Hello,
My mother recently had a hypertensive crisis, diagnosed as heart attack and
mini-stroke. Her symptoms were:
-Headache night before
-Continuing headache next morning, plus dizziness, nausea, chest pain, and
seizure-like cramping of the right (yes) arm and neck.
– When the ambulance arrived, her blood pressure was 220/190; she was in
hypertensive crisis.
– When they gave her meds to relieve blood pressure, she
was basically fine, and went to the hospital.
– Her blood levels were all fine except for minor increase in muscle enzymes.
At hospital, they examined old MRI (from Carotid artery surgery 6 months ago)
and compared to new MRI and discovered 2 new very small brain infarcts
indicating mini-stroke. They think the strokes came as a result of the
attack, i.e., that they were not the cause of the hypertensive crisis. They
then did an angiogram, and found a minor constriction in only one vein leading
to a small chamber. (I’m not saying this quite right, but it was almost
undetectable, because they removed the angiogram equipment and saw the
constriction on photos and went back in next day to angioplasty that one
spot.) Anyway, the cardiologist told my dad that that constriction probably
did not cause the hypertensive crisis.
Now. Here’s the problem. So we’ve learned my mom has a healthy heart, no
detectable tissue death, and no arterial constrictions, and 2 ministroke spots
caused by the hypertensive crisis … but we don’t know what caused the
hypertensive crisis.
Here’s the question:
What else can cause a hypertensive crisis besides heart attack and stroke?
My dad will be taking her to endocrinologist, next. She’s been very cranky
since the carotid surgery – is this a clue? Is she terrified of things to
come and stressed out by that? Could she be exhausted by getting up and back
in the swing right after the carotid surgery? Also, her sister died one month
after the carotid surgery, and I’m not sure she’s fully grieved…
Any and all comments will be most appreciated. Please e-mail.
Sincerely,
Pat
In article <1818755038.167…@lamg.com>, P_Iann…@lamg.com (Paul Iannone) writes:
|> In message ID <ricks.40.0017F…@sage.ultranet.com> on 2/22/95, Rick Sullivan
|> wrote:
|>
|> : What else can cause a hypertensive crisis besides heart attack and stroke?
|>
|> :
|> : My dad will be taking her to endocrinologist, next. She’s been very
|> : cranky since the carotid surgery – is this a clue?
|>
|> Among the causes identified for such things in East-Asian Traditional
|> Healing, Liver Yang Attacking Upward has this pattern: headache (especially
|> sides), red eyes, tense neck and shoulders, red tongue, anger and severe
|> irritability, glaring looks…
|>
|> There are several concommitant factors that would have to be considered to
|> chose an appropriate herbal therapy.
|>
|> The most usual (uncomplicated case) therapy is tranquilization therapy with
|> herbals like gastrodia added to reduce the accumulated pressure.
|>
|> P_Iann…@lamg.com (Paul Iannone, P.O.B. 66843, L.A., CA 90066).
|>
Do you have any supportive evidence for this modality used this way?
Frankly, I doubt it. Therefore, Rick, please don’t take what this quack
has to say seriously.
DragonSlayer
In article <9502220134.A911…@dafbbs.com>, gordie.t…@dafbbs.com says:
1. Isn’t there some way to shut you off from posting
this advertisement everyday and wasting all the
bandwidth? Since it is coming from .com, perhaps
not. Anyone got any suggestions?
2. Both chlorella (if you get the kind with the hard
cell walls cracked) and Spirulina have the same
beneifical results and are widely available.
In article <3ifsqm$…@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, rtay…@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
(Roger Taylor) wrote:
> 1. Isn’t there some way to shut you off from posting
> this advertisement everyday and wasting all the
> bandwidth? Since it is coming from .com, perhaps
> not. Anyone got any suggestions?
> 2. Both chlorella (if you get the kind with the hard
> cell walls cracked) and Spirulina have the same
> beneifical results and are widely available.
Well Roger, m.h.a could go moderated that would keep them out. Posting
alternate discount sources doesn’t seem to phase them. I bet if there
were a misc.health.alt.ads newsgroup they would still post here. And gee,
he only has 3 "algae studies" running concurrently, not like the
Teagardens that have closer to a dozen
–
Mike Davis))) xdcr…@quake.net))) Ultrasonic Transducer Solutions
"The stupid opinions expressed here are my own and should not be construed as superior to the stupid opinions of others. EITA"
gordie.t…@dafbbs.com wrote:
:
: Coenzyme Q10 – exerpts fom article
: "Coenzyme Q10 is a natural nutrient essential to life and health
: in every living cell. It is lacking in many people…especially as
: we age. This leads to many degenerative diseases and other effects
: of aging.
