Heart Attack | Consumer Product Reviews

Do you recognise the kinship among niacin and cholesterol levels? The answer is that niacin is known to aid lower cholesterol levels. It is also known as vitamin B3. However as there are numerous types and forms of niacin, which is the best niacin cholesterol letting down supplement? What are it is gains and what are it is disadvantages?

The basi thing to recognise is the dissimilar forms of niacin that are just actually tagged as niacin. Its forms include the nicotinic acid, nicotinamide, and inositol hexaniacinate. Each form has dissimilar gains and effects.

Nicotinic acid lowers cholesterol and reduces the risk of heart attack. This comes in a number of types. On the other hand, nicotinamide is a product derived from nicotinic acid. And the last item I want to mention is inositol hexaniacinate which is another version of nicotinic acid which doesn’t develop side effects. It is popular, but I would like to let you know that it is effectiveness in reducing cholesterol is not proven.

The nicotinic acid of niacin has forms that differ in release. The prompt release or IR type releases the acid directly into the blood. Because of it is fast approach, it causes a great deal of side effects. Itching and flushing may be felt once the acid is freed into the blood.

The extended release or ER type is slower than the IR. Its side effects are not as abrupt as the IR type but it may only be purchased with a doctor’s prescription. The last type is the sustained-release nicotinic acid which is put into the blood over a time period. Its side effects are not apparent equated to the other two but the peril of liver failure is high. It is available even without a doctor’s prescription.

Nicotinic acid works by letting down the bad cholesterol and triglycerides while raising the good ones. And once again I would like to mention that the other two forms need further studies to be proven as effective niacin cholesterol letting down products.

In usual the aftermaths of taking nicotinic acid are bad. Various side effects include skin aggravation and flushing, stomach problems, palpitations and changes in blood sugar level. One of the worst side effects is liver ailments.

So if you think that it is a high danger to choose chemically-treated formulas, there is a potpourri of feed productions which comprise niacin cholesterol letting down compounds. Food selections include chicken, beef, liver and kidney products, and dairy productions such as milk and eggs. Vegetables include tomatoes, broccoli, carrots and asparagus. Peanuts and legumes are likewise roots of niacin.

With it is masters and cons, it is now up to you to choose what you want. Either way, there are still a lot of feed choices available in the market.

For more selective information and ideas, please visit us on the web at niacin for cholesterol.

The Great Cholesterol Con

Statins are the so-called “wonder drugs” widely prescribed to lower blood cholesterol levels that assert to offer unparalleled shelter versus heart disease. Many experts assert that they are altogether safe and that they are also capable of preventing a whole series of other conditions. This groundbreaking study discloses the truth behind the hype surrounding statins and reveals a number of primary facts, including that high cholesterol levels do not cause heart disease; that high-fat dietssaturated or otherwisedo not affect blood cholesterol levels; and that for most men and all women the gains offered by statins are negligible at best. Other selective information is likewise provided that shows that statins have a good deal of more side affects than is many times acknowledged. This hard-hitting survey also points a finger at the powerful pharmaceutical industry and an unquestioning medical profession as perpetrators of the for the most part facetious conceptions of good” and bad” cholesterol that are designed to convince millions of humans to spend billions on statins. With clarity and wit, this appeal to mutual sense and scientific fact debunks mutual assumptions on what constitutes a healthful lifestyle and diet, as well as the idea that there is a miracle heal for heart disease.

