Natural Eradication of Cardiovascular Disease

Natural Eradication of Cardiovascular Disease

Every second man and woman in the industrialized world dies from the consequences of atherosclerotic deposits in the coronary arteries (leading to heart attack) or in the arteries supplying blood to the brain (leading to stroke). The epidemic spread of these cardiovascular diseases is largely due to the fact that, until now, the true nature of atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease has been insufficiently understood.



Conventional medicine is largely confined to treating the symptoms of this disease. Calcium antagonists, beta-blockers, nitrates and other drugs are prescribed to alleviate angina pain. Surgical procedures (angioplasty and bypass surgery) are applied to improve blood flow mechanically. Rarely does conventional medicine target the underlying problem: the instability of the vascular wall, which triggers the development of atherosclerotic deposits.

Cellular Medicine provides a breakthrough in our understanding of the underlying causes of these conditions and leads to the effective prevention and treatment of coronary heart disease. The primary cause of coronary heart disease and other forms of atherosclerotic disease is a chronic deficiency of vitamins and other essential nutrients in millions of vascular wall cells. This leads to the instability of the vascular walls, lesions and cracks, atherosclerotic deposits and, eventually, heart attacks or strokes. Since the primary cause of cardiovascular disease is a deficiency of essential nutrients in the vascular wall, the daily optimum intake of these essential nutrients is the primary measure to prevent atherosclerosis and help repair artery wall damage.

Scientific research and clinical studies have already documented the particular value of vitamin C, vitamin E, beta-carotene, lysine, proline and other ingredients in Dr. Rath’s Cellular Health recommendations for preventing cardiovascular disease and improving the health of patients with existing cardiovascular disease.

Vitamins and Other Nutrients Can Halt and Reverse Coronary Heart Disease

Millions of people die every year from heart attacks because no effective treatment to halt or reverse coronary heart disease has been available. Therefore, we decided to test the efficacy of Dr. Rath’s Cellular Health recommendations for the number one health problem of our time: coronary atherosclerosis, the cause of heart attacks. If these Cellular Health recommendations were able to stop further progression of coronary atherosclerosis, the fight against heart attacks could be won and the goal of eradicating heart disease would become a reality.

To measure the success of this program, we did not primarily look at risk factors circulating in the bloodstream. We focused directly on the key problem, the atherosclerotic deposits inside the walls of the coronary arteries. A fascinating new diagnostic technique had just become available that allowed us to measure the size of the coronary deposits non-invasively: Ultrafast Computed Tomography (Ultrafast CT).

Ultrafast CT measures the area and density of calcium deposits without the use of needles or radioactive dye. The computer automatically calculates their size by determining the Coronary Artery Scan (CAS) score. The higher the CAS score, the more calcium has accumulated, which indicates more advanced coronary heart disease.

Compared to angiography and treadmill tests, Ultrafast CT is the most precise diagnostic technique available today to detect coronary heart disease already in its early stages. This diagnostic test allows the detection of deposits in the coronary arteries long before a patient notices angina pectoris or other symptoms. Moreover, since it directly measures the deposits in the artery walls, Ultrafast CT is a much better indicator of a person’s cardiovascular risk than measurements of cholesterol or other risk factors in the bloodstream.


Before following Dr. Rath’s Cellular Health recommendations, the patient had developed atherosclerotic deposits in the walls of his left coronary artery (white circled area in the left picture). The scans below are magnifications of the heart scan taken with Ultrafast CT.

We studied 55 patients with various degrees of coronary heart disease. Changes in the size of the coronary artery calcifications in each patient were measured over an average period of one year without vitamin supplementation, followed by one year with Dr. Rath’s Cellular Health recommendations. In this way, the heart scans of the same person could be compared before and after the vitamin program. This study design had the advantage of patients serving as their own controls.

The results of this study were published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition. The full text of this landmark study is documented at the end of this book. The most important findings can be summarized as follows: This study measured, for the first time, how aggressive coronary heart disease progresses until eventually a heart attack occurs. Without the use of Cellular Health recommendations, the coronary calcifications increased at an exponential rate (very fast) with an average growth of 44% every year. Thus, without vitamin protection, coronary deposits increased approximately half their size every year.

When patients followed the Cellular Health recommendations, this trend was reversed and the average growth rate of coronary calcifications actually slowed down. Most significantly, in patients with early stages of the disease, this essential nutrient program stopped further progression of coronary heart disease within one year. This study also gives us valuable information about the time it takes for the Cellular Health recommendations to show a repair effect on the artery wall.

While for the first six months the deposits in these patients continued to grow, albeit at a decreased pace, the growth essentially stopped during the second six months with the vitamin program. Of course, any therapy that stops coronary heart disease in its early stages prevents heart attacks later on.

