site map



Health news:
June 2010 - Dec 2013

Minimizing breast cancer risk

May 2010

Time to move beyond salt ?

Salt hypothesis vs. reality

Is sodium bad?

April 2010

Salt studies: the latest score

From Dahl to INTERSALT

Salt hypothesis' story

March 2010

Salt war

Do bone drugs work?

Diabetes vs. drugs, 3:0?

February 2010

The MMR vaccine war: Wakefield vs. ?

Wakefield proceedings: an exception?

Who's afraid of a littl' 1998 study?

January 2010

Antibiotic children

Physical activity benefits late-life health

Healthier life for New Year's resolution


December 2009

Autism epidemic worsening: CDC report

Rosuvastatin indication broadened

High-protein diet effects


November 2009

Folic acid cancer risk

Folic acid studies: message in a bottle?

Sweet, short life on a sugary diet


October 2009

Smoking health hazards: no dose-response

C. difficile warning

Asthma risk and waist size in women


September 2009

Antioxidants' melanoma risk: 4-fold or none?

Murky waters of vitamin D status

Is vitamin D deficiency hurting you?


August 2009

Pill-crushing children

New gut test for children and adults

Unhealthy habits - whistling past the graveyard?


July 2009

Asthma solution - between two opposites that don't attract

Light wave therapy - how does it actually work?

Hodgkin's lymphoma in children: better alternatives


June 2009

Hodgkin's, kids, and the abuse of power

Efficacy and safety of the conventional treatment for Hodgkin's:
behind the hype

Long-term mortality and morbidity after conventional treatments for pediatric Hodgkin's


May 2009

Late health effects of the toxicity of the conventional treatment for Hodgkin's

Daniel's true 5-year chances with the conventional treatment for Hodgkin's

Daniel Hauser Hodgkin's case: child protection or medical oppression?

April 2009

Protection from EMF: you're on your own

EMF pollution battle: same old...

EMF health threat and the politics of status quo

March 2009

Electromagnetic danger? No such thing, in our view...

EMF safety standards: are they safe?

Power-frequency field exposure

February 2009

Electricity and health

Electromagnetic spectrum: health connection

Is power pollution making you sick?

January 2009

Pneumococcal vaccine for adults useless?

DHA in brain development study - why not boys?

HRT shrinks brains


Bookmark and Share


May 2007

Blood pressure numbers

At the mention of blood pressure numbers, most people think of the official standards established for healthy blood pressure - 115 to 125 systolic by 70 to 80 diastolic, with 145/90 being dividing line between pre-hypertension and hypertension. But there is another kind of blood pressure numbers, much more dynamic and disturbing: number of people affected by high blood pressure (hypertension), and significant increase in mortality associated with it.

The estimates are that nearly 1 billion people worldwide suffer from this disease. And that it isn't going to get any better in the next decade, or two - to the contrary. While the world population by 2025 is expected be about 30% larger,

number of people suffering from hypertension is expected
increase by nearly 60%

Most of it due to the western-type lifestyle (unhealthy diet, lack of physical activity, high stress levels) and toxic contamination. These are not only persisting in affluent countries, but expanding to the developing countries, especially highly populated ones like China and India. Also, what makes hypertension difficult to control is the relative absence of symptoms - until the damage is already done.

One important reason for this hypertension epidemic is treatment inefficiency. Typically, if low-salt diet doesn't work for you - and the chances it will to a significant degree are about 1 in 3 - you will be prescribed pressure-lowering medications. This not only leaves the cause of your hypertension out, inevitably to worsen, it also exposes you to a

number of possible side effects,

some of them directly contributing to the disease.

For instance, common diuretic drugs for hypertension will cause loss of potassium and magnesium (among other minerals) - low levels of which may have been the cause of your hypertension in the first place - while commonly increasing blood-vessel-damaging homocysteine.

Longer-term use of calcium-channel blockers shrinks both, brain and its functionality, and also promotes cancers, by interfering with normal functions of the cell membrane. As if it wasn't enough, longer-term use of pressure lowering drugs links to higher incidence of diabetes and elevated tryglicerides12.

The solution is, obviously, to pinpoint and address

the cause of high blood pressure.

And - surprise, surprise - the cause is always diseased blood vessel system, commonly a result of combined nutritional deficiencies/imbalances and toxic contamination. That makes establishing one's nutritional status mandatory for treating hypertension (just as it should be for any serious disease, in particular degenerative diseases). But not by assessing the usual plasma level, which is plain unreliable. The red blood cell (RBC) test, while still not perfect, does much better job of presenting your actual nutrient level.

If you are not convinced yet, consider that low levels of only three nutrients, vitamins A, C and E, are much better predictor of dying from heart attack than either elevated total cholesterol or blood pressure12.

Possible cause of hypertension may be elevated ADMA (asymmetrical dimethyl arginine), preventing your blood vessels from relaxing. It is remedied with L-arginine supplementation12.

Yet another frequent cause of high blood pressure are toxic metals, particularly mercury. Another could be phthalates from plastics, by damaging the glands. Or it can be magnesium deficiency, or vitamin D, Omega-3 essential fatty acids, phosphatidyl choline deficiency, or long-term side-effect of your NSAID (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) painkiller.

There is a number of possible causative factors of hypertension, and they all can, and should be tested for as appropriate, in order to cure the disease ("The high blood pressure hoax", S.A. Rogers, M.D.). The problem is: it is not a part of the "accepted medical practices", seemingly perfectly happy to remain limited to "treating" symptoms, even if it takes one's lifetime.

What makes all this more sad is that good portion of this knowledge is a decade, or more, old, but just wasn't able to make it into the practices of symptom-treating medicine of today. Almost as if someone benefits from people getting sick, staying sick, and getting sicker.

Wonder who that could be...