Removing Signs of The Confederacy in Forest Park

A few weeks ago I was interviewed by Fox2 News . Not for anything having to do with cardiology but because I randomly stumbled upon the City of St. Louis taking down a street sign.

This was no ordinary street sign.

It was associated with the small strip of road that runs adjacent to the Confederate Memorial that sits in Forest Park (America’s #1 Urban Park!)

Workman removing the Confederate Drive sign. He left the Cricket Road sign. Confederate Drive sign replaced by nothing.

The Forest Park Confederate Memorial became part of a national discussion after long-time St. Louis Mayor, Francis Slay, writing in his blog in 2015, proposed a a committee for reappraisal of the statue:

 

Their charge would be to recommend whether, with the benefit of a longer view of history, the monument is appropriately situated in Forest Park – the place where the World was asked to meet and experience St. Louis at its best and most sublime — or whether it should be relocated to a more appropriate setting.

They also should address whether the monument represents a peculiar memorial to what euphemistically was referred to in the American South as a “peculiar institution” – slavery-and wherever ultimately situated, whether the monument should be accompanied by a description of the reality and brutality of slavery, over which the war was waged, including in this city, and the bitter badges of slavery, Jim Crow and de facto discrimination and segregation, that are its continuing legacy.

I would ask the commission, also, to reappraise the name “Confederate Drive,” the Forest Park thoroughfare on which the monument is situated. They might consider whether “Freedom” or “Justice” would be more fitting.

Missouri was a deeply divided border state during the Civil War, pitting neighbors and kin against one another. As St. Louis was a Union stronghold, it is not surprising that even 50 years after the war ended, the erection of the Confederate Memorial was controversial. It was dedicated in December 1914 after the Ladies’ Confederate Monument Association spent 15 years raising $23,000 for its construction. To avoid provoking further antagonism to the project, the Association declared that the design they would choose could not depict any figure of a Confederate soldier or object of modern warfare. The resulting monument features a 32-foot-high granite shaft with a low relief figure of “The Angel of the Spirit of the Confederacy.” Below is a bronze group, sculpted by George Julian Zolnay, depicting the response of the South to this spirit as a family sends a youth off to war. Of Hungarian birth, Zolnay had come to St. Louis as director of the art department for the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition and remained here for some years afterward, teaching at Washington University and the Art Academy in University City. Choosing Zolnay’s model over two other submissions caused another battle when one of the losers, Frederick Ruckstull, wrote to the committee demanding that Zolnay’s design be eliminated, as the male figure too closely depicted a soldier. Calling the letter “contemptible,” Zolnay shot back that Ruckstull’s allegorical group, featuring figures of Glory, History, Poetry and Sorrow, was “suitable for a wedding cake.” On the back of the shaft, designed by William Trueblood, is a tribute “To the Memory of the Soldiers and Sailors of the Southern Confederacy,” written by St. Louis minister Robert Catlett Cave, who had served as a Confederate soldier from Virginia. Beneath that is a quotation by Robert E. Lee: “We had sacred principles to maintain and rights to defend for which we were duty bound to do our best, even if we perished in the endeavor.”
I rode to Forest Park and asked in the visitor center where the confederate memorial was. When I arrived it was surrounded by this temporary fence, erected in the morning, presumably to protect workmen from pro-statue protestors.

 

 

It looks like the committee delivered their report in December , 2015 and it can be found here. They indicate their charge was to assess how best to get rid of the statue, not really to “reappraise” it.

They asked for proposals from various museums/historic organizations for moving the statue and received no satisfactory proposals. . The cost of moving the statue to another site was estimated at 268,000$ and moving it to storage at 122,000$.

A new mayor of St. Louis,  Lydia Krewson, was elected last November and she has vowed to move the statue.

Apparently, it’s a lot easier and cheaper to remove the street sign than the statue.

Don’t expect any brilliant insights into this controversy from my interview with Fox2 News.  Before I’m ready to make any public pronouncement on an issue I require hours and hours of research and clearly I have no expertise or background that would qualify me to pontificate on the fate of this statue.

Since then, I’ve thought about it and read more and hope to share some observations down the line.

-ACP

Since the interview aired it seems to have gone viral around St. Luke’s hospital with many marveling at my odd “beekeeper’s” hat and others impressed by my handling of a random cyclist’s yelled comments.

This is the link to the Fox 2 News Interview

 

Are Plant-Based “Milks” The Margarine of the 21st Century?

Full fat dairy doesn’t make you fat or give you heart disease. But nutritional guidelines still continue to recommend the substitution of non-fat or low-fat dairy for full fat, something that flies in the face of an overall movement to consume less processed foods.

The rise of plant-based milks resembles in many ways the rise of margarine as a substitute for butter. In both cases, industry and misguided scientists collaborated to produce an industrial product to substitute for a natural food, based on an unproven projection of health benefits. Subsequent studies have shown that this was an unmitigated health disaster, as the trans fats created in the production of margarine substantially increase the risk of heart disease.