: Coenzyme Q10 may be very beneficial for individuals suffering
: from cardiovascular disease. Several studies have shown that when
: patients suffering from severe heart failure were treated with
: Coenzyme Q10 they showed "extrordinary clinical
: improvement"…also, Coenzyme Q10 has the ability to relax
: arterial walls, allowing the blood to flow more easly, which in
: turn will lower blood pressure. Research has shown that when the
: immune system is boosted with Coenzyme Q10, the body can produce
: the energy to effectively fight infection and disease..
: In addition,,it has been theorized that Coenzyme Q10 may
: enhance athletic performance by increasing the muscle’s ability to
: generate energy and shortening recovery time for healing damaged
: muscle tissue…
: Coenzyme Q10 can promote healthy weight loss by increasing the
: body’s overall metabolic rate. Studies have shown that very obese
: people often have as much as 50% deficency in Coenzyme Q10, while
: slim people show higher levels of this substance…"
: Reported benefits:
: – Promotes healthy heart and circulatory systems
: – Lowers blood pressure
: – Strengthens immune system
: – Increases energy
: – Slows down the aging process
: – promotes vibrant sexuality
: – Prevents cell damage that is caused by lack of oxygen
: – reduces toxic side effectsfrom many drugs
: – Dramatically improves perodontal (gum) disease
: – Aids weight loss
This all sounds much too wonderful, it wouldn’t be a sales pitch
would it ?
No side effects or contraindications to worry about I guess ?
: Used as cardiac medicine in Japan since 1974 (six million users
: daily!)
In standard medical practice ?
Where is this piece of information documented ?
: References:
: 1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
: 2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
These references are incomplete where were these articles published ?
Bye,
In article <3j0mbs$…@southern.co.nz>,
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
Colin Douthwaite <Colin_Douthwa…@equinox.gen.nz> wrote:
>gordie.t…@dafbbs.com wrote:
>:
>: Coenzyme Q10 – exerpts fom article
>: "Coenzyme Q10 is a natural nutrient essential to life and health
>: in every living cell. It is lacking in many people…especially as
>: we age. This leads to many degenerative diseases and other effects
>: of aging.
>: Coenzyme Q10 may be very beneficial for individuals suffering
>: from cardiovascular disease. Several studies have shown that when
>: patients suffering from severe heart failure were treated with
>: Coenzyme Q10 they showed "extrordinary clinical
>: improvement".
>No side effects or contraindications to worry about I guess ?
>: Used as cardiac medicine in Japan since 1974 (six million users
>: daily!)
>In standard medical practice ?
>Where is this piece of information documented ?
>: References:
>: 1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
>: 2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
>These references are incomplete where were these articles published ?
Colin: I think it’s a bit disingenuous of you to ask for references on
Co-Enzyme Q10 as if you had never heard of such a thing even though I
mailed you the results of a MedLine search on CoQ10 and heart failure
several weeks ago. This search turned up eight or ten studies, some
randomized and some involving more than a thousand patients. And no
significant side effects either.
-Steve Dunn
Colin Douthwaite writes/relates…
<<Where is this piece of information documented ?
: References:
: 1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
: 2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
These references are incomplete where were these articles published ?>>
I’ll step into this, since I’ve written a number of articles on CoQ10 and
more or less regularly talk with some of the researchers involved with it.
The Bliznakov book was first published by Bantam in 1986; ninth printing in
1989. It contains dozens of references to the literature. Don’t be lazy. You
can look these up easily enough.
If you have access to Medline or a medical school library, you’ll have no
problem finding hundreds of journal articles on the subject. CoQ10 ha diverse
benefits because it is essential for the production of ATP (i.e. energy) in
the mitochondria. This is a very fundamental action in the body. Part of the
problem with the perception of CoQ10, which is vitamin-like, is that it was
discovered relatively recently (1957)…after most of the vitamins were
supposedly discovered and the subject put to rest.
Jack_J._Chal…@ortel.org (Jack J. Challem) writes:
>I’ll step into this, since I’ve written a number of articles on CoQ10 and
>more or less regularly talk with some of the researchers involved with it.
>CoQ10 ha diverse benefits because it is essential for the production of ATP
>(i.e. energy) inthe mitochondria. This is a very fundamental action in the body.
Jack,
I am curious what specific conditions, CoQ10 has been shown to improve,
in studies involving large numbers of subjects (at least 100 people).
