorie Sweetener contains a very small amount of common food ingredients, e.g., dextrose and/or maltodextrin, for volume. Because the amount of these ingredients is so small, SPLENDA® No Calorie Sweetener still has an insignificant calorie value per serving and meets FDA’s standards for “no calorie” sweeteners. “

    To make matters worse, when sucralose was shown to not raise blood sugars, it was the pure substance that was tested, not the mixture that is sold to the public.  Dextrose, sucrose, and/or maltodextrin are definitely going to raise a diabetic’s blood sugar.  There is also a great deal of evidence that artificial sweeteners actually cause an increase in appetite, causing people who consume them to take in more calories than they would otherwise.

    Stevia, on the other hand, lowers blood sugar, making it a much better choice.  If you have tried stevia in the past and did not like the flavor, you might want to try another brand. ..."

  • Brandon Nolte

    3/19/2011 10:38:51 PM |

    If your looking for a more nutritious "sweetner" you should try adding half a cup of coconut water. Delicious!

    Ps. I love your blog. Keep up the great work!

  • bob412

    3/19/2011 11:34:59 PM |

    Tapioca starch in the almond milk, but not enough to hurt you.

  • Dr. John

    3/20/2011 2:49:18 AM |

    I enjoy your blog. You have a good thread about the hazards of hyperglycemia.
    However, this recipe is not one I would recommend to patients attempting to reverse metabolic syndrome, T2D, or IR.
    Their main concern is the inflammation caused by the above listed disorders. The omega 6 content of the peanut butter, sunflower seed, and to an extent, almond butter would exacerbate the inflammation mitigated by the hyperglycemia.
    In addition, sugar alcohols (xylitol, erythritol) tend to cause GI upset (gas, diarrhea). Also the hazards of Sucralose are intuitively obvious....it contains chlorine molecules....commonly found in many household cleaners, and of course used in WWI as a pulmonary choking agent.
    I would only use macadamia nuts/nut butter, and Stevia to sweeten.
    Dr. John

  • Dr. William Davis

    3/20/2011 1:28:28 PM |

    Thanks, Dr. John.

    I hear you on the sucralose issue. I've actually been having positive experiences with stevia, xylitol, and erythritol. The important thing is that people have some good choices nowadays, unlike 20 years ago when we had saccharine . . . period.

    There is no question that mannitol and sorbitol have greater potential for both GI distress (diarrhea) as well as increases in blood glucose, so these are clearly on the no-no list (unless you need a quick laxative).

  • Gabriella Kadar

    3/20/2011 7:23:42 PM |

    Sucralose is not metabolized.  Most of it is excreted unchanged in the feces.  A small percentage is absorbed and excreted unchanged in urine.  

    Sodium in food is more of a concern for a person who experiences migraine headaches.  Over-activity of muscles activated by the Trigeminal nerve due to airway resistance secondary to water retention is a greater concern.  Various factors are present both anatomically and physiologically in people who experience migraine.  The only way to determine if sucralose is actually the cause of a migraine is to consume sucralose on its own.

    What concerns me is what happens to the sucralose in the environment.  The addition of a chlorine atom, (not a molecule, Dr. John) results in a molecule which cannot be metabolized by bacteria.  If environmental degradation is possible, then sucralose excreted by human beings is not an issue.  But if it persists in the environment, then it is a pollutant.

  • Anonymous

    3/21/2011 3:22:42 AM |

    I am practically a fruitarian, so much of what I like would be off limits.
    Is there an article here on what IS recommended?

  • Dr. John

    3/21/2011 3:29:27 PM |

    Yes, atoms, not molecules...ie. precisely 3 atoms of chlorine/molecule of sucrose...

    An interesting thing about this selective halogenation of sucrose, is the fact that sucralose (being 600 times as sweet as sucrose), increases the HbA1c numbers in my patients. This demonstrates a lessening of diabetic control. Thus, hemoglobin gets glycated and fasting blood sugar increases....with the attendant hyperglycemia issues as mentioned, and this excellent blog site.

    For this reason I do not recommend sucralose for diabetics nor anyone wanting to keep blood sugar levels within normal limits. The current cost and future costs for diabetes will cripple our healthcare structure. Here are ADA numbers:

    $174 billion: Total costs of diagnosed diabetes in the United States in 2007
    $116 billion for direct medical costs
    $58 billion for indirect costs (disability, work loss, premature mortality)

    Dr. John

  • Gabriella Kadar

    3/22/2011 1:42:51 AM |

    Dr. John, is it possible that other factors contribute to higher H1ac levels in your type 2 diabetic patients?  

    Since sucrolose is not metabolically active and does not act as a laxative, then there could be other endocrinological and neurological reasons for higher glucose levels.

    Here's an abstract on sucralose and Type 2 diabetes:

    Grotz VL, Henry RR, McGill JB, Prince MJ, Shamoon H, Trout JR, Pi-Sunyer FX. Lack of effect of sucralose on glucose homeostasis in subjects with type 2 diabetes. J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Dec;103(12):1607-12.

