Cholesterol Lowering Statin Drugs for Women Just Say No by Jeffrey Dach MD

January 30, 2008


Cholesterol Lowering Statin Drugs for Women

        Just Say No to Statin Drugs by Jeffrey Dach MD

    Click Here for the Original Version of this Article

__________________________________________

A Woman on Lipitor With Leg Muscle Pain

Sally, a 56 year old retired real estate agent, came to see me in the office with the chief complaint of hot flashes, night sweats, mood disturbance and weight gain which are all fairly typical post-menopausal symptoms. In addition, she also had leg pain for the past 3 months, which prevented exercising. Lumbar Spine MRI Scan to evaluate the leg pain showed only a bulging disk and was otherwise negative. About 6 months ago, Sally’s cholesterol was 245, and her cardiologist prescribed a cholesterol lowering statin drug, Lipitor. Sally has no history of heart disease, does not smoke, eats a healthy diet, and takes a few vitamins, and doesn’t supplement with CoEnzyme Q-10.


 MRI Scan of Leg Muscles

I explained to Sally that her leg pain was a well known adverse side effect of Lipitor, a valid reason for stopping the drug. The leg muscle pain is caused by Lipitor depletion of Co-Enzyme Q 10, which is important for energy production in the muscle cells. I suggested to Sally that she supplement with CO-enzyme Q-10, and strongly recommended stopping the statin drug.

What is the definition of elevated cholesterol?

When I was a medical student in 1976, normal cholesterol was 240. However, this was changed in 1993 to the new guidelines.

New Cholesterol Guidelines in 1993

above 240: high
above 200: borderline high
below 200: desirable

The cholesterol guidelines were revised downward to 200 by a committee of 9 doctors, 8 of whom were receiving money from statin drug companies. There was no science behind this revision. (1 ) (2) (3)

A 2006 paper in the Annals of Internal Medicine (October 3, 2006; 145(7): 520-530)  argues that there is NO EVIDENCE to support the target numbers outlined by the Cholesterol Guidelines panel, challenging the mainstream medical belief that lower cholesterol levels are always better. “This paper is not arguing that there is strong evidence against the LDL targets, but rather that there’s no evidence for them,” said Dr. Rodney A. Hayward, a study author,

The laboratory will flag any cholesterol test results above 200 as abnormal. Please ignore this. In reality a cholesterol reading above 200 and below 240 is normal. If above 240, then nutritional supplements containing niacin, omega 3 oils, and plant sterols are used to bring it down to 240. (4)

Mary Enig says: "Blood cholesterol levels between 200 and 240 mg/dl are normal. These levels have always been normal. In older women, serum cholesterol levels greatly above these numbers are also quite normal, and in fact they have been shown to be associated with longevity. Since 1984, however, in the United States and other parts of the western world, these normal numbers have been treated as if they were an indication of a disease in progress or a potential for disease in the future. (4)

A cholesterol of 240 is NOT ELEVATED. This is normal and compatible with good health.

Medical Terrorism
through Drug Company Advertising:


The reality is that there is no mortality benefit from lowering cholersterol with statin drugs: Both lines on the chart below are superimposed meaning the number of deaths in the statin drug group was identical to the number of deaths in the placebo group. Chart Courtesy of (Eddie Vos).

 
Just say NO When Your Doctor Prescribes a Statin Drug.

 

The truth is that NO woman should ever be given Lipitor or any other statin drug for elevated cholesterol. Dr. Rose says, "There are no statin trials with even the slightest hint of a mortality benefit in women and women should be told so". (5). In other words, statin drugs don’t work for women.

No Female Should Ever Take A Statin Drug

Let me repeat that so this is very clear: No female should ever take a statin drug to lower cholesterol for primary prevention of heart disease. They don’t work for women. Women who take Lipitor or any other statin drug to lower cholesterol do not live any longer than women who don’t take the drug. There is no benefit in terms of prolonging your life for women. On the other hand, there are plenty of adverse side effects which include muscle pain, cognitive impairment, neuropathy, congestive heart failure, transient global amnesia and dementia.

Why do Cardiologists Give Statin Drugs to Women?

Why do cardiologists and mainstream docs continue to prescribe statins to women? It is very simple, they succumb to the drug company “spin” from the drug reps and the medical journals which are slanted in favor of statins. In addition, the mainstream doctors succumb to patient’s demands and expectations for the drugs after seeing the celebrity TV ads.

