E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIf you suffer from heart disease, or have had a heart attack and are therefore at risk of dying from another -- what should you do to reduce your risk? An expensive study sought to find an easy fix, but the large trial sponsored by the National Institutes of Health shows that chelation therapy, a controversial alternative medicine therapy that removes heavy metals from the bloodstream, does little good. So what might help these heart patients instead?
The old reliable standbys are losing weight, stopping smoking and exercising more. These, of course, are dull and hard to do, and they surely don’t create sexy headlines.
Metal-removing therapy shows small benefit in heart patients
Moreover, they don’t make anyone any money in advocating for them. There are many industries that have a powerful stake in your not doing them, and in advertising round the clock to dupe you into yet another day lounging in front of the TV, scarfing down a second triple cheeseburger or guzzling a big gulp sugary soda. Ignore those messages. Losing weight, keeping away from cigarettes and staying fit are the proven ways to reduce risk.
Chelation, on the other hand, sounds seductively simpler by comparison. A doctor gives you ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid via IV. This chemical is widely used to dissolve limescale, the chalky deposit found in kettles, hot water boilers and pipes. That is the extent to which the chemical is proven to do any good. There is no scientific reason to explain why something that can dissolve granular, sand-like deposits in your water heater should be capable of clearing out clogged vessels in a heart.
Still, the dream of finding a simple fix to a terrible health problem and the agitation by a powerful alternative medicine lobby led the NIH to invest 30 million dollars in a study of chelation. There has never been any evidence that chelation worked to fix heart problems, autism or the many other ailments that its tout. The study results are now out and show a tiny, marginal impact on the health of those who took the treatment.
Does that mean that if you have heart disease you should head to the local chelation center? No. Continue to take your same old heart medications. The results of this new trial are so weak, and the issues surrounding how the trial got done so bothersome that it would not be smart to put your aililng heart in the hands of someone giving something that is still very dubious.
If you suffer from heart disease, it is up to you to take the hard, challenging but proven road: change your lifestyle.
Leave a Comment:
Summing it up quickly; Firstly, after hearing older guys talk about 'chelation' it doesn't or didn't sound anything like what your talking about. It was designed to remove all heavy metals from the body. It was administered to ship builders originally, who suffered frequent heavy metal poisonings due to exposure to them in the manufacturing process. A by product of this was a noticeable improvement in health. Now, that aside, I think I need to point something out. Promoting health is one thing, but not pursuing a cure for a disease that is responsible for over one quarter of the deaths in the US is absolutely wrong. You know, I KNOW people who appear to be the picture of good health who have had heart attacks. There isnt' anything wrong about them. They are in shape, some athletic. If you want to hate, just come out with it.
If you are suffering heavy metal poisoning then chelation makes sense, it makes absolutely no sense as a treatment for heart disease. This is nothing more than commercial interests trying to push some dubious treatment in an attempt to make money. They do this because they have not been able to find a way to make money off the only real, proven treatment. That is to exercise, keep your weight down, and do not smoke. Nothing is more effective in keeping your heart healthy than keeping yourself in shape, eating right, and avoiding things that are bad for you like a high fat diet and smoking. Companies like to look for cures that they can sell and make money off of, they have no interest in promoting lifestyle changes as a preventative measure because there is no money in it for them. In addition, they are playing to the public who are looking for a quick, easy cure. People would much rather take a pill than the actually get some exercise, drop their bad habits, and actually do some work on themselves. People would rather continue their destructive lifestyle and be able to take a pill to counteract it then to change the way they live.
This study was not a waste. It probably saved people time and money by exposing the therapy's false claims.
You need to spend $30 m to figure this out? Excuse me - the study is a rip off.
It does make some sense. The erosion of the inner arterial wall that leads to wall rupture,a blood clot and subsequent "heart attack" is driven by the process of inflammation. Part of the inflammatory process is production of metal dependent enzymes called "metalloprotienases". These enzymes eat away cartilage and damage the structural integrity of arteries. The same process is involved in osteoarthritis. The small effect seen in the study is from partially mitigating the inflammatory process,like partially removing fuel from a fire. Lifestyle changes much more effective and cheaper.