Thanks,
Peter R. Spool
—
+==========================+================================+
Peter R. Spool
>: References:
>: 1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
>: 2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
>
>These references are incomplete where were these articles published ?>>
:I’ll step into this, since I’ve written a number of articles on CoQ10 and
:more or less regularly talk with some of the researchers involved with it.
:If you have access to Medline or a medical school library, you’ll have no
:problem finding hundreds of journal articles on the subject. CoQ10 has
:diverse benefits because it is essential for the production of ATP
:the mitochondria. This is a very fundamental action in the body.
I think the point of the person asking "where were these articles published"
goes something like this….as you suggested, via Medline:
1)MED-> f kw coenzyme Q miracle
Search request: F KW MIRACLE COENZYME Q
Search result: 0 citations in the Medline database
2)MED-> f kw coenzyme Q nutrient
Search request: F KW COENZYME Q NUTRIENT
Search result: 0 citations in the Medline database
3)MED-> f kw coenzyme Q Fountain Youth
Search request: F KW COENZYME Q FOUNTAIN YOUTH
Search result: 0 citations in the Medline database
Well, you get the idea. The same search using ‘ubiquinone’ in
combination with these *KEY WORDS* like ‘Miracle, Nutrient, Fountain
[of] Youth,’ not surprisingly also had zero (0)returns. OTOH, there were
770 references to various scientific aspects of ubiquinone. It’s sloppy
and/or dishonest to casually refer to these medical references if they
have virtually nothing to do with the promotionalism that surrounds
Panacea Substances which are marketed like Coenzyme Q.
JB.
I’m primarily interested in CoQ10 and peridontal disease. I know that
there were at least a couple of studies; do you have any more info?
jon
Steve Dunn:
>Yes well as you know, medical databases are not going to index things
>under "micracle" or "fountain of youth".
Clearly, Steve, you haven’t responded to a word I wrote. Thanks (geesh!)
Of course I know that Pycnogenolesque, SBGAlgaesque, Kombuchesque, and
yes…CoQ10-esque Claims wouldn’t appear in a medical database. That’s why
I did the Medline search using the _following_ two references which had
been *appropriately* ‘doubted’ by an MHA poster, since they appeared to be
no different than any of the "It Works" stuff that seems to be so prolific
and at-home here in this newsgroup.
References:
>: 1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
>: 2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
That’s right, Steve…read it. "Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10…our
Fountain of Youth." While you may be in favor of "Magnets for Cancer"…I’m
not. And if you object to being characterized as an Advocate for these
*kinds* of claims, then give some thought as to what you found objectionable
to my simple and straightforward criticism of THIS cheap ‘sales’ approach
to medicine. I only said that practitioners (and products) who (that)
would deliberately, either through sloppiness and/or dishonestly, confuse
legitimate medical research with their own ‘schtick’ were…"sloppy and/or
dishonest." You apparently disagree.
>If you want to refute him, then why don’t you actually dig in to the
>facts instead of playing ludicrous wordgames with MedLine.
No, Steve…what IS a "ludicrous wordgame" is ‘CoQ Miracle Nutrient’ and
‘New Fountain of Youth.’ Fine……YOU advocate this twaddle. I don’t.
>One condition which the evidence it quite good is congestive heart
>failure. I think that’s a lot more interesting than close-minded
>skeptism.
Sorry, Steve. I’m neither close-minded nor a skeptic. And I’m surprised
at you for displaying this rather insipid Altism. If you like, I’ll send
you the stuff on ubiquinone and CHF since you apparently find this so
interesting.
>I mean some of
>those 770 studies might be clinical studies – tell us all about it, if in
>fact you have any actual interest in actually investigating the evidence
>for these claims.
There was no mention of ‘clinical studies’ or CHF in the article to which
I responded which is exactly why I wrote what I wrote. It is the deliberate
and over-enthusiastic "extrapolation" (to be euphemistic) of bits and
pieces of those 770 studies into the ‘Zone of Infinite Possibility’ as
characterized by the *KEYWORDS* "Miracle, Nutrient, and Fountain of Youth"
that I found inappropriate and dishonest. You are, of course, entitled to
think otherwise and dismiss this as "close-minded" and "skeptical."
JB.
In article <3j3n2e$…@agate.berkeley.edu>,
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
John Badanes <rom…@uclink.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Steve Dunn:
> >Yes well as you know, medical databases are not going to index things
> >under "micracle" or "fountain of youth".
>Clearly, Steve, you haven’t responded to a word I wrote. Thanks (geesh!)