Are You Still Not Convinced?

Mary Enig writes, "No study has shown a significant reduction in mortality in women treated with statins. The University of British Columbia Therapeutics Initiative came to the same conclusion, with the finding that statins offer no benefit to women for prevention of heart disease." (6) (7)

Are you still not convinced that women should NOT take Statin Drugs? Don’t take my word for it. Take the word of Judith Walsh MD who wrote this in JAMA, 4 years ago in an article entitled, Treatment of Hyperlipidemia in Women: "For women without cardiovascular disease, lipid lowering does not affect total or CHD (Cardiovascular Heart Disease) mortality. Lipid lowering may reduce CHD events, but current evidence is insufficient to determine this conclusively. For women with known cardiovascular disease, treatment of hyperlipidemia is effective in reducing CHD events, CHD mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and revascularization, but it does not affect total mortality."(8)

Translation: Cholesterol lowering with statin drugs does not reduce total mortality in women, PERIOD. It doesn’t reduce mortality in women without heart disease, called primary prevention. It doesn’t reduce mortality in women with heart disease, called secondary prevention.

Still not convinced?, then read this article by Malcolm McKendrick, a doctor in England, in the British Medical Journal, May 2007, entitled: "Should Women be Offered Cholesterol Lowering Drugs? NO"."(8A) "To date, none of the large trials of secondary prevention with statins has shown a reduction in overall mortality in women. Perhaps more critically, the primary prevention trials have shown neither an overall mortality benefit, nor even a reduction in cardiovascular end points in women. This raises the important question whether women should be prescribed statins at all. I believe that the answer is clearly no."(8A)

Note: Secondary prevention means women with known heart disease. Primary prevention means women without known heart disease.

Still not convinced ? Then read this June 2007 article by Electra Kaczorowski, of the National Women’s Health Network (9) "There is currently no indication that women of any age or any risk level will benefit from taking statins to prevent CHD and other heart conditions – yet this is precisely how statins are being marketed to women. "(9)

Still not convinced ? Are statin drugs good for anybody? Read this review article by Joel Kauffman PhD, Dec 2003, in which the best statin trial results (the HPS simvastatin study) had an absolute reduction of all cause death rate of 0.38% per year. Yet this performance was inferior to the less expensive alternatives of buffered aspirin or Omega-3 oils.(10)

Quote: "The most favorable (statin) trial with seemingly impeccable reporting and minimal financial conflict of interest was the Heart Protection Study (HPS), on simvastatin for 5 years, in which secondary prevention in men (86% of patients) of any unwanted vascular event gave a RR = 0.76 (5.5% absolute, 1.1% per year), and an all-cause death rate drop of 0.38% per year.16 Since this performance is inferior to that of either Bufferin in men or omega-3 fatty acid supplements, both of which have lesser side-effects, and are far less expensive, the logic of prescribing simvastatin seems faulty.".(10)

Still not convinced ? Then read this article by Harriett Rosenberg from Women and Health Protection from June 2007, Do Cholesteriol Lowering Drugs Benefit Women ? (11) Evidence for Caution: Women and statin use By Harriet Rosenberg Danielle Allard Women and Health Protection June 2007

Quote: "Our review of these fields identifies a troubling disjuncture between the widespread use of statin medication for women and the evidence base for that usage. What we found instead was evidence for caution."

Still not convinced ? Not only are statin drugs a failure for women, they also should never be prescribed to the elderly. Mortality in the elderly goes up as cholesterol goes down. Read this Letter to the Editor by Eddie Vos. (12)

Quote:"Regarding women, two 2004 analysis found no reduction in deaths from statin over placebo. In actual patient outcomes, the J-LIT study in 41,801 hypercholesterolemic Japanese (2/3rds women) found mortality in the 2 lowest on-statin cholesterol categories 2-3 times higher; its authors cautioned about ‘hyperresponders’ to statin. The 4S study ended with 3 more dead women on statin vs.placebo, and another ‘successful’ study, HPS, found no significant mortality benefit in women." See article for references.

Still not convinced ? Then read this article by Bill Sardi, Who Will Tell the People? It Isn’t Cholesterol ! (13) " If physicians were truly honest with their patients, there probably would be very few people being treated for primary prevention with a statin drug."