Anti-Dairy Propaganda

Vegan/vegetarian sources of nutritional information like one green planet make unsubstantiated claims about the benefits of plant-based milks and the dangers of traditional milk:

the consumption of dairy products has been linked to everything from increased risk of ovarian and prostate cancers to ear infections and diabetes. Fortunately, plant-based milks provide a convenient and healthful alternative to cow’s milk. And if you are currently making the transition to a dairy-free diet, you will find that going dairy-free has never been easier. Soy, almond, hemp, coconut, and rice milks, among others, are taking over the dairy case—and claiming supermarket aisles all their own.

Growth of Plant-Based “Milks”

In response to consumers desire for healthier alternatives to dairy, non-dairy liquid milk-like substitutes  have been thriving. Almond milk, the current darling of plant-based milks (PMB) , sales have grown 250% in the last 5 years during which time,  the total milk market has shrunk by more  than $1 billion.

In western Europe, sales of almond, coconut, rice and oat milks doubled in the five years to 2014; in Australia they rose threefold, and in North America sales shot up ninefold, according to Euromonitor.

Big global beverage food and drinks companies have been entering the PBM market recognizing that American consumers have become aware of the unhealthiness of sugar-sweetened beverages.

Coca-Cola, for example, recently purchased Unilever’s AdeS soya brand. and believes that PBM consumption will grow faster than any other segment of the beverage industry over the next 5 to 10 years. Coca-Cola also recently purchased the China Green brand of plant-based protein drinks.

What’s in Soy Milk and Why It’s Not Real Food

The plant-based milks are a mixed bag of highly processed liquids. Let’s look at soy milk which has been widely promoted as a healthy substitute for dairy. Empowered Sustenance points out that there is reason to be concerned about all the added ingredients found in Silk, a popular soy milk.

Soymilk (Filtered Water, Whole Soybeans), Cane Sugar, Sea Salt, Carrageenan, Natural Flavor, Calcium Carbonate, Vitamin A Palmitate, Vitamin D2, Riboflavin (B2), Vitamin B12.

The long list of ingredients give you an idea of how much processing is needed to approximate the nutritional components of real dairy. Whether adding back synthetic Vitamin D2, synthetic Vitamin A and calcium carbonate simulates the nutritional benefits of the naturally occurring vitamins in a naturally fatty milieu, is anyone’s guess.

Variable Nutritional  Content of Plant-Based “Milks”

Bestfoodfacts.org asked 3 academic nutritional PhD’s how they would advise consumers on substituting nondairy “milk:”

Dr. Macrina: Plant-based milks are quite variable in what they contain while cow’s milk is pretty standard. We know where cow’s milk comes from. Plant-based milks are manufactured and can have a variety of additives. I urge consumers to read the label to determine what’s best for them.

Dr. Savaiano: Yes, consumers should read the label very carefully. Plant-based drinks certainly can be a healthy choice depending on how they’re formulated.

Dr. Weaver: The plant-based beverages all cost a good deal more than cow’s milk. So, one needs to determine how much they want to pay for the nutrients and determine which nutrients you need to get from other foods. A main nutrient expected from milk is calcium. Only soy milk has been tested for calcium bioavailability (by my lab) which was determined to be as good as from cow’s milk. But none of the other plant beverages have been tested and they should be.

Is There Scientific Evidence To Support Replacing Milk and Dairy Products with Plant-based Drinks?

A recent review paper from Danish researchers attempted to answer the question:

Milk and dairy products: good or bad for human health? An assessment of the totality of scientific evidence. 

They concluded:

The most recent evidence suggested that intake of milk and dairy products was associated with reduced risk of childhood obesity. In adults, intake of dairy products was shown to improve body composition and facilitate weight loss during energy restriction. In addition, intake of milk and dairy products was associated with a neutral or reduced risk of type 2 diabetes and a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, particularly stroke. Furthermore, the evidence suggested a beneficial effect of milk and dairy intake on bone mineral density but no association with risk of bone fracture. Among cancers, milk and dairy intake was inversely associated with colorectal cancer, bladder cancer, gastric cancer, and breast cancer, and not associated with risk of pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer, or lung cancer, while the evidence for prostate cancer risk was inconsistent. Finally, consumption of milk and dairy products was not associated with all-cause mortality.

They went on to examine the question: Is there scientific evidence to substantiate that replacing milk and dairy products with plant-based drinks will improve health?

They noted the marked variation in nutritional content of the plant-based milks:

the nutrient density of plant-based milk substitutes varies considerably between and within types, and their nutritional properties depend on the raw material used, the processing, the fortification with vitamins and minerals, and the addition of other ingredients such as sugar and oil. Soy drink is the only plant-based milk substitute that approximates the protein content of cow’s milk, whereas the protein contents of the drinks based on oat, rice, and almonds are extremely low,

and their similarity to sugar-sweetened beverages:

Despite the fact that most of the plant-based drinks are low in saturated fat and cholesterol, some of these products have higher energy contents than whole milk due to a high content of oil and added sugar.