>Of course I know that Pycnogenolesque, SBGAlgaesque, Kombuchesque, and
>yes…CoQ10-esque Claims wouldn’t appear in a medical database. That’s why
>I did the Medline search using the _following_ two references which had
>been *appropriately* ‘doubted’ by an MHA poster, since they appeared to be
>no different than any of the "It Works" stuff that seems to be so prolific
>and at-home here in this newsgroup.
> References:
> >: 1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
> >: 2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
Reference #1 is a book I believe and certainly wouldn’t appear in
MedLine, #2 is obviously a propular book or article. Now then I think I
understand – you were merely trying to point out that popular books are
not legitimate references. Well I disagree, actually. This forum is not a
scientific paper, it’s a discussion group and mentioning popular books is
certainly reasonable as a reference. I rather suspect by your MedLine fun
and games that you were judging these books by their titles, which in
CyberSpace double as their cover. If you want to dispute the legitimacy
of these books, unfortunately, you will have to refer to their actual
contents not just their titles. I have never seen either of them BTW, and
don’t specifically defend them – and yes titles with "miracle" and
"fountain of youth" do not inspire confidence in me either. But this is
not the basis for any sort of attack. The contents of the books are the
only reasonable basis for such, and you have not taken the time to
investigate.
>That’s right, Steve…read it. "Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10…our
>Fountain of Youth." While you may be in favor of "Magnets for Cancer"…I’m
>not. And if you object to being characterized as an Advocate for these
>*kinds* of claims, then give some thought as to what you found objectionable
Stop right there pal. I’m a cancer patient who’s spent much of the last
five years researching cancer treatments. Accusing me of being in favor
"magnets for cancer" amounts to character assanination as far as I’m
concerned. Especially considering that I have never mentioned such a thing
in any posting in any forum. Please think about what you are writing
before posting it to the world, and please refrain from unwarranted
personal attacks.
-Steve Dunn
The Snyder-Dunns (snyd…@ucsub.Colorado.EDU) wrote:
:
: Colin: I think it’s a bit disingenuous of you to ask for references on
: Co-Enzyme Q10 as if you had never heard of such a thing even though I
: mailed you the results of a MedLine search on CoQ10 and heart failure
: several weeks ago. This search turned up eight or ten studies, some
: randomized and some involving more than a thousand patients. And no
: significant side effects either.
:
: -Steve Dunn
I am very aware and grateful for the references you provided from
your Medline search.
The request I have just made is for specific references for the
statements made in the gordie.tong article.
>: References:
>: 1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
>: 2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
>These references are incomplete where were these articles published ?
All that is given is the title and the authors – those are
insufficient. You need to know where to find the articles.
>: Used as cardiac medicine in Japan since 1974 (six million users
>: daily!)
>In standard medical practice ?
That is a very strong statement to make without clarification or
references. CoQ10 may well have been used in Alternative Medicine
but what is the evidence for its use in Japanese standard medical
practice since 1974 ?
That’s all I asked for – quite seperate issues from the data you
obtained in your Medline search, which did not refer to the above
statements or articles.
I was not aware that my post gave the impression that I had never
heard of CoQ10. I have made several postings on CoQ10 earlier in
sci.med but only very recently in misc.health.alternative where
these CoQ10 articles have been appearing.
Bye,
<<I’m primarily interested in CoQ10 and peridontal disease. I know that
there were at least a couple of studies; do you have any more info?>>
These findings were presented at the 7th international symposium on CoQ10
about a year and a half ago. I’m not sure they’ve been published…but you
might check Bliznakov’s book on CoQ10 (referenced in an earlier posting). I
think people broke open a capsule and rubbed it on their gums, then swallowed
the remainder.
John Badanes writes…
<<It is the deliberate
and over-enthusiastic "extrapolation" (to be euphemistic) of bits and
pieces of those 770 studies into the ‘Zone of Infinite Possibility’ as
characterized by the *KEYWORDS* "Miracle, Nutrient, and Fountain of Youth"
that I found inappropriate and dishonest.>>
Coenzyme Q10: The Miracle Nutrient and Coenzyme Q10: Is It Our New Fountain
of Youth? are the titles of two paperback books, not scientific papers. Blame
the publishers if you don’t like them. BUT…read the medical literature (as
I have done and do). Geez, I’ve given you enough citations over the past
couple of weeks or so. Get thee to a medical library and quitcherbitchin!
Jack
>: References:
>: 1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
>: 2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
>These references are incomplete where were these articles published ?
All that is given is the title and the authors – those are
insufficient. You need to know where to find the articles.
Bliznakov’s book was published by Bantam, 1987. At least 9 printings since
then.
Lee’s book was published by Keats. The Bliznakov book is better.