Still not convinced? Then read this Jan 2007 Lancet article by Harvard trained MD, John Abramson, "Are lipid-lowering guidelines Evidence-Based ? ". (14)

Quote:" No studies have shown statin cholesterol-lowering drugs to be effective for women at any age, nor for men 69 years of age or older, who do not already have heart disease or diabetes. Better than 50 adults have to take a cholesterol-lowering drug for 1 patient to avoid a mortal heart attack, and that figure only applies to high-risk patients. There is a vanishing benefit to lowering cholesterol for healthy adults." Dr. Abramson calls for cholesterol treatment guidelines to be revised. [Lancet 2007; 369:168-169]

Still not convinced? Then read this e-book by Shane Ellsion, "The Hidden Truth About Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs! ", by Shane Ellison, MS, Organic Chemistry. (15)

"Among healthy people, statin drugs do not prevent early death from heart disease, despite their cholesterol lowering effects. This is because there is no correlation or
relationship between low cholesterol and the progression of atherosclerosis – the number one cause of heart disease. Repeat that sentence. This became abundantly
clear with the statin drug trials."  
The New York Times Questions the Value of Lowering Cholesterol with Statin Drugs !!

In a surprise turnaround, The New York Times questions the value of treating cholesterol with statin drugs in this article, "New Questions on Treating Cholesterol", By ALEX BERENSON, New York Times January 17, 2008 . (16)

"In the last 13 months, however, the failures of two important clinical trials have thrown that hypothesis into question. (that cholesterol lowering is beneficial).

First, Pfizer stopped development of its experimental cholesterol drug torcetrapib in December 2006, when a trial involving 15,000 patients showed that the medicine caused heart attacks and strokes. That trial — somewhat unusual in that it was conducted before Pfizer sought F.D.A. approval — also showed that torcetrapib lowered LDL cholesterol while raising HDL, or good cholesterol.

Torcetrapib’s failure, Dr. Taylor said, shows that lowering cholesterol alone does not prove a drug will benefit patients.

Then, on Monday, Merck and Schering-Plough announced that Vytorin, which combines Zetia with Zocor, had failed to reduce the growth of fatty arterial plaque in a trial of 720 patients. In fact, patients taking Vytorin actually had more plaque growth than those who took Zocor alone.

Despite those drawbacks, that trial, called Enhance, also showed that patients on Vytorin had lower LDL levels than those on Zocor alone. For the second time in just over a year, a clinical trial found that LDL reduction did not translate into measurable medical benefits." endquote from Alex Berenson New York Times (16)


Business Week Questions the Benefit of Lowering Cholesterol with Statin Drugs !! (17)

In an historic turnaround, Business Week’s Jan 28, 2008 cover story asks the heretical question, "Do Cholesterol Drugs Do Any Good? Research suggests that, except among high-risk heart patients, the benefits of statins such as Lipitor are overstated." 
 
Astonishingly, Business Week makes the following statements:

"Current evidence supports ignoring LDL cholesterol altogether "

"Cholesterol lowering is not the reason for the benefit of statins". (17)

                

Both Merck and Pfizer are now under Investigation by the John Dingell’s House Committee and by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo !!

1) Senator John Dingell’s House Committee of Energy and Commerce has recently subpoenaed both Merck and Pfizer. Merck’s subpoena was for the Vytorin – Enhance scandal asking for records. Pfizer’s subpoena was for the Jarvik Lipitor Celebrity Ads, investigating why Jarvik was selected as spokeman for Lipitor even though Jarvik was never licensed to practiced medicine.
 

John D. Dingell
,
Democratic Representative from Michigan and Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce
Click Here for Dingell’s Letter to Merck on Vytorin Scandal

Click Here for Dingell’s Letter to Pfizer Investigating Jarvk-Lipitor Ads

2) The Enhance Vytorin scandal has prompted New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to issue a subpeana to Merck & Co and Schering-Plough Corp to investigate the allegations of deceitful marketing and insider trading.

