By
Owen R. Fonorow © 2001
The ignorance of modern
cardiology is vast. Medical researchers are now headed down a bizarre path that
subjects trusting heart patients to high-dose
radiation pellets in their arteries!
BARCELONA - High-dose
beta radiation, delivered along with balloon angioplasty or stenting, appears to reduce restenosis at
six months in coronary vessels, Swiss
researchers report. Using a system still under development, doctors at
University Hospital in Geneva, along with colleagues in four other European
centers, tested the feasibility of using intracoronary beta radiation in the
treatment of de novo lesions. They found
beta radiation produced "a significant, dose-dependent inhibitory effect
on restenosis after PTCA (percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty) and a
beneficial effect on remodelling," principal investigator Dr. Vitali Verin
told doctors.
Cardiologists
and heart surgeons are confronted with
serious after effects in their patients due to conventional treatments. Restenosis (plaque reqgrowth) is common
after heart surgery and angioplasty. The American Heart Association estimates
that the coronary arteries re-occlude after surgery in 40% of the patients
under the care of cardiologists. The
new “high tech” way around this problem is to use dose-dependent radiation
to interfere with or perhaps destroy the ability of the intima to heal itself.
This
madness began in 1997, according to the European Society of Cardiology, [VOLUME
35, NO. 33, October 5, 1999], with the work by Dr. Paul Tierstein and
colleagues at Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation in La Jolla, Calif. Tierstein reduced restenosis rates by using
gamma radiation to stop neointimal hyperplasia, a common response to injury of
the vessel wall during angioplasty.
DALLAS,
TX -- Nov. 10, 1998 – Stents reduce restenosis rates significantly over the
past decade, but cardiologists have been somewhat frustrated by the problem of
in-stent restenosis. Now researchers report at the 71st Scientific
Sessions of the American Heart Association in Dallas, TX, say radiation therapy may produce a
dramatic reversal of that emergent problem.
Several
FDA sanctioned studies are now actively investigating whether intra-arterial
radiation (as pellets or “seeds”) improves the success rate of coronary by-pass
operations and angioplasty. We can
surmise from the increasing level of mass desensitization (television news
“reports”) that this procedure will soon be sanctioned by the FDA
.
PRESS
RELEASE Guidant's intravascular
radiotherapy system, developed by the company's Vascular Intervention Group, is
used in conjunction with inter-ventional cardiology procedures that help clear
blocked arteries in the heart. Preliminary clinical data have indicated that
the application of radiation to an
artery in conjunction with interventional treatments has the potential to
subsequently reduce or eliminate restenosis caused by smooth muscle cell
proliferation. Restenosis, the re-narrowing of an artery, remains a major
clinical challenge in interventional
cardiology today.
If
you find this alarming, it gets worse.
The late Linus Pauling used the “cure” word in 1994 describing a vitamin
C and lysine therapy for heart disease. According to Pauling, the lesions that
lead to heart disease are caused by a nutritional deficiency unique to humans.
(CVD is the healing response to a lesion in Pauling’s opinion.) Cardiology as a
profession is silent on the Pauling’s therapy. The same profession that shows
not the slightest interest in studying a claim uttered by one of the worlds
preeminent scientists; a claim based on a Nobel prize in medicine and
scientific proof in animals, is willing
to seriously investigate the effects of high-dose radiation in patients whose
stubborn arteries keep trying to heal themselves.
…
radiotherapy system is designed for patient safety and procedure simplicity and
consists of a source wire, a source delivery unit and a centering catheter. The
source wire is flexible and incorporates
a radioactive isotope into its tip. The delivery unit stores the source
wire when it is not in use and automatically advances and retracts it during a
procedure. The source wire is advanced through the centering catheter, which is
placed across the area to be treated. Extensive animal studies of …
intravascular radiotherapy system, conducted by Dr. Raizner at Baylor, have
demonstrated a significant reduction in proliferation after balloon angioplasty
and stenting.
Has
modern medicine lost its collective mind? Eureka! We can save the patient, all we must do is take away his natural
ability to heal! An argument can
soon be made that in today’s medical wonderland, medicine has metamorphed itself into the antithesis of healing --
by design! It is incomprehensible to
me, a lay person, that any doctors would willing interfere with the natural
healing process simply to make their lucrative surgeries more attractive. And there may be an even more sinister
reason.
One should not be required to prove the obvious. High-dose
intra-arterial radiation treatments are wrong-headed, dangerous, inhumane,
cruel, and would nullify any chance for a nutritional based therapy to
succeed. Certainly the Pauling idea
ought to be thoroughly investigated before we subject heart patients to “high
dose” radiation? Cardiologists seem
much too willing to subject heart patients to a treatment that is more cruel
and unusual than punishments our laws
permit for criminals.
This begs the question: Why is cardiology so far off track? Do cardiologists have eyes? Can they not read? Can they not observe what works and what doesn’t work? Since 1995 we have personally observed
end-stage CVD patients completely “cured” within weeks on the high-dose Pauling
vitamin C/lysine therapy. Pauling used
the word “miraculous” and he was not over stating the effect. By
"cured" we mean that end-stage CVD patients report the complete
cessation of their angina pain, color returns, blood pressure drops, blood flow
increases, blockages disappear, heart rates drop, lipid profiles normalize,
energy increases as does the sense of well being. Patients who had failed now
pass treadmill stress tests without surgery or any other medical intervention.
Patients barely able to walk before adopting the Pauling therapy report that
within months they can dig fence post holes and cut down trees. Some doctors
have even told such patients that new blood vessels have "grown" as
an explanation for the increased blood flow to the coronary arteries feeding
the heart.
Based on our these observations and similar reports, we have little doubt that
the proposed use of "high
dose" radiation particles inside arteries to stop the regrowth of plaque
is at best unethical, and at worst criminal. To the extent intra-arterial
radiation treatments interfere with the ability of the artery to heal normally
(and they must), these radiation treatments make success from the Linus
Pauling/Matthias Rath vitamin C/lysine cure impossible. (Pauling's therapy
relies on the artery healing itself. Radiation would interfere with any
non-invasive therapy that relies on healing, e.g. EDTA Chelation therapy.)
We
sincerely hope that the intra-arterial radiation research is based on
ignorance. Since radiation is being widely studied, it is evidence that
cardiovascular doctors, as a group, are entirely ignorant of the Pauling
unified theory. The question of course
is why? Why are some of the most
educated professionals in our society the most ignorant about the condition
they are supposed to treat on a daily basis?
No
profit oriented drug company will inform cardiologists about the Pauling/Rath
unified theory. So how does the
average nuclear cardiologist learn about it?
Answer: They don’t.
No cardiologist or heart surgeon has ever been informed or heard about
vitamin C and lysine from an official source or respected authority. They do not realize that they can completely
cure their patients in less than 6 months, simply, safely, and with the good
effects becoming pronounced after 2 weeks.
Ignorance
perpetuates itself. Cardiologists can not believe this could be true and they
would not know.
Some
EDTA Chelation doctors are equally as fallible.
The
following summary is based on a large body of astounding research that has been
kept from medical doctors for self-serving economic reasons:
·
Linus
Pauling invented his non-prescription cure for Heart Disease in 1991. He announced it as the cure in 1994.
·
The
protocol is based on knowledge first offered to the world in the 1940s,
culminating in the 1985 Nobel Prize in Medicine. The Pauling therapy is
supported by experimental proof conducted at the Linus Pauling Institute of
Science and Medicine.
·
Early
MDs/scientists (Willis/Paterson) recognized that plaque formation is uniform
and localized. Most surgically removed plaque is within inches of the human
heart where the blood vessels are stretched and bent, implicating high blood
pressures and mechanical stress caused by the heart beat.
·
It
is now generally accepted that atherosclerotic plaques deposit in response to
injury. The 1985 Nobel prize was awarded for the discovery of the Lysine Binding sites. The Unified Theory, relying on the Nobel
prize, and the earlier Willis work, blames mechanical stress fractures (caused
by high blood pressures, stretching and bending, etc.) for the lesion.
·
It
is unlikely that the primary cause of the lesions that lead to heart disease
are caused by "poisons" circulating in the blood because plaques are
not randomly distributed. (Note: In a heart bypass, veins from the leg are used
which are without plaque.)
·
According
to theory, the root cause of
atherosclerotic plaque deposits is a vitamin C deficiency. This specific
deficiency limits our ability to produce the structural super-protein collagen.
·
Heart
disease is unknown in most animal species. Pauling and Rath think humans are less resistant to damage
from the heart beat's mechanical stress than animals because they lack a
specific protein (collagen) caused by a specific vitamin deficiency (ascorbic
acid). A vitamin deficiency impossible in
most animals! Humans must supplement 100 times the RDA of vitamin C to get
the equivalent of what animals generally make in their livers or kidneys.
