Still Ticking

I know its been two years since my last post. Time flies when you are having fun. I've been taking my medication since 2004 and rarely experience angina. In the past year, my current cardiologist has tried to convince me to get the quintuple coronary artery bypass graft that I was originally told I needed back in 2004 when I took the advice of my second opinion cardiologist and began a medication protocol to control hypertension and assist my body in developing a better microcirculation and more efficient collateral vessels. It's been working.

Every time I see my cardiologist, my ECG and echocardiogram have shown my heart is normal. It would not be if the collateral vessels and microcirculation were not supplying the heart with adequate oxygen. In December I relented to my cardiologist's insistence that I have an angiogram which showed the blockages to my coronary arteries were essentially the same as they were in 2004. She still wanted me to have a five vessel CABG despite having a normal heart.

I told her that if a second opinion from a noninterventional cardiologist decided I needed a CABG, I would get one. Two months ago, I went to Indiana Heart Hospital for that second opinion. The cardiologist had all of my records and gave me a pretty thorough exam. He told me if I could do seven minutes of a cardiac stress test, he would agree with me that my medication regimen is providing adequate treatment of my coronary artery disease.

My current cardiologist gave me a stress test two years ago and I only lasted a little over five minutes at that time. Now my second opinion cardiologist wanted me to do two whole minutes more. Was I up for the challenge?

Tuesday was the big day. To make a long story short, I lasted seven minutes and 31 seconds and only experienced a slight amount of chest tightness at the end of the test that was gone within two minutes of the end of the test. The results were normal. My stress ECG showed no changes from my baseline ECG. The post stress left ventricle was normal in size. There was a normal pattern of perfusion in all myocardial regions. Resting images showed a normal perfusion pattern. Analysis of post exercise quantitative gated SPECT images showed a normal pattern of systolic thickening and normal wall motion in all regions. The post stress ejection fraction was measured at 63%, which is NORMAL.

Finally, my cardiologist's impression of the cardiac stress test: No scar. No ischemia. Normal LV systolic function. The post stress ejection fraction is 63%. NORMAL MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION STUDY.

I was told in 2004 that I would probably have a massive stroke or deadly heart attack within three months if I didn't have a quintuple coronary artery bypass graft. I opted to be treated with medication and now eight years later, I am still ticking.

Dr. Howard H. Wayne, a noninterventional cardiologist, said 95% of all CABGs are unnecessary. I hope that if you or a loved one have been told you need this very traumatic surgery, you will get a second opinion from a noninterventional cardiologist. It could save your life, or at the very least give you years of a higher quality of life than you would have if you had the surgery.

If you would like to discuss my blog or anything about the choices I have made regarding CABG surgery, email me at wordworks2001@yahoo.com.

I told him so!

Six years ago, I urged Bill Clinton to get a second opinion instead of blindly opting for a quadruple coronary artery bypass. A few months earlier, I had been told by an Indianapolis cardiologist that if I did not undergo a quintuple bypass, I would probably have a massive heart attack or stroke within a few months. I opted for treatment from Howard Wayne, MD, FACC, FACP, of San Diego. Now, six years later, I am doing great and Bill Clinton has had to have two stents placed in his coronary arteries.

Dr. Wayne is gone now, but his web site is still up and as valid as ever. Check it out: http://www.heartprotect.com/

EDTA vs EECP

On another forum that I spend a lot of time on, Cannuck had a comment about EDTA:

Originally Posted by Cannuck Chelation has been used for many decades for a variety of reasons. My wife's Aunt was treated with EDTA for the aftereffects of the concentration camps, as were German citizens from the Ruhr Valley for heavy metal poisoning. I personally know seniors who have done so here for various cardiovascular conditions (most with significant success), and can tell you that the results are VERY short in coming.