Some plant-based drinks have a sugar content equal to that of sugar-sweetened beverages, which have been linked to obesity, reduced insulin sensitivity , increased liver, muscle, and visceral fat content as well as increased blood pressure, and increased concentrations of triglyceride and cholesterol in the blood

PBM and real milk also differ with respect to important electrolytes and elements:

Analyses of several commercially available plant-based drinks carried out at the Technical University of Denmark showed a generally higher energy content and lower contents of iodine, potassium, phosphorus, and selenium in the plant-based drinks compared to semi-skimmed milk

and some PBM contain potentially dangerous components:

Also, rice drinks are known to have a high content of inorganic arsenic, and soy drinks are known to contain isoflavones with oestrogen-like effects. Consequently, The Danish Veterinary and Food Administration concluded that the plant-based drinks cannot be recommended as full worthy alternatives to cow’s milk which is consistent with the conclusions drawn by the Swedish National Food Agency

Finally, the authors emphasize the importance of the health effects of whole foods rather than individual nutrients. Plant-based milks are not whole or real foods:

The importance of studying whole foods instead of single nutrients is becoming clear as potential nutrient–nutrient interactions may affect the metabolic response to the whole food compared to its isolated nutrients. As the plant-based drinks have undergone processing and fortification, any health effects of natural soy, rice, oats, and almonds cannot be directly transferred to the drinks, but need to be studied directly.

The Skeptical Cardiologist Recommendation

Consumers should be very cautious in their consumption of plant-based milks. Eerily reminiscent of the push to switch from butter to margarine in the past, these drinks cannot be considered as healthier than dairy products.

They are creations of industry, promoted and produced by large companies like Coca-Cola and Unilever, whose goal is profit, not consumer’s health.

The PBMs are not true whole or real foods and their nutritional content varies wildly. Some resemble sugar-sweetened beverages like Coca-Cola.

If one of the synthetic ingredients added to these beverages turns out to have the markedly negative health effect that trans fats had, the analogy to margarine will be complete.

My  Eternal Fiancee’ has true lactose intolerance and has baristas substitute almond or soy milk when ordering a latte’.  I understand that but I’ve been trying to convince her (with increasing success lately!)  to drink my Chemex pour-over coffee and adulterate it with nothing, butter, cream or coconut oil.

Skeptically Yours,

-ACP

Featured image courtesy of One Green Planet.

For your enjoyment I present a mind-bogglingly complicated table listing the various nutrients in a mind-bogglingly long list of different plant-based milks (including hemp milk!):

 

 

 

Beware Of More Misinformation From The American Heart Association On Coconut Oil and Saturated Fats

In a “presidential advisory” to the American Heart Association (AHA)  a panel of experts last week  strongly endorsed the heart healthy benefits of replacing any and all saturated fats in our diet with vegetable oils (like corn , soy, and canola oil) which contain predominantly poly  or mono unsaturated fats.

Examining the metrics of this article it appears that the vast majority of news media reporting on it have lead with a headline that reads:

  Coconut oil isn’t actually good for you, the American Heart Association says     

Given this brazen attempt by the AHA to smear coconut oil’s reputation I felt compelled to revisit my analysis of coconut oil from a year ago. I’ve included new discussion on a key paper referenced by the AHA advisory and some words of wisdom from Gary Taubes.

Coconut Oil: Poster Child for Dietary Fat Confusion

Coconut oil (CO) is a microcosm of the dietary confusion present in the U.S. On one hand a CO Google search yields a plethora of glowing testimonials to diverse benefits: Wellness Mama lists “101 Uses for Coconut Oil,” Authority Nutrition lists “10 Proven Health Benefits.”

On the other hand, the  American Heart Association (AHA) and the USDA’s Dietary Guidelines For Americans warn us to avoid consuming coconut oil  because it contains about 90% saturated fat (SFA) which is a higher percentage than butter (about 64% saturated fat), beef fat (40%), or even lard (also 40%)

In many respects, the vilification of coconut oil by federal dietary guidelines and the AHA resembles the inappropriate attack on dairy fat and is emblematic of the whole misguided war on dietary fat. In fact, the new AHA advisory  after singling out coconut oil goes on to cherry-pick the data on dairy fat and cardiovascular disease in order to  support their faulty recommendations for choosing low or nonfat dairy..

The AHAs simple message to replace all saturated fats in your diet with poly unsaturated fats (PUFAs) or monounsaturated fats (MUFAs) is flawed because:

  1. All saturated fats are not created equal :the kinds of saturated fats in coconut oil differs markedly from both dairy SFAs and beef SFAs . Some  SFAs may have beneficial effects on blood lipids, weight, and cardiovascular health.

  2. The types of nonSFAs in vegetable oils differ markedly and may have differential effects on cardiovascular health.

All Saturated Fats Are Not Created Equal!

Saturated fats are divided into various types based on the number of carbon atoms in the molecule. Depending on length, they differ markedly in their metabolism, absorption and effects on lipid profiles.

The major SFA in coconut oil, lauric acid, has a 12 carbon chain and is thus considered a medium chain fatty acid (MCFA).