It is not surprising that there is a delay of several months until the healing effect of these Cellular Health recommendations on the artery wall becomes noticeable. Atherosclerotic deposits develop over many years or decades, and it takes several months to control this aggressive disease and start the healing process. More advanced stages of coronary heart disease may take still longer before the vascular healing process is measurable. To determine this, we are continuing our study.

Can already existing coronary deposits be reversed in a natural way? The answer is yes. In individual patients, we documented the natural reversal and complete disappearance of early coronary artery deposits approximately within one year. The ongoing study will tell us how long the natural reversal takes in patients with advanced coronary artery disease.

The complete natural disappearance of atherosclerotic deposits with Dr. Rath’s Cellular Health recommendations confirms that this vitamin program contains the essential ingredients needed to start the natural healing process of the artery wall.

In patients with early coronary heart disease, this healing of the artery wall can lead to the complete, natural disapearance of atherosclerotic deposits.

In patients with advanced coronary artery disease, these Cellular Health recommendations can stabilize the artery walls, halt the further growth of coronary deposits, reverse them, at least in part, and contribute to the prevention of heart attacks.

Scientific Publications on Nutrients and Cardiovascular Disease
Learn more about Cellular Health
Abstract from Dr Rath Health Foundation

Coronary Heart Disease Is an Early Form of Scurvy

Dr. Rath’s Scientific Discovery in Heart Disease

Dr. Rath’s research reveals that coronary heart disease occurs exactly for the same reason that clinical (early) scurvy does – a deficiency of vitamin C in the cells composing the artery wall. Humans, unlike animals, develop heart disease because their bodies cannot produce vitamin C. The average diet provides enough vitamin C to prevent scurvy, but not enough to guarantee stable artery walls. As a consequence of vitamin C deficiency, millions of tiny cracks and lesions develop in the artery walls. Subsequently, cholesterol, lipoproteins and other blood risk factors enter the damaged artery walls to repair these lesions.

In the case of chronic vitamin deficiency, this repair process becomes continuous. Over the course of many years, atherosclerotic deposits develop. Deposits in the arteries of the heart eventually lead to heart attack; deposits in the arteries of the brain lead to stroke.

Dr. Rath identified and our research has proven that atherosclerosis is nature’s plaster cast for weak and cracked arterial walls that are chronically deficient in vitamin C and other essential nutrients. One of these nutrients is the amino acid lysine. Lysine is called an essential amino acid because, similar to vitamin C, it cannot be produced in the human body. Lysine, together with another amino acid, proline, is the main component of collagen. These two amino acids comprise about 25% of all amino acids in the collagen molecule. A deficiency of lysine and proline can also trigger blood vessel wall weakness and instability.

Research and clinical studies conducted by Dr. Rath confirm that the most important function of vitamin C in preventing heart attacks and strokes is its ability to increase the production of collagen, elastin, and other reinforcement molecules in the body. This groundbreaking discovery in heart disease should be taught in every medical textbook and school and explains why other cardiovascular conditions, including heart failure, irregular heartbeat, high blood pressure and circulatory problems in diabetes, occur in the case of long-term vitamin deficiencies.

http://www.drrathresearch.org/sci_discoveries/heart_disease.html

The Cholesterol Myths

UFFE RAVNSKOV
author of The Cholesterol Myths

UFFE RAVNSKOV is radical. He is so radical that, on a television show in Finland, his critics set his book on fire!

His website (or a website about him) says: If you think this is written by another internet crackpot, take a look at Dr Ravnskov's credentials and the reviews of his book.

The book in question is titled The Cholesterol Myths. Its main argument is that cholesterol is not harmful to health but, in fact, healthy. Its author is certainy no internet crackpot. His credentials are, indeed, impressive.
Uffe Ravnskov graduated with a medical degree in 1961 and, in 1973, obtained a PhD in Chemistry. Between 1975 and 1979, he was Assistant Professor at the Department of Nephrology, University Hospital, in Lund, Sweden. Ravnskov went into private practice in 1980 and, in 2000, retired to become a full-time independent researcher.

More significantly, Uffe Ravnskov has published over 80 scientific papers and letters in peer-reviewed journals criticizing what is commonly called the Lipid Hypothesis of heart disease – the belief that dietary saturated fats and cholesterol clog arteries and cause atherosclerosis and heart disease.
Uffe Ravnskov began studying cholesterol in 1989, the year Sweden launched an anti-cholesterol campaign.

“Very soon I realised that the scientific evidence behind the campaign was non-existing,” he writes.