>: Used as cardiac medicine in Japan since 1974 (six million users
>: daily!)
>In standard medical practice ?
That is a very strong statement to make without clarification or
references. CoQ10 may well have been used in Alternative Medicine
but what is the evidence for its use in Japanese standard medical
practice since 1974 ?
Sorry, even I will dispute the 1974 date. I think the first human trial of
CoQ10 and heart failure was circa 1981/82 at the University of Texas, Austin.
It’s possible it was just the first human trial in the U.S. If my memory
serves me, the Japanese preceded this research with animal studies.However,
my understanding is that this "nutrient" is the treatment of choice for heart
failure in Japan and a a number of European nations. CoQ10 was discovered
and patented in the US, by the way, and the patent was sold to a Japanese
pharmaceutical company because no one saw the potential.
Jack
Jack_J._Chal…@ortel.org (Jack J. Challem) writes:
><<I’m primarily interested in CoQ10 and peridontal disease. I know that
>there were at least a couple of studies; do you have any more info?>>
>These findings were presented at the 7th international symposium on CoQ10
>about a year and a half ago. I’m not sure they’ve been published…but you
>might check Bliznakov’s book on CoQ10 (referenced in an earlier posting). I
>think people broke open a capsule and rubbed it on their gums, then
swallowed
>the remainder.
Thanks, I’ll try to follow it up. I’m not too interested in
non-published, non-peer reviewed articles, however.
That’s really too bad. Many, many discoveries in medicine begin as an
anecodal discovery. Also, a presentation at a medical meeting is often
considered a form of publication to peers. ‘Hope your teeth feel better.
(Wonder is stubborness has been proven to be a cure for periodontal disease,
eh?)
Jack
In message ID <3j6f7e$…@southern.co.nz> on 3/3/95, Colin Douthwaite wrote:
: >: Used as cardiac medicine in Japan since 1974 (six million users
: >: daily!)
: >
: >In standard medical practice ?
:
: That is a very strong statement to make without clarification or
: references. CoQ10 may well have been used in Alternative Medicine
: but what is the evidence for its use in Japanese standard medical
: practice since 1974 ?
It is used by consumers, OTC. I didn’t like the claims in the original post,
but held off countering their presumptuous style due to overall boredom.
P_Iann…@lamg.com (Paul Iannone, P.O.B. 66843, L.A., CA 90066).
Steve Dunn makes some good points…
<<Yes well as you know, medical databases are not going to index things
under "micracle" or "fountain of youth". The previous poster mentioned a
number of specific conditions for which this substance may be of benefit.
If you want to refute him, then why don’t you actually dig in to the facts
instead of playing ludicrous wordgames with MedLine. One condition for
which the evidence it quite good is congestive heart failure. I think
that’s a lot more interesting than close-minded skeptism. I mean some of
those 770 studies might be clinical studies – tell us all about it, if in
fact you have any actual interest in actually investigating the evidence
for these claims.>>
I don’t think any of us relish being a de facto, unpaid medical reference
librarian. A simple Medline search of <<coenzyme Q10>> will bring the desired
results. Or maybe all the research, including the double-blinds, are just too
much for some people to pore over.
Some of the refereces follow. Laziness and rationalizing are not cool.
***
Coenzyme Q10: More Evidence That This Vitamin-Like Nutrient Improves Heart
Function
* 1994 By Jack Challem. All rights reserved. From The Nutrition Reporter*
newsletter, March 1994. Any electronic or other reproduction must be
accompanied by this copyright notice.
If anyone doubts the value of coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) in cardiomyopathy and
heart failure, he need only read through a recent supplement to the journal
Clinical Investigator(Aug. 1993;71S). The supplement describes the
proceedings of the seventh annual international symposium on CoQ10, held in
Denmark.
Some highlights:
* In a study of 1,715 outpatients with heart failure, modest doses of CoQ10
eased a variety of symptoms, including shortness of breath, palpitations,
elevated diastolic blood pressure, and fluid retention in the lungs. Prof.
M. Lampertico of Milan, Italy, gave patients 50 mg CoQ10 for four weeks.
"The rate of improvement and the low number of side effects in this large
group of patients demonstrate that despite some methodological limitations in
the study design and the short period of treatment… coenzyme Q10…led to
an improvement in the signs and symptoms of heart failure and in the quality
of life." (71S:129-133).
* Twenty-five hundred heart failure patients at 173 Italian medical centers
were given 50 to 150 mg CoQ10 daily for three months. An analysis of 1,113
patients showed that 80 percent of them had some type of improvement.