·
The correct terminology for cardiovascular
(heart) disease is either "chronic" scurvy or "sub clinical" scurvy.
·
Medicine
has been deliberately steered astray about vitamin C since the 1940s.
·
Elevated
cholesterol, elevated homocysteine, and oxidized cholesterol then, are effects,
not the cause of CVD. Sugar intake is more closely correlated to cardiovascular
disease than cholesterol intake.
Pauling
and Rath claim that specific non-toxic substances called Lp(a) binding inhibitors taken orally will prevent and even
dissolve existing atherosclerotic plaque build-ups. Three United States of America
Patents have been granted on the Pauling/Rath method.
The
three primary "Lp(a) binding inhibitor" substances are vitamin C, lysine
and proline.
The
Pauling mega-nutrient therapy to counter Lp(a) increases blood concentrations
of important substances that will:
·
Strengthen
and heal blood vessels,
·
Lower
Lp(a) blood levels and keep Lp(a) levels low, and
·
Inhibit
the binding of Lp(a) molecules to the walls of blood vessels.
Lysine
and proline work to unbind Lp(a) from the arterial wall.
Unlike
ordinary drugs, there are no health risks.
Linus
Pauling recorded a video in 1992 that describes these findings.
There
is an awesome elegance that these binding inhibitors (vitamin C/lysine)
are
completely non-toxic, yet they have been shown to dissolve plaque in vitro. They are also the basic
building blocks of collagen. The unified theory places poor collagen production
at the root of the heart disease
problem. Therefore, the Pauling therapy
not only melts plaque, but it treats the root cause: inadequate collagen
production.
If,
as Pauling and Rath claim, plaque formation is a surrogate healing process,
doctors should not be surprised that plaque reoccurs after invasive surgery.
Mainstream medical science has known since 1989 that only Lp(a) (not LDL cholesterol) binds to form
atherosclerotic plaques. Pauling and Rath, expanding on these findings,
identified Lp(a) as an evolutionary surrogate for low vitamin C in humans. Not
only will high dose intra-arterial radiation interfere with the healing of
chronic scurvy, the great risk nuclear
cardiologists subject these patients to is completely unnecessary. Patients who
are subjected to radiation will not be able to heal normally, and they will
likely suffer premature death. If the patients live, how can anyone know the
dangerous side effects that radiation may itself cause (e.g. cancer.)
The
doctors who use radiation to stop restenosis do not really understand the
disease they are charged to treat. If
they do understand, then they are acting in a criminal manner. We conclude, therefore, that the true nature
of heart disease is unknown to cardiologists who would otherwise know that
restenosis is completely preventable and that high-dose radiation procedures
are completely unnecessary.
Damaged
arteries must heal. When the surgeon cuts (by pass) or damages the arteries
(angioplasty) how can they be surprised that the scab (atherosclerotic plaques)
reforms. Any therapy that unnaturally
interferes with this healing process (beta radiation) poses such a great risk
to the overall health of the patient, that there can be no ethical basis for it
what-so-ever.
The
average person might assume that since there is no known harm, cardiologists
would have nothing to lose by trying a safe nutritional therapy. The average
person has a lot to learn.
Cardiologists believe that their profession is based on strict science
and they are taught that there is no value in nutritional therapies, especially
vitamin C. The great scientist Linus
Pauling himself argued that a full clinical trial was not necessary in this
case with such obvious positive results and so little downside. If Pauling is
wrong, no harm done. If cardiology is
wrong, millions have died needlessly.
In
1995, we didn’t know whether Pauling was right or wrong. So we made it a point to ask the thousands
of callers about their daily vitamin C intake. Those with severe, end-stage CVD
say they did not supplement, or they stopped their supplemental vitamin C. We estimate that of the 1000 to 2000 callers
since 1995 with severe heart disease, 95% claimed to have taken less than 500
mg. I have never found any person who
takes more than 10 g (10,000 mg) of vitamin C daily who has any evidence of
heart disease (and neither has Life Extension Foundation. LEF recently ran such a study with high
vitamin C users. See www.lef.org/featured-articles/may2000_vitamin_c_01.html)
What
of all the heart patients in hospitals? Cardiologists routinely tell their
patients that there is no value in vitamin C. Does any reader believe that any
patient under the care of a modern cardiologist is supplementing vitamin C?
The
results of our informal survey have been so overwhelming one-sided, we conclude
that professional cardiologists are blinded, either by economic and or
political considerations. (It is interesting that retired cardiologists are not so blind.) That vitamin C is the leading risk factor in heart disease is
easily proven, shown by countless studies, but completely ignored by
cardiology.
Any
person connected with alternative medicine long enough has become paranoid, and
although hard for even us to believe, maybe there is an ulterior motive
behind the on-going intra-arterial radiation research? The real problem
facing cardiology is that the good effects of the Pauling therapy are rapid,
pronounced, dramatic, and without downside.
The
American heart association estimates that the cost of heart disease was 326
billion dollars in the year 2000. This
includes time lost at work, etc. If
medicine had acted on the Pauling claims back in 1994 or 1995, more than a
million lives and trillions of dollars would have been saved. This makes ignoring the Pauling/Rath heart
disease cure the most costly suppression ever perpetrated by the
medico-pharmaceutical complex on humankind.
And now that knowledge of the Pauling cure is rapidly spreading, thanks
to the Internet, nuclear cardiologists may have found a clever way to preserve
the cash cow: Intra-arterial high dose radiation. So we can’t help thinking that the real purpose behind the push to
sanction “high dose” intra-arterial radiation is to keep heart patients
perpetually ill. For only in this way can cardiologists guarantee a
lucrative income stream that is in great danger of drying up -- soon. Cardiology simply can not compete head on
with the Pauling and vitamin supplemented Chelation therapies. We must say no. It bears repeating: It would
be impossible to cure someone who has been given a radiation dose to stop healing, and maybe that is the point? To
make these people incurable? What other
explanation is there?
It
is important to keep the danger of inter-arterial radiation in perspective
using the Pauling/Rath Unified theory. If patients are not getting enough
vitamin C to produce collagen, and their blood vessels are wearing down, then
the Lp(a) plaque is of great benefit to them. Simply removing plaque (angioplasty)
without restoring the vein or artery to health is like tearing a scab off a
wound. Intra-arterial radiation only compounds this basic theoretical
problem. One should not remove the scab
until after
the
tissue underneath has started healing. The body needs sufficient vitamin
C
so veins and arteries can heal. If
radiation works because it destroys the ability to heal, we have the worst of
all possible worlds. But of course, the
perfect means to expand the cardiologist bank account.
Who
cares about the patient? Apparently the
CVD patient’s health takes a back seat to the health of the technician who
applies the radiation!
"Beta
radiation travels a short distance
in the artery and does not leave the body, so it has a great attraction for the operator, because there's no radiation
exposure," said Dr. Spencer King, professor of medicine (cardiology)
and radiology at Emory University Medical Centre in Atlanta
Dear
reader be advised, if your doctor prescribes a therapy such as intra-aterial
radiation that interferes with your ability to heal, then the Pauling Therapy
and any other complimentary therapy (i.e. EDTA Chelation) that works by
healing, WILL NOT WORK for you, and may never work. Our advice: Avoid radiation
for restenosis at all costs. A doctor who advises it should be considered
extremely ignorant, incompetent, or worse. Tell him you would prefer to try the
Pauling therapy first. If he refuses,
and insists on a radioactive approach, I would report the doctor to criminal
authorities.
If
you have already been subjected to radiation therapy, and are interested
in
a class action lawsuit to halt this dangerous procedure, contact us.
Owen
Fonorow
www.Paulingtherapy.com
fonorow@foxvalley.net
Fax:
630-416-1309
REFERENCES
Teirstein
PS, Massullo V, Jani S, et al. Catheter-based radiotherapy to inhibit
restenosis after coronary stenting. N EnglJ Med 1997;336:1697-703.
Condado
JA, Waksman R, Gurdiel O, et al. Long-term angiographic and clinical outcome
after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and intracoronary
radiation therapy in humans. Circulation 1997;96:727-32.
King
SB, Williams DO, Chougule P, et al. Intracoronary beta radiation inhibits late
lumen loss following balloon angioplasty: results of the BERT-1 trial
[abstract]. Circulation 1997;96:1-219.
"The
Beta Energy Restenosis Trial: Update Results and Subgroup Analysis" King, Spencer; Klein, J.;
Williams, David; Bonan, Raoul; Waksman, Ron; Crocker,
Ian.)
Pauling,
Linus, Heart Disease Video: Unified Theory of Cause and Cure, 1993.