The Vytorin Enhance Data showed no benefit for the Zetia/Zocor combination compared to Zocor alone. This created a scandal because of the late registration of the Enhance study, and accusations of insider trading at Pfizer, dumping stock in advance of the unfavorable results. Merck and Schering sat on the results of an unfavorable study for almost two years. They claim they haven’t peeked at the data, but Schering President Carrie Cox dumped 28 Million worth of stock back in the spring of 2007.

3) 2 drug trials in the past 13 months show no health benefit of lowering LDL cholesterol. (ENHANCE and Torcetrapib)

Dr Steven Nissen, cardiologist at Cleveland Clinic, said this of the Merck Enhance-Vytorin data:

”ENHANCE results were a big surprise and a big disappointment. The data show no benefit for ezetimibe (Zetia) on top of simvastatin (Zocor). In fact, the data on both the rate of progression of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events are trending in the wrong direction. This is a pretty clear failure. Physicians should now stop using ezetimibe or Vytorin except as a last resort. The drug doesn’t work”.

The results of the ENHANCE had to be released because now all trials must be pre-registered with the government because of new FDA rules Sept 2007. In the old days it would have been buried. (22B)

The following quote about Vytorin-Enhance from Bill Sardi at LewRockwell.com is illuminating (18 )

"The revelation that statin cholesterol drugs may be of little or no benefit, as revealed in a lengthy cover story in January 28 issue of Business Week (BW) magazine, begs the question: how did this misdirection go on for so long?

As the BW article pointed out, statin drugs "are the best-selling medicines in history, used by more than 13 million Americans and an additional 12 million patients around the world, producing $27.8 billion in sales in 2006."

How can anyone question the benefits of such a drug, asks BW, when they are "thought to be so essential that, according to the official government guidelines from the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP), 40 million Americans should be taking them. Some researchers have even suggested – half-jokingly – that the medications should be put in the water supply, like fluoride for teeth. And it’s almost impossible to avoid reminders from the industry that the drugs are vital. A current TV and newspaper campaign for one statin drug, as endorsed by Dr. Robert Jarvik, artificial heart inventor, proclaims that this drug ‘reduces the risk of heart attack by 36%…in patients with multiple risk factors for heart disease’."

Statin drug ruse revealed:

But the cholesterol/statin drug ruse finally unraveled when, after two years of foot dragging delays to release data from a large study involving Zetia, a cholesterol-lowering drug that inhibits cholesterol absorption from foods, and Vytorin, which is a combination of Zetia plus Zocor, the latter a statin drug that inhibits formation of cholesterol in the liver, revealed no health benefits.

Even though this drug combo lowered circulating cholesterol numbers better than either drug alone, it did not reduce plaque formation in arteries and did not confer a projected reduction in mortality.

In fact, an earlier review published last year in the British journal Lancet by Drs. John Abramson of Harvard Medical School and James M. Wright MD of the University of British Columbia, could find no evidence for a reduction in cardiac mortality in a combined review of all published statin drug studies. [The Lancet 2007; 369:168–169]

Falsifying the numbers:

The Business Week report says statin drugs benefit only 1 in 100 users, but they claim to reduce the risk of a non-mortal heart attack by 36%. But that figure is a relative number, not a hard one. About 3% of patients taking an inactive placebo pill will experience a heart attack compared to 2% taking a statin drug, which produces the so-called 30-plus percent risk reduction. But in hard numbers, this is only a 1% reduced risk. This type of misleading advertising wouldn’t pass Federal Trade Commission guidelines. But public health agencies, serving as free publicity agents for the statin drug manufacturers, repeat the claim to give it a ring of credibility." end quote from Bill Sardi on Lew Rockwell.com.

America Fooled Again
More on the Merck Vytorin/Enhance Scandal:

(19) (20)

Merck ran these these Cholesterol Lowering-Vytorin Televison Ads over the course of about a year spending 160 million dollars, allowing a windfall of 1-2 billion dollars on the sale of Vytorin. All the time they knew that the ENHANCE study showed that Vytorin didn’t work. Take at look at the TV ads that fooled a nation into spending a fortune for drugs that don’t work.

Vytorin Ad Video

Another Vytorin Ad Video

Vytorin Ad video Parody by Mike Adams of NewsTarget

The Vytorin Ads have been pulled, so you won’t be seeing them on national TV anymore.