I wanted to clarify a comment I previously made regarding EDTA and explain my reason for using EECP as my next step in treating my angina. Here was my reply:

When I said EDTA (Chelation therapy) either oral or IV is controversial, that doesn't mean I disapprove of it. Quite the contrary, I feel it is a choice of treatments that has been effective in treating CAD and some other coronary diseases and despite the fact it hasn't been approved by the FDA for use in such diseases, should be available to patients making informed choices. The reason I am opting for EECP is because I have studied its effects, side effects and contraindications and have talked with patients who have received it. Unlike bypass surgery "victims" and angioplasty (balloon & stent) recipients, none of them had negative reports of their experiences.

Further, angiogenesis and the development of a collateral vessel system to naturally bypass the clogged coronary arteries is a process the body already has started on its own, without the introduction of any drug. Like it or not EDTA is a drug and therefore could have side effects or be harmful. There are reports of unexpected deaths during or following chelation therapy. I have found none associated with EECP. That is not to say EECP recipients haven't died as a result of therapy, there simply are no reports where the therapy caused the deaths, that I have found.

I realize EDTA is a natural enzyme and as such can be sold as a nutritional supplement and I am not opposed to nutritional supplements as long as they are used wisely and in some form of a therapeutic regimen. I personally take the following supplements daily in the strengths and doses indicated:

Organic Flaxseed Oil 1200 mg, three times a day
Borago Seed Oil 1200 mg, three times a day
Omega 3 Fish Oil 1200 mg, three times a day
d-Alpha Tocopheryl (Vitamin E) 400 IU, one time a day
Glucosamine 750 mg Chondroitin 600 mg, twice a day
Folic Acid 800 mcg, one time a day
B-100 Ultra B-Complex, one time a day (Puritan's Pride Brand)
l-Arginine 500mg, one time a day
Super C Complex 1000 mg, three times a day (Puritan's Pride Brand)
Acetyl L-Carnitine 400 mg with Alpha Lipoic Acid 200 mg, one time a day
Natural Selenium 50 mcg, four times a day
Co-Enzyme Q10 100 mg, one time a day
Magnesium Oxide 400 mg, one time daily
Multiple Vitamin, one time daily

I always try to take my supplements with food and I am on a schedule that has me taking something, prescribed medications and supplements every six hours.

Just for the information to folks with CAD and angina, my medical treatment regimen is aimed at not only controlling my blood pressure, but keeping it as low as possible without adverse side effects. I try to keep mine around 90/50 when I am at rest. It usually ranges between 80/40 to 100/50. When my BP is a normal 120/70 or more, during stress or increased physical activity, I often experience symptoms of angina. Here are the prescribed drugs I am on daily

Aspirin 325 mg in the morning
Fosinopril
Metopropolol Tartrate
Isosorbide Mn
Nitroglycerine (as needed)

No dosages are provided because you need to consult a physician before starting this protocol. Suffice it to say, some of the dosages are higher than usually recommended. The Isosorbide and Nitroglycerine were recently added to my regimen and Modiuretic was discontinued due to an abnormal increase in blood tests that indicated my liver was being adversely affected. I also take prescription medication for Parkinson's disease.

I cannot emphasize enough the need to be under the care of a medical doctor who you trust and have a good working relationship with. I encourage anyone who has CAD or angina or has a loved one who does to read my blog from beginning to end and to get a second opinion from a non-invasive cardiologist before being coerced into bypass surgery they do not need.

Your Angiogram Increases Your Cancer Risk

CT Coronary Angiography Carries "Nonnegligible" Cancer Risk

Computed tomography coronary angiography carries a "nonnegligible" risk for cancer, which varies greatly by age and gender, according to a study in JAMA.

The study was based on risk estimates -- developed for the National Academies' Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation report -- that were applied to simulation models.

The lifetime attributable risk for cancer from a single CTCA for women was 1 in 143 at age 20, 1 in 284 at age 40, and 1 in 466 at age 60. Lung and breast cancer accounted for about 80% of the cancer risk in women.

Men's risks were considerably lower: 1 in 686 at age 20, 1 in 1007 at age 40, and 1 in 1241 at age 60. Women's higher risk was attributed to the greater radiosensitivity of their lungs and to the fact that the breast lies in the field irradiated during CTCA.

The authors note that CTCA "should be used particularly cautiously in the evaluation of young individuals, especially women."