Among the many research findings published in scientific journals, Uffe Ravnskov discovered that:

lowering cholesterol did not result in lower death rates from heart disease, but in HIGHER death rates from all causes.

drug trials with an allegedly positive outcome was cited almost only by the trial directors, although the numbers of trials with an allegedly positive and a negative outcome were identical.

the successful dissemination of the diet-heart idea is due to authors systematically ignoring or misquoting discordant studies.
Uffe Ravnskov also discovered that LDL, commonly called “bad cholesterol”, actually protects against infections. This led him to put forward the hypothesis that high cholesterol, rather than promoting atherosclerosis, in fact may protect against it.

Uffe Ravnskov first summarised his research findings in a book, first published in Sweden in 1991, whose title translates to The Cholesterol Myths.

In 1992, the book was published in Finland. That was when his critics burned the book during a television show about it.

In 2000, an updated and expanded English edition of The Cholesterol Myths was published in the United States.

In 2002, a German edition of The Cholesterol Myths was published.

In his book, Uffe Ravnskov critically analyzes and demolishes the nine main myths of the Lipid Hypothesis:

High-fat foods cause heart disease
High cholesterol causes heart disease
High fat foods raise blood cholesterol
Cholesterol blocks arteries
Animal studies prove the diet-heart idea that diet affects heart disease
Lowering your cholesterol will lengthen your life
Polyunsaturated oils are good for you
The cholesterol campaign (to have people reduce their cholesterol levels) is based on good science
All scientists support the diet-heart idea.
All the above statements, Uffe Ravnskov maintains, are NOT TRUE. And he backs his assertions with solid scientific research.

Ancel Keys' Seven Countries Study

Uffe Ravnskov starts off with a critical analysis of the original 1950s research that gave rise to the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease – Dr Ancel Keys Six Countries Study, which later became the more famous Seven Countries Study published in 1980.

The Seven Countries Study – which gathered data on heart disease of some 13,000 men in Greece, Italy, Croatia, Serbia, Japan, Finland and the Netherlands over several decades – is widely considered to be one of the greatest epidemological studies ever undertaken.

Ancel Keys' Seven Countries Study showed that countries with the highest animal fat intake have the highest rates of heart disease. And this is frequently cited as “proof” that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease.

Uffe Ravnskov informs us, however, that Ancel Keys had deliberately hand-picked the countries he included in his studies. In other words, Ancel Keys chose to study only those countries that supported his hypothesis.

Yet there are many other countries where high consumption of animal fat DID NOT cause heart disease. But, Ufee Ravnskov points out, Ancel Keys ignored those countries.

Dangers of statins and other cholesterol lowering drugs

Uffe Ravnskov is also highly critical of statins, the cholesterol-loweing drugs that are widely hailed as miracle “wonder drugs”.

He presents scientific evidence that show:

drug trials involving statins produced only neglible reductions in the rates of heart disease
lowering cholesterol did not reduce the death rate from heart disease but INCREASED the overall death rate from all causes
whatever positive benefits associated with the use of statins are due to factors other than cholesterol-lowering.
statins are probable carcinogens and women on statins have reported higher rates of breast cancer.
Uffe Ravnskov warns that exposure to carcinogens may result in cancer only after 20 or more years. And since there has not been controlled studies on statins over such long periods, we do not know whether the use of statins will lead to increased rates of cancer in the coming decades.

"“Millions of people are being treated with medications the ultimate effects of which are not yet known.”
– Uffe Ravnskov

Of course, it is not just Uffe Ravnskov saying all this and more. What he tells us about saturated fats and high cholesterol foods comes mainly from studying the reports of other scientists. He further tells us that…

The reason why laymen, doctors and most scientists have been misled is because opposing and disagreeing results are systematically ignored or misquoted in the scientific press.

Cholesterol sceptics

Myth Number 9 in Uffe Ravnskov's book is that “All scientists support the diet-heart idea.”
This certainly is not true and Uffe Ravnskov has gathered a large – and growing – group of doctors, scientists, academics and science writers in The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics (THINCS).

Members of the group may disagree about what causes heart disease. But they share one thing in common.