Review

“[The Great Cholesterol Con] will save you a lot of heartache—LITERALLY!” —Examiner.com

Most helpful customer reviews

128 of 129 people found the following review helpful.
Can lowering cholesterol be worse than cholesterol?
By A reader
If you’ve somehow managed to sidestep the pressure to go on statins, this book will provide you with justification. Kendrick walks you, step by step, through your own physiology and bio-chemistry, and backs his contentions that cholesterol can not be the cause of heart disease by citing and summarizing published studies that bear this out. The book is technical but highly readable thanks to an easy conversational style (if your high school biology teacher had been Kendrick, you’d have understood everything and gotten an A). If you don’t really care about arterial plaques and exactly how they’re formed (and exactly how they’re not) the take-away message is pretty much this: statins are ineffective for women, especially for women over 50 years old, and for anybody over 70 years old. Further, statistical studies may indicate that lowering cholesterol encourages cancer. Many of the points Kendrick makes here are also borne out in Gary Taubes’ excellent “Good Calories, Bad Calories.” Both of these books are recommended.

I also feel somewhat compelled to add this: While doctors will tell you they’ve rarely seen anyone with side effects from statins, among my own circle of middle-aged friends, I know 3 who’ve had serious problems with their livers, one who had some muscles permanently destroyed, one–a usually energetic tennis player– who felt, for the few months he took statins, as though he had the flu, and could barely go to work– and one who was left with ringing in the ears and a facial tic. All of these are listed as side effects of statins, as Kendrick points out.

60 of 62 people found the following review helpful.
Another coffin nail for the fat/cholesterol theory of heart disease
By Paul Bergner
It is remarkable that the fat-cholesterol hypothesis of heart disease gained such an established place in US medicine, culture, and popular consciousness, despite a lack of any -strong- evidence to support the theories (including that “bad cholesterol” causes heart disease) and despite sometimes stronger evidence against the theories. The emergence into broader understanding of insulin resistance around the year 2000 was a watershed in the demise of these two theories. I believe the last two months will be looked back on and viewed as the death of these hypotheses.
Perhaps most important, last week results were published that showed that a drug that lowered LDL (“bad”) cholesterol not only did not prevent heart attacks, but may have increased them. The LDL went down, but not the heart attacks. This fairly well disproves the idea that even “bad” cholesterol is really that “bad” in the first place.
There has also been the appearance of two very well researched books on this topic:
Good Calories Bad Calories by Gary Taubes
The Great Cholesterol Con by Malcolm Kendrick (not the same title from Colpo)
Both are impeccable in their science, both show that the fat/cholesterol theory has been, well, frankly, fraudulent from a scientific point of view. Kendrick was lead author of the 14 Countries Study. He took WHO data on fat consumption and heart disease in a large group of countries. From these he selected the seven countries with the lowest fat consumption, and the seven with the highest fat consumption, and compared the rates of heart disease in the two groups. Every one of the countries with the lowest level of fat consumption had a higher rate of heart disease than any of the countries with the highest fat consumption. Do a double take? Read that again.
Taubes goes as far back as 1846 reviewing the science on the cause and cure of obesity (=carbohydrate consumption). He doesn’t miss a stitch.
Both books describe in detail the scientific errors, and false thinking, that led to the acceptance of both hypotheses as if they were Laws, and “settled science” rather than controversial, from s true scientific point of view, from start to finish. Both make good case studies of the methods of good and bad science.
Now we are all going to have to do psychotherapy to treat our obsessive-compulsive fat/cholesterol delusional phobias. But will anyone REALLY stop buying 2% milk instead of whole, or discarding those luscious fatty skin from their chicken breast? I suggest everyone read these two books as part of their psychotherapeutic process.

70 of 75 people found the following review helpful.
excellent
By Paul
Superb science/medical writing. I was already familiar with a lot of the story about cholesterol misinformation, but I still found it very useful to see the issues dissected one-by-one, with comprehensive references to the relevant research studies. The author is obviously extremely well-read in this area, far beyond the main dietary studies. His final chapter about stress and heart-disease is a must-read for anyone interested in these topics, and the fact that he had been so thorough in the earlier part of the book makes me take his speculations seriously. It comes with a good dose of quirky British (actually Scottish) humor, which I enjoyed a lot.

See all 49 customer reviews…

The Great Cholesterol Con Photo

The Great Cholesterol Con Pic

The Great Cholesterol Con Image

The Great Cholesterol Con Picture