The AHA advisory makes a cursory attempt to address the huge hole in their logic primarily relying on a meta-regression analysis published in 2003 by Mensink, et al., and concludes:

The Mensink meta-regression analysis determined the effects on blood lipids of replacing carbohydrates with the individual saturated fatty acids that are in common foods, including lauric, myristic, palmitic, and stearic ac- ids. Lauric, myristic, and palmitic acids all had similar effects in increasing LDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol and decreasing triglycerides when replacing carbohydrates

In summary, the common individual saturated fats raise LDL cholesterol. Their replacement with monounsaturated or polyunsaturated fats lowers LDL cholesterol. Differences in the effects of the individual fatty acids are small and should not affect dietary recommendations to lower saturated fat intake.

But if we examine what the actual paper by Mensink et al (available in full here) we find their conclusions are the exact opposite of the AHA:

Lauric acid greatly increased total cholesterol, but much of its effect was on HDL cholesterol. Consequently, oils rich in lauric acid decreased the ratio of total to HDL cholesterol. Myristic and palmitic acids had little effect on the ratio, and stearic acid reduced the ratio slightly.

The differences in the effects of the individual fatty acids are not small they are quite significant if we look at the totality of the effects on lipids relevant to cardiovascular disease. In their discussion, Mensink, et al go on to say:

Our results emphasize the risk of relying on cholesterol alone as a marker of CAD risk. Replacement of carbohydrates with tropical oils markedly raises total cholesterol, which is unfavorable, but the picture changes if effects on HDL and apo B are taken into account.

What’s more :

The picture may change again once we know how to interpret the effects of diet on postprandial lipemia, thrombogenic factors, and other, newer markers. However, as long as information directly linking the consumption of certain fats and oils with CAD is lacking, we can never be sure what such fats and oils do to CAD risk.

This graph from Mensink, et al. shows what would happen to the total/HDL cholesterol ratio if we substituted various foods in place of 10% mixed fat. Theoretically a lower ratio is more heart healthy. Look at the drastic differences between palm oil, coconut oil and butter, all of which are condemned by the AHA

 

Misguided Dietary Fat Recommendations

The  AHA experts have doubled down on their recommendation to use cooking oils that have less saturated fat such as canola and corn oil. They advise, in general, to “choose oils with less than 4 grams of saturated fat per tablespoon.”

Screen Shot 2016-05-07 at 12.28.40 PMCanola and corn oil, the products of extensive factory processing techniques, contain mostly mono or polyunsaturated fats which have been deemed “heart-healthy” on the flimsiest of evidence.

The most recent data we have on replacing saturated fat in the diet with polyunsaturated fat comes from the Minnesota Coronary Experiment performed from 1968 to 1973, but published in 2016 in the BMJ.

Data from this study, which substituted liquid corn oil in place of the usual hospital cooking fats, and corn oil margarine in place of butter and added corn oil to numerous food items, showed no overall benefit in reducing mortality. In fact, individuals over age 65 were more likely to die from cardiovascular disease if they got the corn oil diet.

Cherry-Picking Data

The new AHA presidential advisory doesn’t include this study or  data from the Sydney Heart Study, another study with negative results for substituting PUFAs for SFAs.

As Gary Taubes pointed out in a post for Larry Husten’s cardiobrief.org blog, the AHA experts cherry-picked four “core trials” that  agreed with their hypothesis and excluded the ones that don’t agree:

They do this for every trial but the four, including among the rejections the largest trials ever done: the Minnesota Coronary Survey, the Sydney Heart Study, and, most notably, the Women’s Health Initiative, which was the single largest and most expensive clinical trial ever done. All of these resulted in evidence that refuted the hypothesis. All are rejected from the analysis. And the AHA experts have good reasons for all of these decisions, but when other organizations – most notably the Cochrane Collaboration – did this exercise correctly, deciding on a strict methodology in advance that would determine which studies to use and which not, without knowing the results, these trials were typically included.

Coconut Oil: The Bottom Line

After all is said and done, it would appear that coconut oil, despite coming from a vegetable, resembles dairy fat in many ways.

It is more likely than not that coconut oil, like dairy fat, reduces your chances of obesity and heart disease, especially when compared to the typical American diet of highly processed and high carbohydrate foods.

Although containing lots of saturated fat, the SFAs in coconut oil are drastically different from other dietary sources of SFA.  The medium chain fatty acids like lauric acid which make up the coconut are absorbed and metabolized differently from long chain fatty acids found in animal fat.

The only explanation for dietary guidelines advising against coconut oil and dairy fat is the need to stay “on message” and simplify food choices for consumers, thus continuing the vilification of all saturated fats.

Substituting corn oil (or other vegetable oils with lots of linoleic acid) for foods containing saturated fats does not lower risk of heart disease and may promote atherosclerotic outcomes like heart attack and stroke.