The website of THINCS state:
"For decades, enormous human and financial resources have been wasted on the cholesterol campaign, more promising research areas have been neglected, producers and manufacturers of animal food all over the world have suffered economically, and millions of healthy people have been frightened and badgered into eating a tedious and flavorless diet or into taking potentially dangerous drugs for the rest of their lives.
As the scientific evidence in support of the cholesterol campaign is non-existent, we consider it important to stop it as soon as possible."


http://www.stop-trans-fat.com/uffe-ravnskov.html

Saturated Fat - The misunderstood nutrient

by by Vreni Gurd | Fri, 04/06/2007 - 11:15pm

We are told that saturated fat and trans fat are terrible for us. The distinction must be made. Saturated fats are healthy, trans fats are not.
Saturated fats have been vilified as being the cause of heart disease, some cancers, and the obesity epidemic. Although heart disease and cancer were rare before 1920, the incidences of these diseases have increased dramatically since then. By as early as 1950, heart disease was the leading killer of Americans. However, contrary to what one would expect if the saturated fat/heart disease hypothesis were true, the consumption of animal fat between 1910 and 1970 DECREASED by 21% and the consumption of butter DECREASED from eighteen pounds per person per year to only four, according to the research of Sally Fallon and Mary Enig. Furthermore, over that same time span the consumption of refined vegetable oils much of it consumed as partially hydrogenated or trans fat, INCREASED by 400%, and the consumption of sugar and processed foods INCREASED by 60%. Current Canadian 2006 data (thank you Chris Williams!) suggest that those trends are continuing, with a continued decrease in the consumption of high saturated- fat foods like full-fat milks, eggs and red meat between 1970 and 2006. Since 1981, butter consumption (a saturated fat) has decreased by a third, while the consumption of salad oil (refined and therefore rancid polyunsaturated vegetable oils) has more than tripled. Shortening consumption (a trans fat) has remained relatively constant. So considering the continued decline in saturated fat consumption, blaming heart disease on saturated fat makes no sense (see this study published in the Lancet). To fully understand how it is possible that we find ourselves in this position where we are being told to eat refined polyunsaturated vegetable oils which are disease-causing and avoid saturated fats which are health promoting, read The Oiling of America by Mary Enig, PhD, fats and oils researcher, and Sally Fallon. The insight into the politics of food is scary.

All fats and oils are made up of a mixture of saturated, mono and polyunsaturated fatty acids. Calling animal fats "saturated fats" is very misleading, as many animal fats are actually more than 50% unsaturated, and chicken fat is actually 70% unsaturated. If a fat were completely saturated it would be very solid with the consistency of hard wax. For example, beef fat or tallow is made up of about 50% saturated fatty acids (25% palmitic acid, 22% stearic acid and others), 40% monounsaturated fatty acids (oleic acid, the main fatty acid in olive oil), and the balance polyunsaturated fatty acids (linoleic and linolenic, the ratio depending on the diet of the cattle).

Saturated fatty acids are critical to maintaining the structure and rigidity of our cells by making cell membranes out of phospholipids and cholesterol, and they act as enzyme and hormone regulators thereby playing an integral role in cell messaging. When the body is fooled and incorporates trans fats into the cell membrane instead of saturated fats, cell messaging no longer works, which is one of the reasons trans fats are so dangerous.

Saturated fats are necessary for calcium to be incorporated into our bones, so no-fat or skim milk won't work as a calcium source, unless you eat some saturated fat in your meal. Saturated fats are needed to boost immune function, and to build a healthy nervous system and digestive tract. Saturated fats are the base material out of which the body makes cholesterol, which is the precursor to such critical hormones as vitamin D, cortisol, testosterone, estrogen and progesterone, as well as bile acids which are necessary for the digestion of fats. Fats also are needed as carriers for the fat soluble vitamins (the antioxidant vitamins), like vitamin A, E, D, K, and a low fat diet can lead to deficiencies in these nutrients. Saturated fats are also needed to be able to utilize omega 3 fatty acids easily. Breast milk is high in saturated fat for a reason - it is vital for the healthy development of the baby! Does it make sense that saturated fats which are vital for a baby are suddenly poison for an adult?

Fat is also needed to feel satisfied after a meal. Mary Enig says in her book Know Your Fats: The Complete Primer For Understanding the Nutrition of Fats, Oils, and Cholesterol that "as a result of the presence of fat in the small intestine, special hormones are produced that prevent hunger contractions. ... Too much fat in the diet and the loss of weight is thwarted; too little and the hunger pangs play havoc with good intentions and usually lead to overeating carbohydrates."

Saturated fatty acids can be broken down into three groups - short chain, medium chain and long chain. The short and medium chain saturated fatty acids don't turn into body fat unless consumed in very large quantities, but rather are utilized immediately by the body for energy. Therefore fats that contain more short to medium chain fatty acids have less calories than the same amount of longer chain fatty acids. According to Mary Enig, in her book Know Your Fats: the Complete Primer for Understanding the Nutrition of Fats, Oils and Cholesterol, a pound of coconut oil has 100 kilocalories less than a pound of soybean oil. And yes, butter has less calories than margarine, although not much less.