Roby, not sure if what you're saying is true, but even if it were, who says that people who suffer from heart attacks have an increased number of these "metallproteinases"? I know for sure that atherosclerosis leads to inflammation, and the process of inflammation leads to more clotting because of the build up of dead macrophages in addition to other clotting factors. So it just becomes a vicious cycle. Fat induces inflammation as well and its been scientifically proven that the majority size of a tumor is the result of inflammation. Your body has natural mechanisms to try and fix things but it can inadvertently cause more damage if things build up, hence why the "anti inflammatory" drugs like asprin are considered "power drugs". The only thing you can do to help your body is not to get into that state in the first place by dieting and exercising....
@ronaldJohnson wow, he actually mentioned the cure in his story. Good diet, a healthy weight and exercise. If you are feeling guilty for being fat then loose weight you idiot.
The only problem with chelation is not that it doesn't work (it does) but that it uses a natural substance which is not patentable, therefore not very profitable nor expensive, and it would compete with those "same old heart medications" which are great money makers for you know who!
There is nothing more natural about EDTA than about aspirin, or factor 7a, or, say, atorvastatin. The fact that it occurs in nature doesn't mean that it'll cure anything or that its even safe for you. There are plenty of naturally lethal substances such as ricin.
Ah, yes. The old "doctors are conspiring against us" theory. Real physicians often recommend simple aspirin for prevention of strokes and heart attacks. It's cheap. It helps. Why hasn't the use of aspirin been conspired against, by these same doctors?
Chelation therapy will prove itself in clinical trials, if it's effective. It hasn't proven effective, yet.
Yes, Joe is right. EDTA is a "natural substance"? The only reason EDTA is found in the environment, is because humans manufacture it, and let it escape into the wastewater.
EDTA might be "natural" to some other planet, but not here.
I can show you a few graves of people in my town of people who tried chelation therapy, one being my father. It does not work.
eventually we will realize ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL
and also, that some things DO WORK for SOME PEOPLE even if they didnt work MOST PEOPLE.
Chelation therapy might not be a good fit for MOST people, but who's to say it's not a perfect fit for some people?
Jessica: You are probably referring to the fool that is born every minute...........Chelation probably works as well as prayer...................so pray because it is a lot cheaper and more likely to work because it reduces stress.
The only problem with chelation is not that it doesn't work (it does) but that it uses a natural substance which is not patentable, therefore not very expensive nor profitable, so it would compete with those "same old heart medications" which are great money-makers for you-know-who.
EDTA will bind a lot of metal ions vital for your body including magnesium. As such, it inactivates a lot of enzymes and screws up your biochemistry.
Physicians who practice chelation therapy correctly test for mineral deficiencies and correct them.
I was thinking about the same thing. And to Roby Mitchell............why "correct" what was not screwed up to begin with before you started messing around with metal ions and physiological parameters that the "respected doctors" who do this stuff really know very little about.........chromium as a cofactor for insulin action for example.
Well stated, as a retired health care professional, and someone who has worked in research. Basically, it's a no brainer, but folks like/need to think they can buy panacea for good health and longevity, when what they can do right now - change lifestyle - they chose to not do, until oftentimes, there is a crises. I have worked with many of these patients over the years. Lifestyle is so important. Now that I am retired, and working in market research, I see the contrast.
Thank you for your thought provoking article. As a retired health care professional, now working pt in market research, I can tell you lifestyle is the answer, but not a money maker, other than some fitness products/clubs, wt loss programs for those with resources, and supplements. I have worked with patients with chronic disease promoting lifestyle for almost 30 yrs, (in public health and clinical settings, including research) and it usually takes a crises for someone to make a dramatic change in their habits. Living healthy and improving longevity and quality of life does not cost much, it takes a paradigm shift. In the next half of my life, I hope to see folks become better consumers of their health, just as they would do for an expensive purchase.
There was no reason not to test it, and studies cost a lot more money than they ought to for various reasons. I'm always glad to see alternative methods tested, at least when the test is carried out by an ethical and competent entity--if such an entity exists.
The cost of the study is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of warmongering, which so many seem to think is money well spent.
A study in the 1950's proved that heart disease could be reversed with a largely plant based diet. Now with imaging techniques Drs can see the plaque disappearing using imaging techniques when a patient switches to a near Vegan diet. As others have said, there is not a lot of money to be made curing people by this technique, so don't expect your normal dr./surgeon to suggest this approach.
To read all about it & get input into all the research get "The China Study" by Dr's Campbell
Also Dean Ornish's book "Reversing Heart Disease".
As a layperson on the day before the election, I can't help but be struck at the many different parts of our lives that require us to do something to help ourselves, how many try to profit or advance by telling us we don't have to- and how much we seem to want to hear it.
Off to the gym.
I'm with you tom.
I heard of chelation 40 years ago from one of my students never thinking one day it would save my life. I've never smoked and never had a weight problem. Four years ago I started having significant intermittent chest pain and pain in my left arm. My doctor sent me to a cardiologist who was touting a stent in one of my heart arteries. Remembering the words of my student I opted for a regimen of oral chelation. Six weeks was the recommended treatment of one dose per day, after the first week and a half my pain was totally gone. I finished the series and on advising my cardiologist of what I had done was given a clean bill of health and haven't had one episode of pain since. At 82 I can do anything I feel like doing without any fear of my symptoms returning. Pryor to my chelation treatment I couldn't pursue normal activities without having my Nitro Glycerin pills handy. I still have an unopened bottle of those pills.
Placebo is a powerful medicine.
That's great news Jim. Hardly "placebo" as many patients have told me the same story. I recommend the lifestyle changes but don't discourage patients from having the chelation. It pulls out heavy metals that are used to fuel the process of inflammation.
Mymomdidnotraiseafool-Yes your motehr did, because if you read the original study, the first large, long-term trial of chelation for heart patients -- the therapy reduced the risk of heart attacks, deaths, strokes and other cardiovascular problems by 18%. Placebos were given toa test group during teh study, so that's a firm 18%.
Yo mama must love fools.
I don't doubt that Caplan's point is valid. But I do wish that nbcnews.com would stop trying to pass off opinion pieces as news reporting. (The headline, in particular, is misleading.)
Amen, Wilmer-furman -- that's all MSNBC is -- misleading, liberal opinions. It's not "news" people!
How in the f**k did this cost 30 million dollars? What a tremendous waste of taxpayer money. That money could have been used for food, clothes, shelter, etc for people that have none. Instead it was wasted on a ridiculous study to help people who are too lazy to quit smoking, exercise, and lose weight.
Some days I hate humans.
There isd also another therapy out there but FDA won't even consider it- why? The FDA is in the hands of the pharmaceutical companies. They only want people on medications forever.
Stem cell shows promise but good old FDA/USA corrupt medical vision will not even consider it.
Shame on our wonderful government agencies. WE could actually be saving $ and lives if they would at least study it at NIH. (oops forgot- FDA would not allow their federally supported institution to be used for non- pharmaceutical studies!)
Hindsight is a wonderful device for so many. While $30m sounds like a poor investment when you don't get the good results you were hoping for, it's mere peanuts when you compare it to what we spend on bullets, guns, and other military matters. However, if the gamble had paid off, you would have had one less thing to complain about.
An important clarification here is the underlying pathology in "heart disease". Hearts don't "attack" but react negatively to lack of blood flow with a potentially fatal rythm calle ventricular fibrillation-a siezure of the heart muscle. This lack of blood flow is precipitated by an acute blood clot. The clot forms after the inner lining of the artery finally collapses after years of being degraded by a process called inflammation. The process is analogous to using sand paper on a ballon. The inflammation process is fueled,in part,by metal dependant enzymes,metalloprotienases. These same enzymes degrade articular cartilage to cause osteoarthritis. Its physiologically reasonble that removal of heavy metals would have the small mitigating effect seen in this study. The effect is likely patient dependent as some patients/practitioners are likely to combine the treatment with lifestyle changes. The effect of this therapy,however,pales in comparison to the complete reversal of vascular endothelial "disease" seen with lifestyle changes. This has been proven "to death" by Dean Ornish and others. Vascular endothelial disease(also the cause of most strokes) is a lifestyle driven consequence,like being drunk. Chelation or drugs have no reasonable place in either condition.
Dr Caplan is hiding the fact that the study he denigrates -- the first large, long-term trial of chelation for heart patients -- the therapy reduced the risk of heart attacks, deaths, strokes and other cardiovascular problems by 18%.
Of coure, you can only read it on CNN http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/04/health/chelation-heart-study/index.html?hpt=hp_t4
Dr. Caplan is a calf sucking o the utter of big drug companies. You can't believe a word he says because he purpsoely hide the results of the study. If you are one of Dr. Kaplan get a new doctor...
I don't agree that alternative treatments should not be studied, nor that anyone's entitled to get angry about positive study results or presume them to be fraudulent. But the results here are kind of lame. First, a relative 18% risk reduction was actually a 4% absolute risk reduction, since most people in the placebo group didn't have any events either. (In fact, risk was reduced more in diabetics, but basically not at all in non-diabetics.) So only 1 in 25 people, potentially, benefited at all.
Second, most of the events counted in "reduced risk of death, heart attack, other problems" are "other", what are known as "soft outcomes." Spending $125K ($5000 x 25) to prevent one premature death/stroke is a good deal; spending $125K to prevent one stenting probably isn't. There are also many trials of conventional medicine that lump outcomes in the same way so the researchers can claim their pet treatment "reduced death, heart attack and PCIs" when in fact it only reduced PCIs. It's dishonest, IMHO. So far these folks haven't published any details to show that "hard outcomes," really bad things like strokes or major surgery, were reduced at all. There was no meaningful quality of life benefit at all, though more in the placebo group did drop out.
Third, an 18% relative risk reduction for such events is not all that impressive. A person with actual heart disease can get at least as much benefit just by taking a cheap statin, presuming he can tolerate it. He can get better risk reduction by following the Ornish program and see other benefits as well. This treatment requires weekly three-hour infusions. A lot of people dropped out, probably because the treatment was so burdensome. Suppose you spent three hours a week walking until you sweated and bought $5000 worth of real food instead - how much more good might that do for your total health and quality of life?
This treatment is not covered by insurance, so people pay for it out of pocket. In the real world, most people do not have enough money for every possible approach at once; they have to prioritize. Dr. Caplan may seem to be arrogant in dismissing research he doesn't like, but he's absolutely right that if you have to choose between getting chelated and getting off the Western diet, the latter is your better choice.
I'm not a big fan of chelation therapy, but I think the person writing this article is obviously prejudiced against it. I had to laugh when he alluded to the "powerful alternative medicine lobby". Compared to pharmaceutical lobbies and lobbies of big business in general, it is a pitifully weak lobby.
Plus, I feel obligated to ask: "Is it ethical for someone to write an article about something they are obviously prejucided against?"
And yes, $30 million dollars is a drop in the bucket for these types of tests, especially compared to many of the cancer drugs that show equivalent amounts of improvement and cost 10 to 100 times what this treatment costs, plus isn't covered by insurance anyway. Besides, the people who don't like alternative medicine should be glad a lot of these regimens are being evaluated, since if they are found to not help, it probably saves a lot more money by people not using them anymore. The only alternative is not to test them and so that leaves people unable to make a rational decision and so they end up going by "testimonials"...and anyone can get 10 good testimonials of "success" about almost anything. I've seen it done way too many times.
With genetic testing becoming more popular, I predict we will find that certain people really do benefit from things like chelation therapies and many don't. In this we people can figure out what works best for them. In the mean time, we get contradictory results and bland results, when the problem could be that the population tested was one that genetically could not benfit. So, we need to check our guns at the door when it comes to these types of testing and keep an open mind.
Everything was summed up nicely when it was stated that things that actually are known to help require some effort. The seduction of advertising gives people the idea that simple and 'painless' approaches will solve all their problems.
But there will always be advocates who will find one reason or another to challenge any study that contradicts with things they believe in, even if there is no proof of effectiveness. That is how anecdotes work. They don't need proof. I "heard that so-and-so improved" is all they need.
www.acam.org The American College for Advancement in Medicine
www.iaomt.org The International Association of Metal Toxicology
move forward, not everything good comes in a pill form