http://www.medpageto...arction/tb/7877
LongeCityAdvocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans
Another D thread
Started by
sUper GeNius
, Jan 07 2008 11:56 PM
2 replies to this topic
#2
-
- Guest
- 830 posts
- 788 ₮
- Location:Bend, Oregon, USA
- ✔
Posted 08 January 2008 - 12:12 PM
Dr. William Davis of the Track Your Plaque program and the HeartScanBlog has been hammering on optimal Vitamin D levels as critical for coronary plaque regression for a good while now.
Davis says that his current view of optimal levels of vitamin D3 (25-OH D) is between 50 ng/mL and 60 ng/mL from a coronary artery plaque risk perspective.
The study referenced above doesn't demonstrate that point but it does cause me more to believe that getting a handle on what this Dr. Davis character says about keeping plaque at bay could be important.
As I understand it, Dr. Davis will be presenting preliminary (i.e., anecdotal) data from his cardiology practice about coronary plaque reversal at a scientific conference in San Diego in April 2008.
And speaking of Dr. D, he appears perfectly content to go on the record with other statements that run against the established consensus regarding heart disease. Check out one of his latest posts entitled Is skinny necessary for reversal?. The point there is that it's not the weight that is the causal variable but, instead, other independent variables that are usually, but not always, associated with the weight.
Davis says that his current view of optimal levels of vitamin D3 (25-OH D) is between 50 ng/mL and 60 ng/mL from a coronary artery plaque risk perspective.
The study referenced above doesn't demonstrate that point but it does cause me more to believe that getting a handle on what this Dr. Davis character says about keeping plaque at bay could be important.
As I understand it, Dr. Davis will be presenting preliminary (i.e., anecdotal) data from his cardiology practice about coronary plaque reversal at a scientific conference in San Diego in April 2008.
And speaking of Dr. D, he appears perfectly content to go on the record with other statements that run against the established consensus regarding heart disease. Check out one of his latest posts entitled Is skinny necessary for reversal?. The point there is that it's not the weight that is the causal variable but, instead, other independent variables that are usually, but not always, associated with the weight.
Edited by wccaguy, 08 January 2008 - 12:27 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