If you are eating high quality fats, such as pasture fed, non-medicated, organic eggs, dairy, poultry, and meat, you are doing your body good. If you are eating conventionally raised poultry and meat, it is a good idea to cut off the fat, as the medications, hormones and pesticides consumed by the animal will be concentrated in the fat, which will in turn be concentrated in your fat. Cook only with pasture-fed organic butter, ghee, tallow or chicken fat, or organic coconut oil, or unrefined or cold pressed extra virgin olive oil (low to medium temperatures only), as these fats are stable and won't oxidize and go rancid when heated. To find out what ratio of fat, protein and carbohydrates are appropriate for you according to your own personal biochemistry, get yourself metabolically typed at Healthexcel, and receive a food list of appropriate foods for you. Some people require more quality fats to be healthy than others.

High Cholesterol does NOT cause heart disease

by Vreni Gurd | Fri, 04/13/2007 - 11:48pm

The lipid hypothesis needs to be re-evaluated - it has very serious flaws.
First of all, it is important to understand that that "risk factor" does not mean the same thing as "cause". A risk factor is a characteristic that is associated with a diagnosis. For example, for women, being tall is associated with breast cancer. Does that mean that being tall causes breast cancer? Of course not.

It is also important to understand cholesterol is an essential component of our cell membranes, it acts as an anti-oxidant, it is a precursor for the synthesis of vitamin D as well as bile for digesting fats, and is the only source out of which our steroid hormones, such as cortisol, as well as estrogen, progesterone and testosterone which are key to reproduction, can be made. Therefore it is safe to say that without cholesterol we would not survive. Cholesterol is also the precursor to calcitrol, the steroid hormone that regulates calcium levels in our bodies by helping us absorb calcium from our food, thus playing a key role in the mineralization of our bones and teeth. Cholesterol is also manufactured in the glial cells of the brain to aid with synapses.

Cholesterol is used by our bodies to repair lesions in the arteries. Dr. Mary Enig, fat researcher, suggests that blaming cholesterol for heart disease is something like blaming firefighters for starting fires. Is it really a good idea to reduce our arteries' firefighters? The key to stopping heart disease is to stop the lesions (fires) in the arteries from occurring in the first place, by minimizing glycation by eating less sugar and high fructose corn syrup, and minimizing free radical damage by not consuming refined and therefore rancid vegetable oils AND by reducing systemic stress.

Our bodies consider cholesterol to be so essential to our survival, that every cell in our body can manufacture it as needed. If we eat little or no cholesterol, our bodies manufacture more, and if we eat a lot, our bodies don't manufacture as much. This way our cholesterol levels maintain homeostasis irrespective of our diet, and this is the reason it is so difficult to reduce or raise cholesterol levels much with diet alone.

Dr. Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD, who wrote the book The Cholesterol Myths, goes through study after study destroying the idea that high cholesterol levels are the cause of heart disease. In the Framingham heart study done near Boston that spanned 30 years , the researchers concluded that high cholesterol was a risk factor for heart disease, but when one really dissects the data, one must question how they came to that conclusion. For example, when the participants of the study are plotted on a graph it clearly shows that those with cholesterol levels between 182 and 222 did not survive as long as those with higher cholesterol levels of between 222 and 261. The study shows that about half the people with heart disease had low cholesterol, and half the people without heart disease had high cholesterol.

Most studies have found that for women, high cholesterol is not a risk factor for heart disease at all - in fact, the death rate for women is five times higher in those with very low cholesterol. In a Canadian study that followed 5000 healthy middle-aged men for 12 years, they found that high cholesterol was not associated with heart disease at all. And in another study done at the University Hospital in Toronto that looked at cholesterol levels in 120 men that previously had heart attacks, they found that just as many men that had second heart attacks had low cholesterol levels as those that had high. The Maoris of New Zealand die of heart attacks frequently, irrespective of their cholesterol levels. In Russia, it is low cholesterol levels that are associated with increased heart disease. The Japanese are often cited as an example of a population that eat very little cholesterol and have a very low risk of heart disease. But the Japanese that moved to the US and continued to eat the traditional Japanese diet had heart disease twice as often as those that maintained the Japanese traditions but ate the fatty American diet. This suggests that it is something else, like stress perhaps, that is causing the heart disease.

Dr. Malcolm Kendrick noticed that in the MONICA study that has been going on for about 40 years, there is no association between high cholesterol levels and heart disease. See the graph for yourself at the bottom of the article. (Dr. Kendrick wrote another interesting piece about the "disappointing results" of low fat diets in the Women's Health Initiatives heart intervention study, and the lack of association between death rates from CVD and saturated fat consumption based on the MONICA study).

These are but a small sample of the studies that contradict the idea that cholesterol is the villain in heart disease. So why has this idea held on so long? Perhaps pharmaceutical companies and the processed-food industry have a lot to gain by keeping this belief alive. Statin drugs (Lipitor, Mevacor, Zocor etc.) are mega money makers, and they definitely do lower cholesterol, but if high cholesterol does not cause heart disease, why are they necessary?

Furthermore, statin drugs may not lower overall mortality rates, as lower cholesterol levels seem to be associated with higher rates of cancer. Statin drugs work by blocking the synthesis of mevalonate, which is a vital step in the body's
synthesis of cholesterol. By blocking this step, every following step is also blocked, and this is a problem, because the synthesis of Coenzyme Q10 (ubiquinone) and squalene, both precursors to cholesterol, is also blocked. Coenzyme Q10 is very important for heart function, it acts as an antioxidant in conjunction with Vitamin E, and it is important in energy metabolism in the mitochondria of muscles, which is why muscle pain is a common side effect of statin drugs. Coenzyme Q10 is important for healthy brain function as well, and when Coenzyme Q10 levels are low, through statin use or otherwise, memory is affected. Squalene is also an antioxidant and is a potent cancer fighter. If you are on statin drugs, supplementing with Coenzyme Q10 and squalene may be very helpful.

I realize that suggesting that cholesterol levels are not associated with heart disease goes against current dogma. I am not making this suggestion in order to create controversy. After looking at the evidence, I am convinced that we are going down the wrong path. I am not alone in thinking this way - there are more and more scientists and physicians that believe that cholesterol and saturated fat stand wrongly accused. For me, the epidemiological evidence is most convincing. If we ate saturated fat and cholesterol in the form of animal fats, eggs, and full-fat dairy liberally for millennia and were heart-disease free up until the early 1900s, and just as we reduced our consumption of these foods and replaced them with sugar, vegetable oils and processed food, heart disease rates began to climb - to me it seems rather obvious that we are putting the blame on the wrong thing. Feel free not to believe this idea, but please don't simply dismiss it out of hand, either. If you have high cholesterol and you are taking, or thinking about taking cholesterol-lowering drugs, please read The Cholesterol Myths: Exposing the Fallacy that Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease so that you can make an informed decision regarding this important issue. Two other very well researched books worth reading, written by scientists but geared to the lay person are Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, by Dr. Weston A. Price, on primitive cultures, their health and their eating habits versus more modern cultures, their health and their eating habits (probably the most important book on nutrition ever written), and Mary Enig's book on lipid chemistry, Know Your Fats: The Complete Primer For Understanding the Nutrition of Fats, Oils and Cholesterol. These books are each very different from the other, but they will open your eyes to the other side of the argument, and only then will you be able to come to an informed conclusion on this issue.

Vitamin E Deficiency

The Untold Epidemic Vitamin E Deficiency by Ladd McNamara, M.D.

It is clear that there is an epidemic vitamin D deficiency (see posting about vitamin D below). Few people are aware that there is also a serious epidemic deficiency of vitamin E. An editorial that accompanied the largest study on vitamin E in medical history (Am J Clin Nutr 2006 Nov;84(5):1200-7) stated 93% of American men and 96% of American women do not obtain the [pathetically low] recommended dietary allowance of 15 IU of vitamin E per day. It is clear that we should be taking at least 30 to 50 times that level (400 to 1000 IU/day) to reduce the risk of chronic diseases. Taking this much vitamin E in the correct form and balance with other vitamins, is both safe and effective; more than the pharmaceutical companies would have you believe. However, it is in the economic interest of pharmaceutical companies to dissuade the public from taking supplements so that they can be on medications which often do little to nothing to reverse disease. Other health practitioners make their living by “educating” others that they can get everything they need from their food alone. The medical research indicates otherwise. The amount of vitamin E, as well as other important vitamins, required to reduce the risk of chronic diseases can only be obtained through supplementation.

Tragically many doctors and the lay person have the misconception that vitamins, such as vitamin E supplementation may be harmful. There seems to be continued misinformation put out in news media and health magazines, regarding the “dangers” of supplementation. Either they are not aware of the medical research, or they are purposefully misleading the public for their own gain. This non-stop attempt to persuade people not to supplement, but to get all their antioxidants from their food alone is at minimum unethical, at worst dangerous. Vitamin E seems to be in these detractors line of fire more than any other nutrient, probably because it is the most common supplement used today. With the thousands of medical studies showing the benefits of supplemental vitamin E, how is it that there is still controversy and confusion? The doses of vitamin E that research has shown to be of benefit can ONLY be obtained through proper supplementation.

Almost weekly a new study about the benefits of vitamin E is published. Almost all show health benefits or potential health benefits. Because vitamin E is one of the most popular supplements, it is only when a medical study or report showing a possible negative effect it is reported by the media, either to make headlines, and/or to scare people away from taking this incredible vitamin. The negative findings regarding vitamin E of a few medical reports have either shown to be excessively biased, restricting other important vitamins that work synergistically with vitamin E, poorly designed, or bearing no cause and effect of vitamin E to a detrimental health impact. The studies of vitamin E that have shown a true potential negative impact are few, but of more importance it has given us clarity regarding the synergistic impact of various vitamins as well as the importance of the formulation of vitamin E.

Vitamins must work together for optimal benefit:

Studies published many years ago showed that for vitamin E to continue to function as an antioxidant within the body, adequate levels of vitamin C must be present to regenerate (donate more electrons) to vitamin E so that it can continue to prevent oxidation of lipids. Any study about vitamin E that restricts the participants from also taking vitamin C is setting up the study to show nothing more than how vitamin E is quickly “used up,” and not regenerated to continuously provide an antioxidant benefit. It tells us nothing about the real benefits that can be obtained from proper supplementation.

The correct formulation of vitamin E is critical:

Vitamin E is a family of nutrients; alpha, delta, and gamma-tocopherols and tocotrienols. There is a difference between the synthetic (petroleum-derived) vitamin E, dl apha-tocopherol , and the natural (food-based ) vitamin E, d alpha-tocopherol. Gamma-tocopherol is a critical form of vitamin E needed to reduce the oxidation of lipids (cholesterol) in conjunction with alpha-tocopherol. (J Am Copll Cardiol. 1999 Oct:34(4):1208-15, Pro Natl Acad Sci USA, 1993 Mar 1:90(5):1771-5) In addition, studies have shown that people who supplement solely with vitamin E in the alpha-tocopherol form are at risk to lower the blood levels of a critical form of vitamin E, gamma-tocopherol. (J Nutr. 2003 Oct:133(10):3137-40; J Nutr.1985 Jun:115(6):807-13 ) The average American’s blood-stream is five times more rich in alpha-tocopherol than gamma-tocopherol, and that difference jumps 20-fold among people who take vitamin E as alpha-tocopherol without gamma tocopherol.

In 2007, a negative study about vitamin E (that lingers as the “justification” for the case against vitamin E) highlights the way the public can be mislead to make some poor decisions about supplementation. (JAMA Feb 27, 2007). This was a flawed study with flawed data that concluded that vitamins A and E “significantly increased the risk of mortality.” This meta-analysis (report) did very little to help us understand the benefits of vitamin E, but showed us just how data, and the public’s opinion, can be manipulated. The authors of this meta-analysis (which is not a study per se, but a review of previous published studies) considered 815 prior studies regarding antioxidants, but included the results of only 68 of these studies for analysis. Some of the studies excluded from their report showed significant benefits and reduction of mortality from taking supplements. Selection bias was glaringly evident. The authors essentially “cherry-picked” the studies they wanted, and ignored others, so that they could come to their desired conclusion: vitamin E can kill you!

The authors were unable to establish any cause and effect between supplementation with vitamin E and an increased risk of death, making this a poorly designed study. The elderly people who died could have just as easily died from accidents, medications, surgery, etc. …who knows? One noted researcher described this report a kin to “doing a cholesterol-lowering study without ever measuring cholesterol levels.” Furthermore, the average duration of the reviewed studies was 2.7 years, so the ridiculous conclusion that the authors wanted the public to believe was that vitamin E could kill you (somehow) in less than 3 years!

The others ignored many studies showing significant benefits derived from supplemental vitamin E. One such study that was ignored by these researchers was the November 10, 2006 study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition which is the largest study on vitamin E in medical history measuring alpha-tocopherol in male smokers. (Am J Clin Nutr 2006 Nov;84(5):1200-7) This study followed 29,000 patients for over 19 years, and included over 13,000 deaths, …making possible a significant and fair analysis of vitamin E and the risk of death.

This study showed a significant reduction in overall mortality in those patients with the highest blood levels of alpha-tocopherol. Specifically, over a 19-year period men with the highest blood levels of alpha-tocopherol showed the following reduction in causes of death:
Prostate Cancer 32% Reduction of Death
Ischemic Stroke 37% Reduction of Death
Hemorrhagic Stroke 35% Reduction of Death
Lung Cancer 21% Reduction of Death
Respiratory Illness 42% Reduction of Death
The authors of this significant and powerful study stated: “As a primary fat-soluble antioxidant that protects lipids from peroxidation, alpha-tocopherol is able to scavenge mutagenic free radicals and inhibit the oxidation of LDL-cholesterol, and the abilities have important implications for the prevention of carcinogenesis and atherosclerosis ….alpha-tocopherol also has several important functions that are independent of its antioxidant activity, including modulation of gene expression, enhancements of immune responses , an suppression of tumor angiogenesis.”
The researchers further elaborated that although the patients who enjoyed the greatest health benefits had higher blood levels of alpha-tocopherol, these same subjects also had the highest levels of gamma-tocopherol, meaning that these people were taking the natural formulation of vitamin E, not dl-alpha-tocopherol without gamma-tocopherol and the tocotrienols. This study, and other significant studies are ignored by the media, and obviously by doctors who are continually visited and educated by pharmaceutical companies.

Certainly, there are tens of thousands of studies reporting the benefits of various nutritional supplements. They are both safe and effective. If doctors and the public were simply made aware of the poorly designed analyses that denigrate vitamin E supplementation, and the significant studies about the benefits of taking vitamin E, in the form of alpha-tocopherol and gamma-tocopherol (along with delta-tocopherol and the mixed tocotrienols) along with vitamin C and vitamin K, which replenishes the antioxidant abilities of vitamin E, then I believe that not only would people need less medication and reduce the economic crisis in the health care industry, but more importantly people could enjoy the true health and happiness that can be obtained by eating right, exercise, and proper supplementation with a full spectrum of quality vitamins and minerals.

Vitamin E, in the natural form (as described above), appears to be safe up to at least 2000 IU per day. I personally take 800 IU per day of the full spectrum of vitamin E. When I was in medical practice, I recommended at least that much (if not up to 1200 IU of vitamin E) to patients with diabetes. The natural form of vitamin E, along with co-enzyme Q10, the red grape extract (grape seed extract and resveratrol) and a full spectrum of other antioxidants (quercetin, alpha lipoic acid, turmeric extract, olive extract, green tea extract, etc.), vitamins (B, C, D, and K), and minerals in the chelated form, all contribute to safely and significantly reduce the risk of heart disease, stroke, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, lung diseases, and almost every other chronic degenerative disease, as well as slow the aging process, all without the side-effects of drugs.

Posted by Ladd McNamara at 12:10 PM

Cataracts: Reduced Risk with Vitamin E, Lutein, Zeaxanthin and Grape Seed Extract

In recent study published in the Archives of Ophthalmology (Arch. Ophthalmol. 2008;126:102-9) gathered from the Women's Health Study, vitamin E and the carotenoid lutein were both found to be associated with a reduced risk of cataracts.

The Women's Health Study (WHS) was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving nearly 40,000 women health professionals aged 45 years and older at inception of the study in 1993.

In this recent study gathered from the WHS, the researchers assessed the antioxidant intake (from food and supplements) of 35,551 women and followed them for an average of ten years. They divided the women's intake into 5 groups, ...groups with the lowest intake, to the next highest intake, to the next highest intake, etc. When women with the highest intake of lutein/zeaxanthin (mean intake of 6.7 mg/day) were compared to the group with the lowest intake (mean of 1.2 mg/day) they found an 18% decrease in the risk of cataracts.

Similarly, when women in the highest intake group of vitamin E (mean 262 mg/day, or 390 IU/day; 1 mg alpha-tocopherol = 1.49 IU) were compared to women in the lowest intake group of vitamin E (mean 4.4 mg/day, or 6.5 IU/day), there found a 14% decrease in cataracts.

This study adds to existing observational studies that xanthophyll carotenoids lutein (and its stereo-isomer, zeaxanthin) may delay cataract formation. (BTW, in animal studies, grape seed extract has been found to reduce the formation of cataracts as well.) Lutein and zeaxanthin concentrate in the tissues of the eye, ...including the lens and retina.

Personally, I take a broad spectrum multi-antioxidant and minerals in chelated form, fish oil, grape seed extract, and additional lutein/zeaxanthin and bilberry extract supplement (for a total lutein intake of 13 mg per day, ...well above the mean intake of the top fifth group of this study). In addition, I take an additional vitamin E supplement, that has the full family of vitamin E (d-alpha tocopherol, d-gamma tocopherol, delta tocopherol, and the tocotrienols), for a combined total of 600 IU/day.

For optimal eye health of the lens and retina (macular degeneration is the number one cause of blindness after the age of 40), as well as maintaining health in a time of increasing risk of chronic degenerative disease, I recommend an optimal intake of various antioxidants, vitamins, minerals, and essential fatty acids.

Posted by Ladd McNamara at 9:05 AM