    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of 3-months' daily administration of high doses of sucralose, a non-nutritive sweetener, on glycemic control in subjects with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study, consisting of a 6-week screening phase, a 13-week test phase, and a 4-week follow-up phase. SUBJECTS/SETTING: Subjects with type 2 diabetes (age range 31 to 70 years) entered the test phase of this study; 128 subjects completed the study. The subjects were recruited from 5 medical centers across the United States and were, on average, obese. INTERVENTION: Subjects were randomly assigned to receive either placebo (cellulose) capsules (n=69) or 667 mg encapsulated sucralose (n=67) daily for the 13-week test phase. All subjects blindly received placebo capsules during the last 4 weeks of the screening phase and for the entire 4-week follow-up phase. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose, and fasting serum C-peptide were measured approximately every 2 weeks to evaluate blood glucose homeostasis. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance using repeated measures. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the sucralose and placebo groups in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, or fasting serum C-peptide changes from baseline. There were no clinically meaningful differences between the groups in any safety measure. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that, similar to cellulose, sucralose consumption for 3 months at doses of 7.5 mg/kg/day, which is approximately three times the estimated maximum intake, had no effect on glucose homeostasis in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Additionally, this study showed that sucralose was as well-tolerated by the study subjects as was the placebo.

    PMID: 14647086 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    Now, I can understand how sugar alcohols taken in large quantities might have some effect on blood sugar because they are laxative and increase gut motility and cause discofort or pain, both of which will spike blood sugar values. the liver dumps glucose into the bloodstream when the body is under stress like this.  And of course, the pancreas reacts very sluggishly to endogenous glucose.

    I think type 2 diabetics should have routine sleep study screening to determine whether breathing issues during sleep may be upramping the sympathetic nervous system and causing high sugar levels during sleep. We can't just help these people improve their life quality by looking at only one parameter.

    They need otolaryngological evaluation for anything from deviated nasal septa to chronic allergies, enlarged adenoids and tonsils.  The size of their jaws, how they function and tongue posture also factors in.

    Not to mention, anyone with pulmonary issues would have increased effort on breathing...asthma, pulmonary hypertension etc.  The existance of chronic pain and anxiety conditions also influence how the body produces its own glucose.  

    Patient's require a multi-disciplinary workup to determine the multiple factors that result in the development of type 2 diabetes.  It's not merely diet because these people have an awfully hard time changing their diets without having other problems addressed.

  • Anonymous

    3/24/2011 7:01:46 PM |

    Excellent! Dr. Davis, you have had many posts of what not to eat but very few on what we should eat. Taking something out of our diet means we have to replace it with something. This post seems to be in the right spirit. I am going to try this soon. Now if only you can post a similar substitute for Keva Juice's Oreo Speedwagon smoothie! Yes, I know they are hazardous to your health but they are wickedly good!

    -- Boris

  • Dr. John

    3/25/2011 5:50:15 AM |

    I'm not totally convinced why sucralose, a chloro-carbon, similar to DDT and PCBs, would elevate the HgA1c levels. My guess would be a neurological response to an ingested poison. Sucralose does kill intestinal beneficial bacteria...lactobacillus, bifidobacteria, and bacteroides...of varying amounts of 37-67%...and the enteric nervous system would react by elevating cortisol/adrenaline/glucagon: while at the same time not delaying gastric emptying.
    Body perception is stress....glycation of RBCs result, with CVD and sudden cardiac death.

    Studies that use diabetic, and obese subjects in the assessment of A1c elevation are biased from the start. These individuals have already lost glycemic control and as a result would not have normal A1c levels to begin with...let alone studying their response 13 weeks later.

    McNeil Nutritionals, maker of SPLENDA® Brand products, stated it has provided the American Diabetes Association (ADA) with a sponsorship to support the Association's efforts to fund research, information and advocacy programs on behalf of people with diabetes.
    And McNeil Nuts. are owned by Johnson and Johnson, who are large contributors to the ADA...the journal of the previously listed biased study showing the sucralose doesn't affect A1c levels...in spite of the fact in clinical results showing the opposite.

    Anything, sucrose or sucralose, that elevates A1c levels is cardio-lethal...and is best avoided.

  • reikime

    4/2/2011 5:07:29 PM |

    Dr. D,
    Do you use regular coconut milk or the lite? Does it make a difference, except calorically?

    Thanks!

    Jeanne

  • Anonymous

    4/8/2011 1:09:56 AM |

    I am allergic to the artificial sweeteners. Thought I could tolerate sucralose but it just took a little time for a reaction. My mouth and throat became inflamed and I had sore bumps all over the inside of my throat and back of my mouth after about a week.

    I don't like stevia or the other natural no calorie sweeteners either...they just don't taste sweet to me or have odd flavors.

    But I found something.  It is not calorie free, but it has low glycemic index and tastes just like sugar.  It is "Organic Blue Agave". What are a few calories in exchange for some actual taste.

    I bought it at Costco.

  • Geoffrey Levens

    4/8/2011 1:30:13 AM |

    ""Organic Blue Agave". What are a few calories in exchange for some actual taste."

    High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is about 55% fructose and cause inflammation, insulin resistance, and elevates triglycerides.  Agave syrup is often 70% or higher (possibly as high as 90%) fructose!  Marketing scam...

Loading