Cyanosis (skin discoloration resulting from reduced hemoglobin in the blood)
improved in 81 percent of the patients. In addition, 76.9 percent had
reduced edema and 75.7 percent had fewer palpitations. (71S:145-9)
* A 12-month double-blind study compared 319 patients taking CoQ10 (2 mg/kg
body weight) with 322 taking a placebo. Only 73 of the patients receiving
CoQ10 required hospitalization, compared with 118 of those taking the dummy
pills. Prof. B. Trimarco Napoli, Italy, found that CoQ10 reduced
complications of heart failure as well as the need for hospitalization.
(71S:134-6)
What many people overlook is that CoQ10 is a nutrient, not a drug. Karl
Folkers, M.D., Ph.D., one of the pioneering CoQ10 researchers, acknowledged
in the symposium’s introductory remarks that naming the substance a
"coenzyme" was a mistake. "In retrospect, as of 1992," he wrote, "had we
called the orange molecule ‘vitamin Q,’ much subsequent confusion would have
been avoided…"
As a nutrient, CoQ10 is abundant in organ meats, such as heart, liver, and
kidneys. It’s also found in vegetables, though in trace amounts. The body
can produce its own CoQ10, but it’s not a simple process.
"There are a minimum of 17 reaction steps which occur in human tissue to
yield CoQ10 from the amino acid phenylalanine, and acetyl-CoA," explained
Folkers (71S:51-54). "Many of these 17 steps indispensably require known
vitamins and coenzymes, including…vitamin B6 as pyridoxial-5′-phosphate,
vitamin C, vitamin B2, folic acid and vitamin B12 coenzymes, niacinamide,
pantothenic acid and other essential nutrients and trace elements."
In conclusion, he wrote, "Historically, cardiovascular drugs were developed
by the pharmaceutical companies to treat heart failure before CoQ10 was
discovered….Because CoQ10 has the organic structural specificity of a
vitamin, not a single one of these cardiovascular drugs can biochemically
function like CoQ10….
"Today CoQ10 is available and has been proved to be specific to correct the
deficiency in heart failure and to be clinically effective and safe for
therapy. Apart from the regulations of the United States Food and Drug
Administrtation, one may question the intellectual ethics for cardiologists
and physicians to prescribe any cardiovascular drug in the absence of therapy
with CoQ10 because no such drug can correct a CoQ10 deficiency."
RED ALERT *** BRIEF ADVERTISING AHEAD *** RED ALERT
The Nutrition Reporter newsletter, published every month except August and
December, summarizes (with full references) recent medical journal articles
on vitamins and other nutrients. Subscriptions: $24 US, $43 Canada, and $38
in US funds for all other countries. Sample issue $3. Write to The Nutrition
Reporter, Post Office Box 5505, Aloha OR 97006 USA. (The Nutrition Reporter
is NOT published by a vitamin company.)
Jim Zisfein (BMGT…@prodigy.com) wrote:
: >: – Promotes healthy heart and circulatory systems
: >: – Lowers blood pressure
: >: – Strengthens immune system
: >: – Increases energy
: >: – Slows down the aging process
: >: – promotes vibrant sexuality
: >: – Prevents cell damage that is caused by lack of oxygen
: >: – reduces toxic side effectsfrom many drugs
: >: – Dramatically improves perodontal (gum) disease
: >: – Aids weight loss
: This stuff is worthless. Check out the latest issue of Nutrition Action
: Health Letter (CSPI) for a critical review.
——————————————————————–
The current issue of Nutrition Action Health Letter (published
by the Center for Science in Public Interest) has a brief article on
CoQ10. The following ia a synopsis:
"There hasn’t been enough good research to tell if CoQ10 helps
people with congestive heart failure, cardiomyopathy, or HIV.
There is no solid evidence that it protects the heart or boosts
the energy level of healthy people, or that it delays aging.
CoQ10 appears to be safe, even at high doses.
CoQ10 that comes mixed with oil in softgels is far better
absorbed than CoQ10 in dry form in tablets or capsules, say
researchers. ’People are wasting their money on the dry
stuff,’ says coenzyme Q10 discoverer Fred Cane, a retired
biology professor at Purdue University."
Reference:
Nutrition Action Health Letter (Center for Science in the Public
Interest) March 1995 – Volume22/Number 2, pp. 8-9.
——————————————————————–
Bye,
Colin_Douthwa…@equinox.gen.nz (Colin Douthwaite) writes:
> The current issue of Nutrition Action Health Letter (published
>by the Center for Science in Public Interest) has a brief article on
>CoQ10. The following ia a synopsis:
> "There hasn’t been enough good research to tell if CoQ10 helps
> people with congestive heart failure, cardiomyopathy, or HIV.
