Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Medications are drugs they have side effects. Herbs have none to minimum side effects.
That's just not true at all. Many medications are derived from plants, and then scientists find methods to synthesize the active ingredients to make supply reliable and of a known quality. Herbs have varying amounts of the active substances, and can cause side effects just as much as a pill does. Natural is not necessarily better.
That's just not true at all. Many medications are derived from plants, and then scientists find methods to synthesize the active ingredients to make supply reliable and of a known quality. Herbs have varying amounts of the active substances, and can cause side effects just as much as a pill does. Natural is not necessarily better.
That's true, but just like processed food is worse for you than whole food, the same is true for processed drugs vs their natural occurring components.
That's just not true at all. Many medications are derived from plants, and then scientists find methods to synthesize the active ingredients to make supply reliable and of a known quality. Herbs have varying amounts of the active substances, and can cause side effects just as much as a pill does. Natural is not necessarily better.
the body sees the drugs as poison. thus the dose must be high enough so that the body cant process it out quickly.
Your numbers are fine, your health seems fine. If you're concerned you can go up for a workup and stress test, but imo it's just a waste of time.
As you get older, monitor your cardiovascular output (can be crudely done by measuring your BPM for a fixed difficulty level) and as long as you're hitting your goals, you should not pay attention.
Cholesterol's role in plaques and blockages is far from clear. Is it correlative or causative? What cholesterol is important for is your brain, which has 70% of your body's total cholesterol. Artificially lowering it via statins present themselves with many numerological and muscular problems as well as diabetes.
And for your profile, there is no benefit from statins in terms of living longer or having less heart attacks. In patients who already had a MCA, statins prevent 1 MCA for around 25 treated for 5 years IIRC. These are not great numbers.
Good post (the number is 1 in 45, not 25)
Research has shown that CV health, in terms of preventive effects, for exercise is to run your HR up to 75% of age-related max (from a chart) for 20 consecutive minutes, 3x/wk...If your goal is to win marathons and such, you can go higher, but from the preventive standpoint, that's good enough...How well does it work? Ask Jim Fix. He might disagree. ..If your other health problems don't contradict exercize, it has many other benefits too....Regular exercise seems to counter act the negative effects of hi chol, statistically speaking...It also allows (forces) the development of collaterals that can prevent the big one when that Widow Maker suddenly clots over.
Ca/CT scan-- not ready for prime time. It cost the industry many $millions to develop the tech to get a CT scanner with a high enough "shutter speed," so to speak, that would "stop" a heart for a photo, and with a resolving power good enough to see changes on the sub- millimeter level....They're getting close, but still no cigar. They put the thing on the market early just for a chance to re-coup some research money expenses...The test has false negative and false positive numbers inferior to cardiac stress/nuclear testing.
The stress test with nuclear scan has false pos & neg numbers of ~10% each-- pretty good for screening purposes for pts with two postive risk factors, but not really good enough for symptomatic pts. ...If you have symptoms or a positive stress test, you need to proceed to angiography....If you don't have at least two risk factors and no symptoms, doing the test actually increases the false results (Bayes' Theorem).
65 years old - cholesterol was 246 as of last month.
Cut out all meat (except for Sunday night) and all sweets except for the brown sugar I sprinkle on the oatmeal. (2 cups a day) No bread. Only brown rice.
Eggs - Just a couple of times a month.
Weight - A good 10-15 pounds overweight.
Stress - Nothing out of the ordinary and I take a nap every afternoon
Exercise - use weights to keep upper body strength and walk 1.8 miles say 3-4 times a week.
Just FYI, these studies are hopelessly terrible as they're riddled with confounders. The average vegan does many other healthy things that a normal person does not (a normal person is not a vegan).
LOL. Thanks for classifying me as abnormal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRM20
My Mom went almost vegan for a year when the cholesterol meds she was taking quit working. She managed to get her cholesterol down to 300. Genetics play a huge par tin cholesterol numbers.
That's just not true at all. Many medications are derived from plants, and then scientists find methods to synthesize the active ingredients to make supply reliable and of a known quality. Herbs have varying amounts of the active substances, and can cause side effects just as much as a pill does. Natural is not necessarily better.
65 years old - cholesterol was 246 as of last month.
Cut out all meat (except for Sunday night) and all sweets except for the brown sugar I sprinkle on the oatmeal. (2 cups a day) No bread. Only brown rice.
Eggs - Just a couple of times a month.
Weight - A good 10-15 pounds overweight.
Stress - Nothing out of the ordinary and I take a nap every afternoon
Exercise - use weights to keep upper body strength and walk 1.8 miles say 3-4 times a week.
Don't smoke or drink
Eat more fiber and fish oil supplements. Lower weight
Vegans, as a group, are probably better educated, wealthier, more health conscious, white, female etc than normal meat eaters. At least in this country! So, when we do these studies it's hard to separate what variable is causative and what else is along for the ride.
Though, I have to say I believe that a vegan diet probably would result in you improving cholesterol numbers if you avoid potato chips, and sugars found in certain candies. But then as a vegan, you probably don't do that (I'm guessing). Anyways, sugar alone will not raise your cholesterol numbers, sugars combined with fat will and fat is hard to come by in a true vegan diet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
