Tag Archives: heart disease

Link

The treatment and placebo groups’ mortality lines should be independent: a trend in one should have no consequential influence on the other. However:

  • All 4 lines are essentially identical for 1.6 years.
  • Then there is a departure — by both lines at the same time.

The fact that both lines — treatment and placebo — depart at the same time is important. Why should the treatment suddenly become beneficial at exactly the same time as non-treatment becomes detrimental?

The average line of both treatment and non-treatment groups follows a ‘natural’ mortality curve; any natural survival curve would have its slope increasing downward. (i.e. becoming more negative.)

Both treatment and placebo lines follow this natural curve for 1.6 years. Then both diverge. The placebo group shows this slope change increasing (negative) at a faster rate than all other lines. But, surely, it should follow the natural mortality curve. Why doesn’t it?

The slope of the treatment group is nearly constant from 1.8 years onward. It’s not a curve at all, but an almost straight line — and it shouldn’t be. What it says is that old people die at the same rate as younger ones. And life isn’t like that.

Is this evidence that the data of the 4S trial were not handled in an honest manner? Were deaths occurring in the treatment group assigned to the placebo group? Is this why the two curves, which should be independent, are apparently related? Or is there a mistake somewhere? Is there an error in logic?

Statins: Saviours of Mankind or Expensive Scam?

Link

The impact of statin drugs goes far beyond those declared by the advisory leaflet in the packet. It is really time that the professions got to grips with the fundamental biochemistry of mevalonate inhibitions. More about the book ‘The Dark Side of Statins’ later in the year!

I hope this video will encourage people to consider the wider implications of the biochemical action of statins as they target the important pathway affecting much more than cardiovascular outcomes.

Statin drugs will continue to devastate the quality of life of its users. ‘All cause mortality data’ is not fully released. Failure to appreciate mevalonate pathway effects is allowing this devastating avalanche of adverse impacts to continue, with the blessing of professionals who should know better.

Dark Effects of statins are listed on in adverts and on the leaflet supplied with the medication. more info at: http://www.spacedoc.net .

Statins – The Dark Side – Video Link

Sugar Damage and Dementia

Posted on by
Reply

A normal brain requires reliable supplies of fatty nutrients supplied by the liver as LDL. LDLs are fatty packets of nutrients travelling in the blood to feed the brain and other organs.  LDL receptors on the organs recognise the LDL packets and absorb them. The ‘empty packets’ (HDL), carrying waste for recycling, return to the liver via the blood stream.
image

Over time sugars damage the LDL labels, and thus stop the nutrients from being recognised by the brain’s LDL receptors. Consequently LDL stays in the blood and less HDL packets are produced.  This raised LDL. and lower HDL. is associated with poor health. The cause is sugar-damage. image

Sugar damage causes the brain to be starved of vital fat and cholesterol.

Treatments which lower ‘LDL cholesterol’ do not help. They further deprive the brain of LDL, The brain and other organs become starved of fatty nutrients. Meanwhile, any excess dietary sugars (fructose & glucose) become the cause many ‘diabetes associated’ illnesses.

Fructose, which is increasingly being added to food products, is the new problem sugar. It is more reactive and 10 times more damaging than glucose.

The vital fatty nutrients in LDL are falsely called ‘Bad Cholesterol’.

Raised blood lipids (LDL) are a symptom, and again the cause is sugar-damage.

Is it any wonder that years of the dogmatic policy of ‘Cholesterol Reduction’ have failed to deliver health benefits, and is fraught with problems such as muscle wastage, diabetes and dementia?

The above is a very simplified overview of our paper. If you click on this link you can read our full paper, as published in the Archives of Medical Science.

Click here for our Dementia Paper

(These are ‘free access’ publications)

Link

When the British physiologist John Yudkin published Pure, White and Deadly—his 1972 book linking heart disease to sugar consumption—he met strong opposition from the sugar industry. As Geoff Watts writes in this week’s BMJ (doi:10.1136/bmj.e7800), “jobs and research grants that might predictably have come Yudkin’s way did not materialise.” Attacks also included the abrupt cancellation of conferences suspected of promulgating anti-sugar findings, and the book was dismissed as a work of fiction. Enter fat in the role of chief culprit in the rise in heart disease. The fat hypothesis, the chief proponent of which was the American biologist Ancel Keys, influenced policy makers and captured the popular imagination. Meanwhile, writes Watts, medical interest in the sugar hypothesis faded. Yudkin’s book fell out of print and low fat became the buzz phrase in nutrition.

image

But in recent years, and with rising obesity becoming one of the main health concerns in the developed world, the sugar hypothesis has started to regain momentum. Recent anti-sugar initiatives include New York city’s restriction on the size of fizzy drinks (BMJ 2012;345:e6768). At the end of last year Penguin Books reissued Pure, White and Deadly, with a new and enthusiastic introduction by US endocrinologist Robert Lustig, which in this week’s BMJ Jack Winkler hails as a medical classic (doi:10.1136/bmj.e8612). And, as if to forestall any further policy initiatives against sugary beverages, this week Coca-Cola launched a television advertisement in the United States acknowledging the obesity problem and attempting to defend the company’s record in producing low calorie drinks.

How science is going sour on sugar – BMJ