> There is no solid evidence that it protects the heart or boosts
> the energy level of healthy people, or that it delays aging.
> CoQ10 that comes mixed with oil in softgels is far better
> absorbed than CoQ10 in dry form in tablets or capsules, say
> researchers. ’People are wasting their money on the dry
> stuff,’ says coenzyme Q10 discoverer Fred Cane, a retired
> biology professor at Purdue University."
The last paragraph seems to contradict the first, since it states that the
oil form is "better" and _not_ a waste of money compared to the dry form.
This implies that it is better for some therapeutic need. So what IS it
good for, according to the article?
jon
In article <3jdj20$…@southern.co.nz>,
Colin Douthwaite <Colin_Douthwa…@equinox.gen.nz> wrote:
>No one has yet come up with references supporting the statement of
>gordie.t…@dafbbs.com dated Sun, 12 Feb 95 :
>> Subject: COENZYME Q10
>> Used as cardiac medicine in Japan since 1974 (six million users daily!)
>Whilst there are references to trials and studies on CoQ10 in Japan
>I don’t think these show that it has been used in standard medical
>practice there since 1974.
One reason it might be hard to come up with references to support this
would be that it is not true! I think you are quite right about the 1974
date, and I don’t know if this is standard medical practice in Japan or
not. What I really care about is WHETHER IT WORKS. The references I culled
from MedLine would seem to indicate rather clearly that it does work for
congestive heart failure. So I’m just not all that impressed with people
making a big hulabaloo about what the Japanese do since when, or about
whether they can find "miracle" or "fountain of youth" in MedLine. That’s
because I think that what counts is the actual evidence. But I suppose
that’s just my personal bias.
-Steve Dunn
PS: To be clear, I am not the poster of the article giving the 1974 date,
and making claims about Japanese medical practice.
Colin relates from the Nutrition Action Health Letter (published
by the Center for Science in the Public Interest)…
<<"There hasn’t been enough good research to tell if CoQ10 helps
people with congestive heart failure, cardiomyopathy, or HIV.
There is no solid evidence that it protects the heart or boosts
the energy level of healthy people, or that it delays aging. >>
This is starting to get a little tiresome, mainly because I get tired of
people who are too lazy to read the literature. Not necessarily you, Colin.
But the Center for Science in the Public Interest. It’s all in the medical
literature, plenty of studies on congestive heart failure and cariomyopathy.
I wonder if the Center even talked to a physician who uses it? This reminds
me of how everyone, it seemed, in the medical establishment parroted the line
that vitamin E was worthless and would produce only expensive urine–until
Stampfer and Rimm published their two articles in the New England Journal of
Medicine two years ago. Now, doctors are crazy about it (apparently, they
hadn’t paid attention to the journal articles on vitamin E for the past 50
years), and a hospital outcomes study found that routine vitamin E
consumption would reduce US health care costs by an estimated $7 billion
dollars. It’s the same story with CoQ10.
Yawn. Wake me up when this is over. Jack
Jack J. Challem (Jack_J._Chal…@ortel.org) wrote:
: Steve Dunn makes some good points…
: <<Yes well as you know, medical databases are not going to index things
: under "micracle" or "fountain of youth". The previous poster mentioned a
: number of specific conditions for which this substance may be of benefit.
: If you want to refute him, then why don’t you actually dig in to the facts
: instead of playing ludicrous wordgames with MedLine. One condition for
: which the evidence it quite good is congestive heart failure. I think
: that’s a lot more interesting than close-minded skeptism. I mean some of
: those 770 studies might be clinical studies – tell us all about it, if in
: fact you have any actual interest in actually investigating the evidence
: for these claims.>>
: I don’t think any of us relish being a de facto, unpaid medical reference
: librarian. A simple Medline search of <<coenzyme Q10>> will bring the desired
: results. Or maybe all the research, including the double-blinds, are just too
: much for some people to pore over.
:
: Some of the refereces follow. Laziness and rationalizing are not cool.
:
: ***
I am not sure why all this argument has developed over a request
to provide specific references for:
: References:
#1. The Miracle Nutrient: Coenzyme Q10, by Bliznakov, M.D. and Hunt.
#2. Coenzyme Q10, Is it our New Fountain of Youth? by William Lee, Ph.D.
Steve Dunn said:
> Reference #1 is a book I believe and certainly wouldn’t appear in
> MedLine, #2 is obviously a popular book or article.
Jack Challem said:
> The Bliznakov book was first published by Bantam in 1986; ninth
> printing in 1989. It contains dozens of references to the literature.
> Don’t be lazy. You can look these up easily enough.
OK, thanks, but I wonder if my local Public Librarian will agree
with you
( BTW I have to agree that neither of these sources would have been
revealed by a Medline search )
re: second requested reference
——————————
No one has yet come up with references supporting the statement of
gordie.t…@dafbbs.com dated Sun, 12 Feb 95 :
> Subject: COENZYME Q10
> Used as cardiac medicine in Japan since 1974 (six million users daily!)
Whilst there are references to trials and studies on CoQ10 in Japan
I don’t think these show that it has been used in standard medical
practice there since 1974.
Bye,
In message ID <3je95o$…@CUBoulder.Colorado.EDU> on 3/6/95, The Snyder-Dunns
wrote:
: What I really care about is WHETHER IT WORKS. The references I
: culled from MedLine would seem to indicate rather clearly that it
: does work for congestive heart failure. So I’m just not all that
: impressed with people making a big hulabaloo about what the Japanese
: do since when, or about whether they can find "miracle" or "fountain
: of youth" in MedLine. That’s because I think that what counts is the
: actual evidence. But I suppose that’s just my personal bias.
:
: -Steve Dunn
Then you should also note that these studies generally do not suggest that
CoQ10 _prevents_ any disease. Patients with cardiopathy are found to have had
deficient CoQ10 in their heart muscle…treatment with CoQ10 has improved
that status and the disease. But the original poster is arguing that CoQ10
supplementation prevents disease, and I don’t think that is demonstrated as
of yet (except theoretically as an antioxidant).
P_Iann…@lamg.com (Paul Iannone, P.O.B. 66843, L.A., CA 90066).
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
In article <1334974.809…@lamg.com>, Paul Iannone <P_Iann…@lamg.com> wrote:
>In message ID <3je95o$…@CUBoulder.Colorado.EDU> on 3/6/95, The Snyder-Dunns
>wrote:
>: What I really care about is WHETHER IT WORKS. The references I
>: culled from MedLine would seem to indicate rather clearly that it
>: does work for congestive heart failure. So I’m just not all that
>: impressed with people making a big hulabaloo about what the Japanese
>: do since when, or about whether they can find "miracle" or "fountain
>: of youth" in MedLine. That’s because I think that what counts is the
>: actual evidence. But I suppose that’s just my personal bias.
>:
>: -Steve Dunn
>Then you should also note that these studies generally do not suggest that
>CoQ10 _prevents_ any disease. Patients with cardiopathy are found to have had
>deficient CoQ10 in their heart muscle…treatment with CoQ10 has improved
>that status and the disease. But the original poster is arguing that CoQ10
>supplementation prevents disease, and I don’t think that is demonstrated as
>of yet (except theoretically as an antioxidant).
I’ve really only looked into the use of this in congestive heart disease
and cardiomyopathy for which the evidence is strong, and in cancer for
which the evidence it very weak, so I would not be surprised if you are
entirely correct about preventative value.
If I recall correctly, the original poster’s article contained a
remarkable panopoly of claims that elicited skeptical dismissals that
CoQ10 could have any valid use. I am merely arguing that this is not the
case, but what I have not said yet, but should, is that I agree that the
original poster’s list of claimed benefits was certainly overblown, and
insupportable.
-Steve Dunn
Steve Dunn writes…
<<If I recall correctly, the original poster’s article contained a
remarkable panopoly of claims that elicited skeptical dismissals that
CoQ10 could have any valid use. I am merely arguing that this is not the
case, but what I have not said yet, but should, is that I agree that the
original poster’s list of claimed benefits was certainly overblown, and
insupportable. >>
I received mail yesterday from a pharmaceutical industry source, someone who
knows what he talks about, who said that CoQ10 is the fifth most commonly
prescribed "drug" in Japan. The indication is for cardiomyopathy.
Jack
In article <3jai1m$…@southern.co.nz>, Colin_Douthwa…@equinox.gen.nz
(Colin Douthwaite) wrote:
> The current issue of Nutrition Action Health Letter (published
> by the Center for Science in Public Interest) has a brief article on
> CoQ10.
Colin: There are those of us that do not consider CSPI an authoritative
reference.
> ‘People are wasting their money on the dry
> stuff,’ says coenzyme Q10 discoverer Fred Cane, a retired
> biology professor at Purdue University."
Pardon me Fred, but there are thousands of preventive medical
practitioners with vast experience who would argue that the dry stuff does
a wham bang job.
–
O for that moment to be now
Or better yet be recent past
And we sit as children on the beach
Laughing at how long it took to pass Czap