Finally, I agree with Taubes that we deserve good scientific studies proving without a doubt that these drastic changes in diet are truly helping:

“telling people to eat something new to the environment — an unnatural factor, à la virtually any vegetable oil (other than olive oil if your ancestor happen to come from the Mediterranean or mid-East), …..is an entirely different proposition. Now you’re assuming that this unnatural factor is protective, just like we assume a drug can be protective say by lowering our blood pressure or cholesterol. And so the situation is little different than it would be if these AHA authorities were concluding that we should all take statins prophylactically or beta blockers. The point is that no one would ever accept such a proposal for a drug without large-scale clinical trials demonstrating that the benefits far outweigh the risks. So even if the AHA hypothesis is as reasonable and compelling as the AHA authors clearly believe it is, it has to be tested. They are literally saying (not figuratively, literally) that vegetable oils — soy, canola, etc — are as beneficial as statins and so we should all consume them. Maybe so, but before we do (or at least before I do), they have a moral and ethical obligation to rigorously test that hypothesis, just as they would if they were advising us all to take a drug.”

Cocovorically Yours,

-ACP

For those seeking more information.

This graph is from the BMJ paper which also included a meta-analysis of all randomized studies substituting linoleic acid for saturated fat.  The data do not favor substituting corn oil for saturated fat

F7.large

 

 

 

The Three E’s Of Interrupting Patients

The skeptical cardiologist was trained to listen carefully to patients who are relating their “history” as we term it and to minimize interruptions. However, there are only a limited number of minutes in the day and some patients are capable of monologues that rival a Shakespeare soliloquy.

If a physician doesn’t learn methods for getting the patient back on point he will spend his days stressed and running behind schedule.

A recent JAMA editorial describes the three E’s that physicians should employ when interrupting a patient.

The first “E” element is to excuse yourself. The second is to empathize with the topic being interrupted and the third is to explain the reason for the interruption.

For the patient who is repetitive, disorganized or circumcloquacious:

(circumloquacious (adjective): Using excessive language to evade a question, obscure truth or change the subject [comb. of ‘circumlocution’ and ‘loquacious’]

Always circumloquacious, she evaded defining the word and instead started a discourse on etymology and metalinguistics.

the writer suggests this typical “topic tracking” interruption:

Forgive me. You are sharing a lot and I can see you are really bothered about… your headache, fatigue, allergy, stomach pain… and this is frustrating and scary for you. I would like to switch gears and ask several specific questions, then do an exam to make sure we develop a plan that works best for you.

Excessively circumloquacious patients can be their own worse enemies as the office visit is spent on issues peripheral to their major problems.

Hopefully your doctor has learned some variation on the three E’s to deal with circumloquacity (I just invented that word!), otherwise he/she will continually be late and stressed.

Empathetically Yours,

-ACP

 

Urban Cycling, Part 2: Hit and Run Drivers and Bike Helmets

A doctor colleague of the skeptical cardiologist was riding his bike on a quiet road here in St. Louis recently when he suddenly awoke in a hospital bed. His friend who was riding in front of him heard a crash, turned and saw a black car making a U-turn and speeding off. Fortunately, the good doctor, suffered only the concussion and multiple bruised ribs and will live to ride again

He is in his seventies and I asked him if he would, indeed, climb onto the saddle of a two-wheeled vehicle in the future and he indicated yes, but never again on roads shared with cars.

I also inquired as to the state of his bike helmet post-trauma: it was shattered into multiple pieces.

In a previous post I pondered the question: Does cycling to work make you more or less likely to die?

cycling to work for many individuals would provide the daily physical activity that is recommended for cardiovascular benefits. However, cycling in general, and urban cycling in particular, carries a significant risk of trauma and death from accidents and possibly greater exposure to urban pollutants.

In the Netherlands cycling to work likely makes you less likely to die.

One study quantified the impact on all-cause mortality if 500,000  people made a  transition from car to bicycle for short trips on a daily basis in the Netherlands and concluded

For individuals who shift from car to bicycle, we estimated that beneficial effects of increased physical activity are substantially larger (3–14 months gained) than the potential mortality effect of increased inhaled air pollution doses (0.8–40 days lost) and the increase in traffic accidents (5–9 days lost). Societal benefits are even larger because of a modest reduction in air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and traffic accidents.

In St. Louis, however, I suspect my longevity would be substantially reduced by cycling the 15 miles of heavily trafficked roads from University City to St. Lukes Hospital in Chesterfield. I would be cheek to jowl with SUVs, pick-up trucks, and mini-vans full of distracted, texting and chatting commuters.

Should  Bike Helmets Be Mandated?

Like most people I know, my colleague wears a bike helmet religiously when cycling. He, like many who have shared their bike accident stories with me, believes the bike helmet saved his life. I certainly can’t refute that possibility but it is impossible to know with certainty.

I’ve posted my analysis of the wisdom of mandating bike helmets here and even after hearing the good doctor’s story,  I still refuse to wear one.

Typical skeptical cardiologist bike riding garb. No helmet but safari (not bee-keeper) hat because sun is not his facial friend.

A commonly cited statistic is that bike helmets reduce serious head injuries by 85% and brain injuries by 88%.  This comes from an observational  study  published in 1989 which has serious limitations and has never been reproduced. For an exhaustive critique of these data see here.

I think a fair summary is in this British Medical Journal editorial which is behind a paywall but can be reviewed as a PDF here (bmj-june-2013.pdfbicycle helmets and the law).

 

Larry Husten, a journalist, who writes an excellent cardiology blog at cardiobrief.org apparently agrees with me and has recently written about “The Unintended Consequences of Bike Helmets.”

I encourage everyone to read his post which can be found here.

Here is his main point:

I am opposed to public health campaigns that focus on helmets, thereby implanting in people’s minds the dangers of cycling. Instead, in my view, the public health agenda regarding cycling should be to promote the far greater health benefits of cycling. The overarching goal of any public health campaign should be to dramatically increase cycling in the US, thereby encouraging physical activity and helping to reduce obesity and diabetes.  In tiny Denmark, by way of example, one expert, Lars Bo Andersen, PhD, of Western Copenhagen University of Applied Sciences, reports that “26 persons were killed in the whole country in cycle accidents last year, but more than 6000 deaths were avoided due to the huge amount of physical activity this behavior is a result of.”

Circuitously Yours,

-ACP

Speaking of Holland, the skeptical cardiologist will be visiting this hotbed of cycling, tulips and dikes in July.

I’ll be staying in Haarlem but wandering around the country researching cycling, assisted suicide and the Dutch dairy industry which may be responsible for the Dutch having gone from being among the shortest people in Europe to being the tallest in the world.

Nonskeptical Musical Thoughts On Dick Dale and the Dead While Running For Longevity

Since determining that running would lower my cardiovascular risk and that it was actually good for my wonky knees (running is associated with a lower risk of ostearthritis or hip replacement, see here), I’ve been trying to do it regularly.

It has become therapeutic in many ways, aiding sleep and reducing stress levels. And, unlike my bike riding adventures, I have yet to fall and injure myself running and I don’t get dirty looks for not wearing a helmet.

I’ve even contemplated running 5 kilometers,  although not as part of any formal exhibition: just a personal , private goal. To this end I have for the first time recently run 4 kilometers.

Listening to music during these longer runs greatly helps the time pass and sometimes I am able to find songs which fit my running cadence, albeit not through any systematic analysis but through mere serendipity. I let my entire musical collection (nicely streamed by Apple music) be my running playlist and this ranges from the Talking Heads to Thelonius Monk to Bach.

This morning’s run (the second time I reached 4K) I was aided by two songs: one by the king of surf guitar, the other by the kings of psychedelic jam rock.

Dick Dale and Miserlou

Although, Dick Dale was huge in the early sixties, he did not register on my musical radar until  I watched Pulp Fiction and in its dazzling opening scene and  was jolted by Dale’s staccato machine gun guitar riffs alternating with his plaintive trumpet solo on  “Miserlou“.

I immediately strapped on my Strat and began trying to emulate his unique playing style.

Here’s Dick and the Del-Tones performing their version for the movie “A Swinging’ Affair”

This version contains none of the rhythmic power and electrifying guitar attack of the single and the band appears to be on tranquilizers. To make matters worse, Dick  doesn’t play that magical melodic moaning trumpet solo which contrasts so brilliantly with the pile-driving reverb-drenched guitar riffs on the original version.

You can see some of the power of the left-handed Dale in this live performance of Miserlou from 1995 but alas, no trumpet solo.

Dick Dale, remarkably, is still touring and playing well at age 80.

As fortune would have it the beats per
minute of this song is 173 which fits my preferred running speed stride cadence perfectly.

The Other One (Not Cryptical Envelopment)

The next song to aid me on my run was a live performance from the Grateful Dead’s 1972 European Tour  which is 36 minutes long.

I was slow to revere the Dead but when I first listened to their live album Europe ’72 I was hooked. Instead of studying in college, I spent way too many hours playing Sugar Magnolia (and Blue Sky, et al..)  thereafter.

The Other One highlights their free and wild improvisational style. While running I could focus on what Keith Godchaux was doing on the piano and that takes me to a psychic place in which I feel no pain.

Please excuse my hubris but I am convinced that I could have done a good job as the Dead keyboardist.  It’s probably a good thing I never got that gig, however, as it carries a very high mortality rate (not to mention that I’m a much better cardiologist than keyboardist.)

As Billboard pointed out in its obituary on the last keyboardist, Vince Welnick (who committed suicide by slitting his throat at age 55 in 2006):

Welnick was the last in a long line of Grateful Dead keyboardists, several of whom died prematurely, leading some of the group’s fans to conclude that the position came with a curse.

Welnick had replaced Brent Mydland, who died of a drug overdose in 1990. Mydland succeeded Keith Godchaux, who died in a car crash shortly after leaving the band. And Godchaux had replaced the band’s original keyboard player, Ron “Pigpen” McKernan, who died at 27 in 1973.

Last week a very good Grateful Dead documentary (Long Strange Trip) was released on Netflix. I’ve been somewhat mesmerized by what I’ve watched so far.  For example, at one point, Phil Lesh reveals that Jerry Garcia asked him to join the band as their bassist even though he had never played the instrument. (If only he had asked me!)

Strangetrippingly Yours

-ACP

N.B. Miserlou is a very old folk song with a scale that sounds exotic to Western ears: the double harmonic scale

per Wikipedia

The song’s oriental melody has been so popular for so long that many people, from Morocco to Iraq, claim it to be a folk song from their own country. In fact, in the realm of Middle Eastern music, the song is a very simplistic one, since it is little more than going up and down the Hijaz Kar or double harmonic scale (E-F-G#-A-B-C-D#). It still remains a well known Greek, Klezmer, and Arab folk song.

 

 

 

Unsure About Taking A Statin For High Cholesterol? Consider A Compromise Approach

In an earlier post the skeptical cardiologist introduced Geo, a 61 year old male with no risk factors for heart attack or stroke other than a high cholesterol. His total cholesterol was 249, LDL (bad) 154, HDL (good) 72 and triglycerides 116.

His doctor had recommended that he take a statin drug but Geo balked at taking one due to concerns about side effects and requested my input. My first steps were to gather more information.

-I calculated his 10 year risk of stroke or heart attack at 8.4% (treatment with statin typically felt to benefit individuals with 10 year risk >7.5%) and as I have previously noted, this is not unusual for a man over age 60.

-I assessed him for any hidden  or subclinical atherosclerosis and found

The vascular ultrasound showed below normal carotid thickness and no plaque and his coronary calcium score was 18,  putting him at the 63rd  percentile. This is slightly higher than average white men his age.

So Geo definitely has atherosclerotic plaque in his coronary arteries. This puts him at risk for heart attack and stroke but not a lot higher risk than most men his age.

Strictly speaking, since he hasn’t already had a heart attack or stroke, treating him with a statin is a form of primary prevention. However, we know that atherosclerotic plaque has already developed in his arteries and at some point, perhaps years from now it will have consequences.

What is the best approach to reduce Geo’s risk?

It’s essential  to look closely at lifestyle changes in everyone to reduce cardiac risk.

The lifestyle components that influence risk are

  1. Cigarette Smoking (by far the strongest)
  2. Diet
  3. Exercise
  4. Obesity (Obviously related to #1 and #2)
  5. Stress
  6. Sleep

Patients who try to change to what they perceive as a heart healthy diet by switching to non-fat dairy and eliminating all red meat will not substantially lower risk (see here.) Even if you are possess the rock-hard discipline to stay on a radically low fat diet like the Esselstyn diet or the Pritikin diet there are no good data supporting their  efficacy in preventing cardiac disease.

Geo was not far from theMediterranean diet I recommend but would probably benefit from increased veggie and nut consumption. He was not overweight and he doesn’t smoke. I encouraged him to engage in 150 minutes of moderate exercise weekly.

Low Dose, Intermittent Rosuvastatin

I engaged in shared decision-making with Geo.  Informing him, as best I could, of the potential side effects and benefits of statin therapy.

After a long discussion we decided to try a compromise between no therapy and the guideline recommended moderate intensive dose statin therapy.

This approach utilizes a low dose of rosuvastatin taken intermittently with the goal of minimizing any statin side effect but obtaining some of the benefits of statin drugs on  cardiovascular risk reduction.

I have many patients who have been unable to tolerate other statin drugs in any dosage due to statin related muscle aches but who tolerate this particular  treatment and I  see substantial reductions in the LDL (bad) cholesterol with this approach.

Studies have shown that rosuvastatin 5–10 mg or atorvastatin 10–20 mg given every other day produce LDL-C reduction of 20–40 %

Studies have also shown that In patients with previous statin intolerance, rosuvastatin administered once or twice weekly (at a mean dose of 10 mg per week) achieved an LDL-C reduction of 23–29% and was well tolerated by 74–80 % of patients.

In a recent report from a specialized lipid clinic, 90 % of patients referred for intolerance to multiple statins were actually able to tolerate statin therapy, although the majority was at a reduced dose and less-than-daily dosing.

Results in Geo

After several months of taking 5 mg rosuvastatin twice weekly Geo felt fine with no discernible side effects. He obtained repeat cholesterol  levels:

His LDL had dropped 52% from 140 to 92.

Hopefully, this LDL reduction plus the non-cholesterol lowering beneficial properties of statins (see here) will substantially lower Geo’s risk of heart attack and stroke.

We need randomized studies testing long-term outcomes using this approach to make it evidence-based. But in medicine we frequently don’t have studies that apply to  specific patient situations. In these cases shared decision-making in order to find solutions that fit the individual patient’s concerns and experience becomes paramount.

Faithfully Yours,

-ACP

 

 

 

Study Shows EpiPens Effective Up to 50 Months After Expiration Date

The skeptical cardiologist recently revealed that he had been relying on an EpiPen that expired in 2011. Apparently, I was not entirely wrong to keep that old EpiPen around.

A research letter published in the Annals of Internal Medicine found that EpiPens:

 did lose potency over time. Even 50 months past expiration, however, the EpiPens retained 84 percent of epinephrine concentrations – enough to prevent anaphylactic shock,.

Per Reuters based on an email from Julie Knell, Mylan’s senior director for global product communications:

The expiration dates stamped on EpiPens reflect “the final day, based on quality control tests, that a product has been determined to be safe and effective when stored under the conditions stated in the package insert,” Knell said. “Given the life-threatening nature of anaphylaxis, patients are encouraged to refill their EpiPen Auto-Injector upon expiration, approximately every 12 to 18 months.”

Pharmacists indicate they may not get EpiPens until 6 months after manufacture meaning that patients must replace them annually. Extending the shelf-life to 24 months therefore would halve the annual cost of the devices.

-ACP

Dear Kaldi’s, Please Stop Serving Candied Bacon: It Is A Health And Gastronomic Abomination

The skeptical cardiologist enjoys bacon (in moderation), often with quiche, despite the fact that The Who (World Health Organization, not the band that John Entwhistle played for) classifies it as a carcinogen.

Enjoying bacon has become more difficult these days due to the development of a most disturbing fad: the adulteration of bacon  with sugar in some way, shape, or form.

The Eternal Fiancee’ recently ordered a bacon, egg and cheddar on croissant sandwich at my favorite St. Louis coffee spot, Kaldi’s when to our horror, candied bacon was served.

An inquiry at the serving counter  revealed that Kaldi’s only serves candied bacon; you can’t get any that hasn’t been turned into a monstrosity!

I find candied bacon to be an abomination.  All I can taste is sugar and any subtleties of the bacon or its preparation are eclipsed by the saccharine bulk of the sugar.

If this graphic (from my fitness pal.org) is to be believed, the three slices in her sandwich added 40 grams of sugar. This is the equivalent of 10 teaspoons of sugar and the amount of sugar in a bottle of Coke.

 

 

 

 

Readers of this blog know that I consider sugar, not fat, as the major toxin in our diet, contributing to obesity, diabetes and ultimately heart attack and stroke. I’ve also pointed out that huge amounts of added sugar are hidden in smoothiescoffee drinks, and non fat yogurt.

The massive amount of sugar in this candied bacon is not exactly stealth: you can tell it from the first bite. However, there is nothing in the description of the croissant sandwich that alerts you to the fact that your bacon will be transmogrified into candy.

Serving only candied bacon in my opinion is the equivalent of only serving coffee that has had sugar added to it and Kaldi’s should know better.

Kaldi’s is proud of their community commitment which includes support for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. What about supporting healthier food choices (with no added sugar)  for kids so they are less likely to get diabetes and if they have diabetes will be  less likely to be poorly controlled?

I implore Kaldi’s to stop this madness.

Antisucroporcinely Yours,

-ACP

N.B. The Eternal Fiancee’ just tried to order a smoothie at the Clayton Kaldi’s and discovered to her horror that their peanut butter contains hydrogenated oils and added sugar. Yikes!

Is There A Difference in Blood Pressure Between Your Right and Left Arms?

The skeptical cardiologist has a question for all patients who have elevated blood pressure: has your doctor ever taken your BP in both the right and left arms?

Have you ever noted a difference in the systolic BP between arms (interarm difference or IAD) when you do home recordings?

Although UK and USA national hypertension guidelines recommend measuring BP in both arms on  a first visit and most PCPs are aware of the recommendation, only 30% agree with it and few actually adhere to it. (2007) Hypertension guideline recommendations in general practice: awareness, agreement, adoption, and adherence. Br J Gen Pract 57(545):948952.

It’s important to measure the difference between right and left arm BP at least once because:

  1. An IAD >10 mm Hg often indicates peripheral artery disease (such as a blocked subclavian artery to the arm with the lower BP) and is associated with higher cardiovascular disease risk.(Clark, et al (2006) Prevalence and clinical implications of the inter-arm blood pressure difference: a systematic review. J Hum Hypertens 20(12):923931)
  2. A blocked subclavian artery can cause neurological symptoms, dizziness or loss of
    Graphic depiction of blockage of left subclavian artery indicating that the collateral flow is stolen from the brain via reversed flow down the vertebral artery. Thus subclavian steal syndrome.

    consciousness (termed subclavian steal syndrome and typically occurring after using the arm with the blocked artery.)

  3. A consistently  lower BP in the left arm compared to the right arm  can be a sign of a serious and correctable congenital heart disease called coarctation of the aorta.
  4. The true BP (i.e. the one we should be treating) is the higher of the two. Thus, if you do have a consistent IAD, you should only measure the higher one for monitoring BP.

In 2009, Parker and Glasziou noted that whereas 13 of 15 national hypertension guidelines recommend measuring BP in both arms:

“only seven guidelines gave some justification, with only one quantifying the prevalence of substantial arm differences and only one providing a reference to the evidence. No guideline provided a description of appropriate techniques for reliably measuring blood pressure in both arms. “

they speculated that if PCPs were given better justification and precise details on how to reliably measured the IAD they would be more likely to do it.

I’ve mentioned the “why” for measuring IAD above.

The “why” is so compelling that if you have hypertension or pre-hypertension (SBP 120-140) and you’ve never had the BP compared in both arms you should do it yourself.

The “how” of IAD is more complicated.

In a subsequent post I will give my recommendations on how to reliably measure IAD and I will tell the story of a 75 year old competitive ice hockey player with a totally blocked subclavian artery to his right arm.

Dextrosinistrally Yours,

-ACP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: