Chelation/Circulation

Treatment for coronary artery disease CAD can range from simple to severe. While simple is always better and prevention is the best, most patients who look for information regarding chelation therapy have been through the severe forms of CAD treatment.

These treatments may have been stents, angioplasty or bypass surgery. In fact, these procedures have often been repeated multiple times. Imagine having your 2nd or 3rd bypass! Most of my chelation patients say to me, “Doc, I’ll never go through that again”. Do you want to go through another one of these procedures?

While coronary bypass surgery can relieve the symptoms, the recovery and risks can be major problems.
It’s important that you know coronary bypass surgery doesn’t cure the underlying disease process. This is even stated on the Mayo Clinic website regarding RESULTS http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/coronary­ bypass-surgery/HB00022

Overtime unless serious lifestyle changes are made and fate is at your side ….other arteries or even the new bypass will be clogged and another bypass or angioplasty is needed.

Most patients don’t have time to read and research other options before being whisked away for emergency bypass surgery. Their doctor and their family members are telling them they have no choice or they are not even in the physical and emotional state to make a choice.

The purpose of this informational site on chelation is to empower you with information, “knowledge is power” regarding this therapy whether you:

• Already had a heart attack
• Already had a stent
• Already had an angioplasty
• Already had a bypass or 2 or 3
• Already have been told you are at great risk and bypass is in your future

The intention of this site is to have you look at the data and then consider your options.
It’s your life, it’s your health, it’s your pain. It’s only YOU who can decide.

Take time to look at the published data because there are many unanswered questions and events regarding heart attack and stroke.

Historically, the main focus has been the danger of cholesterol causing blockage and hardening of the arteries. We call this the bio-chemical mechanism. If it is trne, this leaves many questions unanswered. These questions include the following:

• Why are the arteries leading to the heart and brain so susceptible to atherosclerosis?
• Why do we not observe atherosclerotic plaques developing in the intramyocardial coronary aiteries (i.e. those that are “buried” in the heart). (Scher 2000), the aiteries of the arms or breasts, or in the veins for that matter?
• If atherosclerosis is caused by a biochemical process as purp01ted by current theories, why does it not affect the vascular system uniformly rather than seeming to exhibit a site-specific and region-specific pattern of development (Kensey and Cho 1992, Kensey and Cho, 1994)?
• Why do people with “normal” blood pressure and “normal” cholesterol still have heart attacks?
• Why do men develop cardiovascular diseases at a younger age than do women, especially premenopausal women (Kameneva etal.1998, Kameneva et al. 1999)?
• Why is there a pattern of increased heart attacks in the morning hours (Cannon et al. 1997, Cohen et al. 1997)?

In the end, there are simply too many questions that cannot be resolved by applying only the cholesterol theory.

The fundamental shortcoming of current biochemical theories is that they do not identify the initiating event that precedes endothelial injury (both denuding and nondenuding). An indispensable sequence in the basic process of atherosclerosis is missing. In this sense, cardiovascular research has failed to solve the most basic problem, since the incidence, course, and outcome of atherosclerosis and its clinical manifestations, including myocardial infarction and cerebrovascular ischemia, have remained largely unchanged.

You may think you’re taking good care of your heart: exercising, eating right and having your cholesterol checked. And your numbers may be good. Even your doctor may say you have nothing to worry about. But should you believe him?
The landmark Framingham Heart Study, which has been tracking thousands of people since 1948, found that 80% of those who develop coronary disease have the same basic cholesterol numbers as those who don’t.
At least 50% of arteriosclerosis (narrowing of the arteries) can’t be explained by the standard risk factors (smoking, diet, lifestyle, high cholesterol). There are other agents at work that routine lab tests miss.(3)
For 25% of men with a family history of cardiovascular problems, the first sign of heart disease is sudden death.(3)

You should be. Despite all the advances in heart disease treatment within the last decade (new drugs, surgeries, preventions), it remains the country’s number-one killer. Every 20 seconds, someone, somewhere in America, has a heart attack and every 34 seconds, someone dies of heart disease. A staggering 60 million Americans (one in every five persons) has some form of it, and each year 725,000 men and women die of it. (6)

Statistics like these contradict the impression most people develop at the doctor’s office, where basic cholesterol numbers, treadmill stress tests, and lifestyle factors parade as ironclad predictors of risk and benchmarks for treatment.

• “There’s no connection what so ever between total cholesterol in food and cholesterol in blood. And we’ve known that all along cholesterol in the diet doesn’t matter at all unless you happen to be a chicken or a rabbit”
  – Ancel Keys, 1997
  – Nutrition, 1997; 97:26-31
  – J Cardiovasc Risk, 1996; 3:69-75
• The Tecumseh Study Conclusion:
  “Serum cholesterol and triglyceride values were not positively correlated with selection of native dietary fat constituents.”
  – A.B. Nichols, it al;
  – Am. J. Clin. Nut. 29:1212; 1384-1392; 1976
• The Framingham Study Conclusions:
  The more one ate of………saturated fat, cholesterol, calories, the lower were those people’s serum cholesterol. …..
• The people who ate the most cholesterol, saturated fat, calories……weighed the least and were the most physically active.
  – Dr. William Castelli, M.D.
  – Director, Framingham Study
  – Am J Cardiolo 2001; 88: 16F-20F

• The excellent survival rates observed both in Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) patients assigned to receive medical and those assigned to receive surgical therapy and the similarity of survival rates in the two groups of patients in this randomized trial lead to the conclusion that patients similar to those emolled in this trial can safely DEFER by-pass surgery until symptoms worsen to the point that surgical palliation is required.
  – Circulation 68, No 5, 939-950, 1983
  What is the message?
  Survival rates are similar between groups who received conservative medical treatment vs. groups who received by-pass surgery.
• The first decade of Aortocoronary Bypass Grafting, 1967-1977:
  Despite a low operative mmiality and rate of graft closure, available data in the literature DO NOT indicate that initial symptomatic improvement necessarily persists, or that myocardial infarctions, arrhythmias, or congestive heaii failure will be prevented, or that life will be prolonged in the vast majority of operated patients.
  – Circulation 57, No 3,405, 1978
  What is the message?
  By-pass surgery initial symptom improvement does not necessarily persist. It does not prevent heart attack, irregular heart beat or congestive heart failure. It does not prolong life in the majority of patients.
• On the other hand, a nomandomized study using matched medical controls and surgically treated patients and a small prospective randomized trial showed that Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) results in NO IMPROVEMENT, either in survival or in the incidence of myocardial infarction. CABG DID NOT prolong life over a period of two to five years except in patients with severe obstruction of the left main coronary artery.
  – The New England Journal of Medicine Volume 297, No 12, 661-663, 1977
  What is the message?
  By-pass surgery does not improve survival rate. By-pass surgery does not prolong life over a period of two to five years except in patients with blockage of the left main coronary artery.
• Most important, however, the results of CASS suggest that it is NOT MANDATORY to operate on patients with multivessel disease who are asymptomatic or whose angina is not intractable, in an effmi to prolong survival or prevent myocardial infarction; it is ce1iainly possible to DEFER surgery in such patients.
  – The New England Journal of Medicine Volume 209, No 19, 1183-1184, 1983
  What is the message?
  It is not mandatory to operate on patients with multivessel disease who are without symptoms or whose Angina is not intractable.
• Does visual interpretation of the Coronary Arteriogram predict the physiologic impmiance of a coronary stenosis?
  These results, together with the high interobserver and intraobserver variability of standard visual analysis of angiograms, suggest that the physiologic effects of the majority of coronary obstructions CANNOT be determined accurately by conventional angiographic approaches.
  – The New England Joumal of Medicine Volume 310, No 12, 819-820, 1984
  What is the message?
  Cardiac cath findings of blockage is not very accurate in determining impairment of blood flow and fimctions.Long Term Prognosis after Myocardial Infarction in Patients with Previous Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery:
• At 5 years after discharge, cumulative mortality was similar in the postbypass and control groups (30 versus 25% respectively, p = NS). However, postbypass patients had more reinfarctions (40 versus 25%, p 0.007), more admissions for unstable angina (23 versus 18%, p = 0.04) and more revascularization procedures (34 versus 20%, p 0.04) than did control patients. The total for these events at 5 years was 70% in the postbypass surgery group and 49% in the control group (p = 0.001).
  – JACC, Vol 12, No 4, 873-880, 1998
  What is the message?
  At 5 years after discharge, bypass surgery patients had more reinfarctions, more admissions for unstable angina and more revascularization procedures than the control group.Immediate Vs. Delayed Catherization and Angioplasty Following Thrombolytic Therapy for Acute Myocardial Infarction:
• These findings indicate that immediate performance of coronary aiieriography and percutaneous Transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) compared with delaying these procedures for 18 to 48 hours provides NO advantage and may be HARMFUL.The last 40 years have seen increasingly aggressive treatment of the patient with acute myocardial ischemia. Each time immediate catheterization anytime of the day or night has been advocated, properly designed control studies have shown NO ADVANTAGE to this disastrously complicated, manpower-consuming and expensive strategy.
  – JAMA, Vol 260. No 19, 2895, 1988

In a textbook on EDTA Chelation Therapy, second edition, edited by Elmer M. Cranton, M.D. it states on the back cover……………..

• Chelation Therapy, based on the intraveneous infusion of EDTA, is a highly effective treatment for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Safety and effectiveness are well documented in clinical studies, all of which to date are suppmiive of this therapy, and there are no studies showing lack of effectiveness. A strong case is made for the use of this safe, efficacious, and inexpensive therapy before resorting to surgery and other risky and invasive treatments.
• “This therapy has been proven effective over and over again in clinical practice,” says Dr. Cranton. “More than one million patients have received more than twenty million infusions with no serious or lasting adverse effects.”

In the textbook, By Passing Bypass Surgery, by Elmer M. Cranton, M.D., he states, chelation therapy is a nonsurgical medical treatment that improves metabolic and circulatory functions in many different ways by rebalancing and removing metal ions in the body.

Chelation Therapy is a medical treatment performed in a doctor’s office. This is accomplished by administering an amino acid, Ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA).

From NIH News Release (8-07-02):
Over 800,000 patient visits were made for chelation therapy in the United States in 1997. Chelation therapy involves the use of EDTA (ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid), a synthetic amino acid that is administered intravenously (through the veins). EDTA, which effectively speeds removal of heavy metals and minerals such as lead, iron, copper, and calcium from the blood, is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in treating lead poisoning and toxicity from other heavy metals. Although not approved by the FDA to treat coronary atiery disease, some physicians and alternative medicine practitioners have recommended EDTA chelation as a way to treat this disorder.

CHELATION UPDATE:
The National Institute of Health (NIH)
funded a 30 million dollar, five-year clinical trial called TACT, (Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy).
This trial is designed to confirm the preliminary evidence that chelation treatment is safe
and effective for the different stages of coronary heati disease.

For More Infotmation visit www.NIH.gov

“This is a landmark study by the NIH which we hope will finally dispel some of the skepticism surrounding chelation,” said Eleazar Kadile, M.D. Kadile, director of KadileAtric Power Principle® in Green Bay, is one of a handful of doctors in Wisconsin that provide chelation therapy. “We have thousands of success stories from across the state, but this double-blind, clinical trial may finally convince some people and providers of the effectiveness of chelation in treating coronary heart disease both before and after heart attacks.”

If you’ve been kept in the dark too long by the conventional medical establishment, PICK UP THE PHONE NOW!……CALL 920-468-9442.

Don’t put it off for tomorrow….tomorrow is your today.

SCHEDULE A “MEET THE DOCTOR VISIT“
Get first hand the information you need to make an informed decision.