Talk about health

Being told you have high cholesterol may not rank alongside getting bad news of cancer, but it is the start of justifiable worry about your heart. Publicity suggests cholesterol is the one and only risk factor, and a heart attack will surely follow - unless you get your cholesterol down! So, you embark on a lifetime of drug taking, with your doctor's blessing. And all will be well ... or so you think.

As with all health-related topics, the above scenario simply doesn't hold for everyone. For instance, will you take your tablets for the rest of your life? The research tells us that quite a lot of people stop taking the drugs after a year or two. Then what? I haven't seen any results on follow-ups of these people.

Is high cholesterol the villain it is portrayed? That's the real question. It seems that half the people who have heart attacks have normal cholesterol. And the majority of people with high cholesterol never suffer a heart attack. So, clearly something else is involved along with cholesterol.

Well, yes there is. C-reactive protein is recognised as a better measure of risk for heart attack. Other factors include family history, blood pressure, excessive weight, exercise, diet, and smoking. And these factors have an effect on inflammation in the heart and blood vessels, and inflammation follows damage. The result is that cholesterol is now seen as part of the way your body tries to deal with inflammation - the more inflammation the higher the cholesterol.

Even if you think taking drugs to lower cholesterol is the answer, have you considered there are side effects related to every drug and the cholesterol-lowering statins are no exception? The conventional medical professions tell us that the statins are a safe group of drugs. Yet stories abound of how the statins are the cause of some worrying side effects. Muscle pain is the usual and most common side effect.

However, over the past few years reports have emerged about memory loss caused by the statins. A US doctor was taking atorvastatin (Lipitor) and realised he had lost his memory for a few hours. His own investigation revealed the statin drug was the cause. He stopped his medication and recovered completely.

After reporting his story on the Internet, hundreds of other people confirmed the same thing had happened to them. And just last week another case was chronicled on a reputable health site. Once again, a successful, intelligent businessman found he had trouble remembering things. He got lost driving in areas he knew well and had to carry a note pad with him to jot down reminders. Dementia or Alzheimer's disease was his first thought, but he was wrong.

Again, investigation discovered the link with atorvastatin, and he began the process of weaning himself off the drug. This involved changing his diet to include more soluble fibre in beans, peas, fruit etc; increasing his intake of omega-3 fatty acids from fish; snacking on a dail handful of nuts and introducing some flaxseeds. Added to this he increased his weekly exercise regime.

With carful management of these and other diet and lifestyle changes this person managed to get his cholesterol down without the statins. His memory is back to normal.

These stories and many others point out the potential problems with cholesterol-lowering drugs such as the statins. Why take the chance. High cholesterol is a warning that things are not as they should be. The important thing to remember is that you can get your cholesterol down by taking some judicious steps to improve your diet and exercise. Once you have incorporated them into your life, review the situation and only then consider the necessity of taking a statin.

Remember the fact that high cholesterol doesn't necessarily mean a heart attack is coming. Normal cholesterol doesn't mean you won't have a heart attack, either.

Yes, try to get cholesterol back to normal by changing your habits. But if you feel better after that, why take the chance with a statin?

You can read the whole story of cholesterol, heart healt, statins and natural and alternative ways of lowering cholesterol by getting a copy of my book All About Cholesterol - villain or saviour?. Just log onto http://www.healthexplored.co.uk and follow the links to the secure order page and look for the big green heart. You'll get your digital copy by return and discover how you can look after your cholesterol without drugs.

Log on to the same site to subscribe to my newsletter - its fr ee and comes with a gift.

It's good to know both sides of an argument, or so I understand. Only one side can be biased and misleading. What everyone needs is balance. Unfortunately, the doctrine of balance doesn’t reach into every aspect of reporting. Twice in the past few days I’ve come across examples of bias in health reports, and it makes me angry. Reporters and program makers clearly don’t share an open mind or look for reasonable conclusions.

The first instance concerned a hospital professor who wished to test claims of super foods, probiotics and so on. Sponsored by a TV company, she trotted out the usual mainstream, conventional medical thoughts on diet that I’ve come to recognise. You know the kind of thing – balanced diet is all you need, why bother with probiotics because it doesn’t really affect health, and so on. It’s just one big yawn.

Then, while she was discussing foods that lower cholesterol, she informed us that she had high cholesterol but was taking a statin drug for it. Why, therefore, would she even consider controlling her cholesterol with diet? A tablet a day and she was fine, thank you very much.

Cue a heated one-way discussion between the TV and me. How can a highly qualified, intelligent medical person be allowed to get away with that? No mention of side effects. No concern about long-term medication. No thought of changing diet to a healthier version. No trace of wonder that avoiding the drug might be preferable. No nothing! Just a large measure of complacency.

Apart from my instant anger, I was disgusted to see that the medical profession has apparently not moved forward in the past decades. They still see treatment as a pill for each symptom. And treat each side effect with another pill. Until the patient (you) ends up taking handfuls of tablets at every meal or even in place of every meal.

I hadn’t long calmed down from that when I read an article in which a doctor had claimed one of his patients had died from taking glucosamine to help his arthritis. The piece went into some detail of this poor man’s symptoms as justification for demanding all alternative remedies be subject to the same legal requirements as drugs. It ended with two sentences from a representative of the herbal profession on the forthcoming European laws regarding supplements and remedies. So much for balance.

What got me going in this case was the lack of details on the case. For instance, was glucosamine the only thing involved? Was he also taking medicines for other conditions or perhaps painkillers for his arthritis as well? How did the doctor come to the conclusion that glucosamine was the thing that caused his death? He was sure it was the glucosamine that caused the death, but why? Had he eliminated all other possibilities?

I have no reason to protect glucosamine. Everything I’ve read about it suggests it is safe and effective. But, I’m prepared to accept that it might be involved in some unfortunate train of events that lead to the ultimate side effect. But I would like some more proof, not just some doctor’s opinion.

While we’re on it, I would like a little context, too. Tell me how many deaths are caused by this doctor’s regulated and approved drugs for arthritis. None, presumably, or we would have heard of them. Wouldn’t we?

Anti-arthritis drugs have caused many thousands of deaths worldwide and I don’t remember the media giving each death the prominence afforded this one. And there have been no claims for the removal of theses drugs from the market. Well, that’s not true. One was removed a couple of years ago because of its exceptional record of causing death. The rest remain for you if you want them.

Don’t ignore this casualty of glucosamine, if that is what it is. Lets get to the bottom of it and find out why a seemingly safe remedy proved not to be safe at all. While you’re at, lets be told the safety record for the prescribable arthritis drugs.

These instances of mainstream medicine ignoring the very basis of health and medicine are all too common in the media. People, even doctors, are entitled to their opinions. But so are the rest of us. The constant one-sided view of health as portrayed without any critical analysis leads the non-medical among us to think that there is no other view worthy of consideration. It’s down to drugs and surgery or nothing.

Its time the media reviewed their rules on balance to include health along with politics. Not that I want them to be mixed, you understand. Don’t start me on our politicians!

Health isn’t solely a conventional medical thing. Convention must be in the mix, but it certainly does not hold all the answers. It has a pretty poor record on safety of medicines. It is responsible for many deaths that might have been avoided if it had taken a wider and less singular view.

Perhaps I should retire to a cave with no TV and no newspapers!

Contact me through http://www.healthexplored.co.uk . Sign up to my fr ee newsletter and check out the reports on stomach acid, cholesterol, pain, stress, and acupuncture. I pride myself that I try to see and understand all views on health. Only then can you decide which one or combination suits your situation and beliefs.

Stay well!