Here is the Wall Street Journal story, "Congress Investigates Vytorin Ads", by Anna Wilde Mathews: (22A)

Here is a story by blogger Rich Thomaselli, "Vytorin Ad Shame Taints Entire Marketing Industry Cholesterol Drug’s Ad Campaign Turns Into PR Nightmare, Fanning Flames of Public Mistrust of DTC" by Rich Thomaselli Published: January 21, 2008 (22C). 


                        Lipitor and the Dracula of Medical Technology

In a previous newsletter Lipitor and the Dracula of Medical Technology, I discussed the Robert Jarvik celebrity ads for Lipitor.  One year later after this first newsletter,  John Dingell’s House Committee on Energy and Commerce is now investigating the matter. They have issued Subpoenas to Pfizer CEO, Jeffrey B Kindler, asking for information about the Jarvik-Lipitor Ad Materials.

Here is the Dingell letter (22).

Among other things, Chairman John Dingell wants to know why Jarvik takes Lipitor, and why Jarvik appears to be representing a doctor in the Ads, yet has never actually been licensed to practice medicine. Jarvik never actually prescribed Lipitor or any other drug for that matter. 

 
Robert Jarvik, MD, Inventor of the Jarvik Heart
and Spokesman for Lipitor

 
The New York Times dubbed the Jarvik Heart, "the Dracula of Medical Technology".  Until the Jarvik Heart was finally banned, all Jarvik Heart recipients died a slow agonizing death from multi-organ failure and sepsis, and had the Kevorkian option of assisted suicide with a small button to turn off the machine, ending their lives.

Here is a Wall Street Journal story about the letter from Dingell asking why Jarvik was chosen to sell Lipitor (23). Here is a Lipitor Television Ad Video with Robert Jarvik selling Lipitor to the masses (60 seconds).(24)
 
Can you imagine what Jarvik would think about Lipitor if Jarvik actually looked at the J-Lit data shown in the chart below which shows that mortlity is the highest at the lowest cholesterol and LDL levels, a result just the opposite to what one would expect if cholesterol lowering was beneficial to one’s health. Notice the lowest mortal (lowest red bar) is located at 240-250 total cholesterol, and as cholesterol is lowered below 230, mortality goes up.  The LDL chart below shows the same findings. 


J-Lit Mortality Data Chart courtesty Eddie Vos, from Circ J 2002;66:1087–1095, Mortality is highest at lowest cholesterol vales.

If Jarvik knew what this chart showed, would he then recant his position, and write an editorial opposing the use of statin drugs, and return the Pfizer Lipitor television ad money?  If Doctor Jarvik has an ounce of moral fibre that is exactly what he should and must do.  We are waiting.


Could this be the END of the Liptor Era? 
Maybe.  Maybe Not.

 Did you find this newsletter interesting? Feel free to Email it to a friend, or sign up for the newsletter with the link on the left sidebar. 

Can’t convince your doctor NOT TO prescribe statin drugs for you?
Print this newsletter and give it to your doctor.

Jeffrey Dach MD
4700 Sheridan Suite T
Hollywood FL 33021
954 983-1443

Jeffrey Dach, M.D. BLOG TrueMedMD

disclaimer

References

(1) The new cholesterol guidelines, Applying them in clinical practice Brian L. Pearlman, MD, FACP VOL 112 / NO 2 / AUGUST 2002 / POSTGRADUATE MEDICINE

(2) The new cholesterol guidelines

(3) USA Today, 2004, Cholesterol guidelines become a morality play the Associated Press

(4) Mary Enig, Cholesterol and Heart Disease– A Phony Issue

(5) Questioning the benefits of statins Eddie Vos and Colin P. Rose , CMAJ • November 8, 2005; 173 (10). doi:10.1503/cmaj.1050120.

(6) Dangers of Statin Drugs: What You Haven’t Been Told About Popular Cholesterol-Lowering Medicines By Sally Fallon and Mary G. Enig, PhD

(7) Therapeutics Initiative, Do Statins have a Role in Primary Prevention? There were 10,990 women in the primary prevention trials (28% of the total). Only coronary events were reported for women, but when these were pooled they were not reduced by statin therapy, RR 0.98 [0.85-1.12]. Thus the coronary benefit in primary prevention trials appears to be limited to men, RR 0.74 [0.68-0.81], ARR 2.0%, NNT 50 for 3 to 5 years.

(8) Drug Treatment of Hyperlipidemia in Women Judith M. E. Walsh, MD, MPH; Michael Pignone, MD, MPH JAMA. 2004;291:2243-2252.

(8A) BMJ 2007;334:983 (12 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.39202.397488.AD Should women be offered cholesterol lowering drugs to prevent cardiovascular disease? No Malcolm Kendrick, general practitioner

(9) Women’s Health Activist May/ June 2007: Exploring Statins: What Does the Evidence Say? By Electra Kaczorowski, National Women’s Health Network

(10) Statin Drugs: A Critical Review of the Risk/Benefit Clinical Research, Joel M. Kauffman, Ph.D. Professor of Chemistry Emeritus USP Philadelphia, PA, USA 9 Dec 2003

(11) Evidence for Caution: Women and statin use By Harriet Rosenberg Danielle Allard Women and Health Protection June 2007

(12) LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Statins for women, elderly: Malpractice? Nutrition, Metabolism & Cardiovascular Diseases (2007) 17, e19ee20 Eddie Vos 127 Courser Rd, Sutton (Qc),

(13) Who Will Tell the People? It Isn’t Cholesterol! by Bill Sardi

(14) Lancet: Vol 369 January 20, 2007 Are lipid-lowering guidelines evidence-based? J Abramson and JM Wright

(15)"The Hidden Truth About Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs! ", by Shane Ellison, MS, Organic Chemistry

(16)"New Questions on Treating Cholesterol", By ALEX BERENSON, New York Times January 17, 2008

(18) Government Health Agencies Complicit in Cholesterol Ruse by Bill Sardi on Lew Rockwell.com

(19) Zetia Enhance trial

(20)January 14, 2008, 9:11 am Zetia Doesn’t Enhance Zocor Posted by Shirley S. Wang Wall Street Journal

(21) Vytorin video AD 30 sec, Humorous clothes which look like the food.

(22) Letter from John Dingel Mich to CEO of Pfizer asking for records on Jarvik and Lipitor, celebrity endorsement of Lipitor Ads.

(22A) Wall Street Journal January 16, 2008, 3:44 pm Congress Investigates Vytorin Ads Posted by Anna Wilde Mathews

(23) January 7, 2008, Wall Street Journal, Congress to Pfizer: Why is Robert Jarvik the Lipitor Man? Posted by Shirley S. Wang

(24) Lipitor Ad with Robert Jarvik 60 seconds

(25) New Questions on Treating Cholesterol By ALEX BERENSONPublished: January 17, 2008 For decades, the theory that lowering cholesterol is always beneficial has been a core principle of cardiology. It has been accepted by doctors and used by drug makers to win quick approval for new medicines to reduce cholesterol. Study Reveals Doubt on Drug for Cholesterol (January 15, 2008) Times Health Guide: Cholesterol But now some prominent cardiologists say the results of two recent clinical trials have raised serious questions about that theory — and the value of two widely used cholesterol-lowering medicines, Zetia and its sister drug, Vytorin. Other new cholesterol-fighting drugs, including one that Merck hopes to begin selling this year, may also require closer scrutiny, they say. “The idea that you’re just going to lower LDL and people are going to get better, that’s too simplistic, much too simplistic,” said Dr. Eric J. Topol, a cardiologist and director of the Scripps Translational Science Institute in La Jolla, Calif. LDL, or low-density lipoprotein, is the so-called bad cholesterol, in contrast to high-density lipoprotein, or HDL.

Did you find this newsletter interesting? Feel free to Email it to a friend with the button on the bar below.

Jeffrey Dach MD
4700 Sheridan Suite T
Hollywood FL 33021
954 983-1443

Jeffrey Dach, M.D. BLOG TrueMedMD

disclaimer

All after tax profits from TrueMedMD clinic operations are donated to charity.

(c) 2007-2008 all rights reserved jeffrey dach md


Visit our new NewsGroups on Google Groups:

Just for Fun: The Day the Earth Stood Still by Jeffrey Dach

TrueMedMD NewsGroup …. Breast Cancer Prevention NewsGroup …. Vitamin C NewsGroup Vitamin B12 NewsGroup

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Jeffrey Dach, M.D. TrueMedMD

Catalog of NewsLetters

_______________________________________________________________
Enter your email address to subscribe to newsletter.
Your email is safe and will never be shared.
Please enter your email address:
_______________________________________________________________

(1) My Vitamins Are Killing Me by Jeffrey Dach MD !!!

(2) Stroke Prevention and Vitamin C by Jeffrey Dach MD

(3) Testosterone Risks and Benefits by Jeffrey Dach MD

(4) Medical School Days and SSRI Research by Jeffrey Dach MD

(5) Iodine and Breast Cancer Prevention by Jeffrey Dach MD

(6) Hypothyroidism Part One by Jeffrey Dach MD

(7) Hypothyroidism Part Two Thryroflex by Jeffrey Dach MD

(8) Guard Your Daughter from Gardisil, Virginia Tech Rampage Seung-Hui Cho by Jeffrey Dach MD

(9) Orthomolecular Medicine Meeting in Toronto 2007 by Jeffrey Dach MD

(10) B12 Deficiency by Jeffrey Dach MD

(11) Rachel Carson and Silent Spring by Jeffrey Dach MD

(12) Vitamin D Deficiency by Jeffrey Dach MD

(13) Andrew Weil AARP, and Human Growth Hormone HGH by Jeffrey Dach MD

(14) Michael Moore’s SICKO by Jeffrey Dach MD

(15) Blood Pressure Pills for Hypertension, When to Treat? by Jeffrey Dach MD

(16) Low Dose Naltrexone (LDN) by Jeffrey Dach MD

(17) Protect Your Family From Bad Drugs by Jeffrey Dach MD

(18) Roger Federer, Race Horses and Pulsed ElectroMagnetic Devices by Jeffrey Dach MD

(19) Vaccination, Autism Link, Real or Imagined? by Jeffrey Dach MD

(21) The Importance of the Pelvic Sonogram by Jeffrey Dach MD

(22) FDA Declares War on BioIdentical Hormones by Jeffrey Dach MD

_______________________________________________________________

Catalog of Articles Published on Hank Barnes World,
You Bet Your Life, by Jeffrey Dach MD

_______________________________________________________________

(1) Lipitor and "The Dracula of Modern Technology" by Jeffrey Dach MD

(2) Osteoporosis, Bisphosphonate Drugs and Toulouse Lautrec by Jeffrey Dach MD

(3) Prozac, Paxil and SSRI Drugs – Part One by Jeffrey Dach MD

(4) Prozac, Paxil and SSRI Drugs – Part Two by Jeffrey Dach MD

(5) Max Essex and Virological Failure in the NEJM by Jeffrey Dach MD

(6) The Origins of HIV by Jeffrey Dach MD

A Medical Article that I Published in 1980:

(7) Dach J, Patel N, Patel S, Petasnick J. Peritoneal mesothelioma: CT, sonography, and gallium-67 scan. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1980 Sep;135(3):614

Jeffrey Dach, M.D.
Member of the Board of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine
Board Certified by the American Board of Radiology

4700 Sheridan, Suite T
Hollywood Fl 33021
office phone 954-983-1443

_______________________________________________________________

Don’t forget to visit my web site for more information, and we you might like to attend one of our free seminars on Wednesday Nights. Please call for reservations for the seminar, though.

Do you have a testimonial, or a question for the newsletter? Send it in via email reply.

Sincerely Yours
Jeffrey Dach, M.D.
4700 Sheridan Suite T.
Hollywood, Fl 33021
954-983-1443

_______________________________________________________________

Dr. Dach is Board Certified by the American Board of Radiology and a member of the Board of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine. He has 25 years experience in the Memorial Hospital System as an interventional radiologist. His current practice focuses on Bio-identical hormone supplementation for men and women, menopause, andropause, HGH, testosterone, natural thyroid and the use of natural substances rather than drugs in the appropriate setting.

All after-tax profits from TrueMedMD office operations (including nutritional supplement sales) are donated to charity.

Conflict of Interest Disclaimer: We receive no money from the pharmaceutical industry or from the NIH. We do not sell any products to the public at large. We do however, make available selected nutritional supplements to our office clients at a small markup to cover our costs.

If this email is sent to you in error, please accept our apology, and simply remove your email from the list with the unsubscribe button on the bar below this text. Sorry for the inconvenience.

(c) 2007 all right reserved Jeffrey Dach MD disclaimer

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: