I thought I was doing everything right with diet, exercise and nutritional supplements, but on about July 1, 2011, I had a small heart attack. There is apparently a strong hereditary factor since my uncle and father both started having heart problems many years younger than me.
I had been having funny feelings (but not painful) around my heart, and so decided to get a chest x-ray to check for problems. Everything was fine, except that I was diagnosed with atherosclerosis of the arch of the aorta. I believe it had to be fairly severe to be visible on an x-ray, and there were no doubt other areas of the heart with atherosclerosis which could not be seen.
Coincidentally, on the way home from the x-ray I started feeling uncomfortable chest pains, and about then is when I believe my small heart attack started or occurred, which would most likely have been caused by thickening of the blood or blood clotting. We had just finished a meal of greasy tacos, which was likely a precipitating factor. The greatest danger at that point would be more severe clotting, so immediately upon arriving home I took plenty of bromelain and nattokinase, which dissolve clots and thin the blood, and which are natural enzymes which have no known harmful side effects. (This is in stark contrast to the horrible Coumadin (warfarin) blood thinner, which is extremely hazardous and has a very long list of harmful interactions with other medicines, vitamins, nutrients and foods.) I also started taking 500mg of niacin daily to improve my blood lipid profile.
I have always been interested in natural and alternative ways of dealing with medical problems, and many years ago I read a book about chelation therapy, which explains how the chemical EDTA given intravenously is usually very effective in cleaning out one’s arteries, giving one an effective cure for heart disease caused by clogged blood vessels. A few years ago I met a person who had a severe heart attack, and who rejected bypass surgery because a friend of his had died during such surgery, and who had a doctor who immediately started him on chelation therapy. I met him after it was all over, and he said that after 60 chelation treatments, he was “as good as new”. I understand he is still taking a treatment once every three months or so as a preventative. On the Internet I have found many testimonials to the spectacular benefits of EDTA chelation therapy, such as this one here (at about 6 minutes into the video).
While we were looking for chelation therapy, a doctor did an electrocardiogram and told me I needed to go immediately to the emergency room to find out exactly where the blockages were and to submit to whatever they said I needed. If I had been incapacitated I would have had no choice, but by the favor of God I was able to reply: 1) If chelation therapy cleans out all the blood vessels, there is no need to know where the blockage is, 2) I believed I was adequately protected with bromelain and nattokinase against a quick worsening of my condition, and 3) I believed I was making the best risk/reward choice, but if wrong, twice in the past I thought there was a real possibility of dying and I knew where I would be going and had peace in those moments. If my condition had have been very severe, I would not have had a choice (conventional medicine is very good at getting you through a crisis), but with the knowledge I believed I had, I had no interest in the conventional medical paradigm of stents and bypass surgery, which I judged to carry as much or more risk than what I was already doing and planning to do, and which promised far inferior results at much greater inconvenience. I had also started using EDTA suppositories (which I found on the Internet), which were touted as as good as intravenous chelation therapy, and it was clear during the 3 weeks looking for intravenous chelation therapy that there was a very clear improvement in my condition. In fact, I expect the suppositories would have slowly done the job in time, but I wasn’t sure I had the time, I didn’t want to take any unnecessary chances, and I wanted professional guidance, and so opted for the more expensive and inconvenient intravenous chelation therapy.
So I finally got started with the intravenous chelation therapy after 3 weeks, and after about the 5th treatment, I remember feeling my heart at rest. At that point, I could again begin to carefully work in the yard and garden, with frequent rests. I could also walk to the office 3 blocks away without distress or rests. That was about 6 weeks after the heart attack. Now after 20-odd treatments, I can work much more strenuously in the yard with less frequent rests. This contrasts starkly with my condition at worst where 20 or 30 normal paces or even standing could be distressful. I am not yet out of the woods completely as I still need to rest during exercise more than before getting sick, but I am hopeful that after the 30 or 40 recommended treatments, I will be as “good as new”. Since the urgency is gone, I will probably soon try finishing up the treatment with suppositories to save money and inconvenience.
As of January 1, 2012, I am very thankful to God and pleased with the results as I can engage in all ordinary activities without distress. The only difficulty is in aerobic exercise, in which I must rest frequently. If I had to live the rest of my life this way I would be happy with my present condition, however I plan to continue the treatments hoping for complete recovery.
This information is pertinent to many, as a recent study showed that the prevalence of atherosclerosis varied from 17% in individuals <20 years old to 85% in subjects ≥50 years old. Just about everyone should study information on this subject in order to be able to take preventative action and, in case of heart illness, make an informed decision. If you have any symtoms whatsoever, you should start chelation immediately, to avoid an emergency or sudden death. If you wait until an emergency to study the issue and take action, odds are very slim that you will opt for anything other than conventional treatment.
Even if you have already had bypass surgery, it is probable that chelation therapy could significantly benefit you. It is not unlikely that you will be looking at a future bypass surgery as the bypasses clog up. I know of a lawyer who had one bypass surgery, and later they told him that he needed another. He opted for chelation instead and afterward “could do all the things that he wanted to” which he could not before the chelation. In addition chelation is good for a number of other conditions. One patient that I met personally said that due to diabetes he lost all feeling from the waist down. After 15 chelations, all feeling had returned and he could walk normally.
Conventional medicine rejects chelation therapy as a remedy for heart disease, and says that it is useless, risky, and even dangerous. (But isn’t heart surgery very dangerous?) They accept no testimonials as valid medical evidence. However, mathematically they are greatly mistaken. Suppose you have 10 testimonials of outstanding benefits from chelation therapy, and suppose that the odds of these benefits occurring by random chance (that is without any treatment) is 1 in 10 for each case. Then the probability of all 10 cases happening by random chance is 1 in 10,000,000,000 (1/10 raised to the 10th power). That is probably better statistical evidence of benefit than just about any of their double-blind studies. But the odds of such spectacular benefits occurring by random chance are actually probably more like one in a million for each case (the more spectacular the benefit, the less likely it could occur with no treatment), and when you multiply that out over hundreds or thousands of cases, you get probabilities which are truly astronomical and more certain than just about anything you can imagine.
So when results are dramatic and unheard of in conventional medicine, and cases are many, testimonial evidence is just about the best evidence you can have. Then why is the system so opposed to something so certain? With bargain bypass surgery starting at $50,000 plus a gushing stream of revenue afterward for prescription drugs, monitoring, testing, dealing with complications, re-doing surgeries and even heart transplants, versus $5,000 or less for chelation therapy with a tiny trickle of revenue afterward for maintenance, it is no contest.
You need to think for yourself, look at the evidence, and base your decisions on hard evidence and nothing else. See Health and Medical Paradigms for more perspective.
If this article has helped you, I would feel very encouraged if you would let me know.
P.S. February 20, 2012: With many thanks to God, I now feel stronger and can exert more and rest less than I have been able to do in several years, in spite of the fact that I still feel slight symptoms during major exertion. My explanation is that the problem was increasing for a number of years but asymptomatic, and it became symptomatic about July 1, 2011. So, I continue to be very pleased with the chelation therapy.
April 2013: I felt completely recovered for all normal activities, and had a stress test with a cardiologist to see how I was doing. Thankfully the tests came out normal except that I did not achieve the target heart rate on the treadmill, suggesting ischemia and some residual arterial blockage. Unfortunately a day or two later I had a setback in that suddenly I could no longer walk the 3 blocks to the office without discomfort or resting. After thinking about it, I theorize that the stress test loosened a piece of plaque, which broke off later and blocked a new area. So, I will need to sort of start all over.
July 2013: I am much better now after a total of about 55 chelation treatments, but not yet as well as I was before the stress test. I now plan to continue with the chelation at a reduced frequency. My doctor has suggested some vitamins which have gradually cleaned out some of his patients arteries over 4 or 5 years. I also plan to try exercise with oxygen therapy (EWOT) as I have read that in conjunction with chelation it is also very helpful for my condition.