EDTA Chelation Effectiveness Challenges Doubting Cardiologists

P How effective is chelation to reduce carotid plaque?

A. Chelation (pronounced key-lay-shen) is a way to remove toxic heavy metals such as lead, mercury, arsenic, iron, uranium and cadmium. The chelating agent EDTA (ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid) is mainly used to remove excess lead body. There is no controversy about its effectiveness and EDTA even has FDA approval for this application.

This compound was originally developed as a water-softening agent in the 1930s during World War II chemical seeking antidotes for arsenic poisoning because this mineral is in a chemical weapon Lewisite call ( the “dew of death”). It was later found to work especially well in the body get rid of lead. For example, when the battery workers are exposed to hazardous amounts of lead due to occupational exposure, EDTA is infused intravenously to help chelate (grab a) the ore body and remove it through the urine.

The controversy Cardiovascular chelation


decades, some doctors suggested that EDTA chelation may also help against atherosclerosis (the buildup of plaque in the coronary arteries). The main theory in those days was that EDTA grabbed calcium found in the buildup of plaque in the arteries and improve circulation to the heart muscle. We have received many messages from people who suffer from angina (chest pain) who claimed that infusions of EDTA allowed to resume their normal activities without undergoing bypass graft coronary artery (CABG).

We were skeptical of these stories, largely because conventional medicine rejected this approach and cardiologists were especially critical. There were no well-controlled to prove or disprove claims clinical trials, so agnostic about the benefits of EDTA chelation for heart patients remained. Despite the lack of evidence of effectiveness, tens of thousands of patients were enrolled in a series of expensive treatments hoping to relieve symptoms or prevent more invasive treatment.

The Amazing Science Behind EDTA chelation

last year, the results of a randomized controlled study ( TACT , or trial to assess chelation therapy ) showed that EDTA chelation reduces the chance of a second heart attack, stroke or cardiac procedure to open arteries clogged volunteers who had had a previous heart attack ( JAMA March 27 2013 ). the benefits lasted for fiver years after 40 chelation infusions of EDTA were completed.

This was not what the community expects cardiology. Most experts anticipate that this “alternative” approach to heart disease would flame out in a placebo-controlled trial. Some expressed the attitude that they do not believe it was still true. There were a large number of complaints about this trial, although it was funded by the National Center of the federal government for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) and followed standard test procedures controlled.

A more detailed test results TACT analysis concluded that patients after a heart attack with type 2 diabetes “showed a marked reduction in cardiovascular events with chelation EDTA “ ( Circulation cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes January 2014 ). Again, this is not what the cardiology community expected.

The most recent in-depth analysis of the trial to assess chelation therapy was even more definitive. The researchers found a regimen of high doses of vitamin / mineral plus chelation significantly reduce the risk of heart attack, stroke or cardiovascular hospitalizations in these patients compared to placebo ( American Heart Journal July 2014 ). To read what this team of researchers said specifically, here is his conclusion:

“In stable post-MI [heart attack] patients in medical therapy based on the evidence, the combination of high doses of oral vitamins and chelation therapy compared with double placebo clinically reduces major cardiovascular events in a move that was statistically significant and potentially clinically relevant. “

” when the evidence conflict with the beliefs “

a commentary published in American Heart Journal (July 2014) states that:

“when the evidence in conflict with the expectations, the results are often discounted … we must not let our prejudices blind us to the possibility that unexpected results may provide an important clue for a new approach.

“it is very important to use the scientific method to test our beliefs against the evidence. Simply dismiss results were not expecting ignore opportunities to expand knowledge and arsenal of effective therapies. “

To say amen We agree with the doctors of these Stanford that more research is strongly encouraged and the cardiology community should remain open to the possibility that EDTA chelation could actually benefit the selected heart patients. If further research confirms the benefits of EDTA, insurance companies must pay for treatment.

thank feedback on EDTA. If you have had this form of treatment, what was your experience. If you are a health professional, what do we do research. Share your thoughts below.

You May Also Like:

Add a Comment

==[Click 2x to Close X]==
Most Popular Today!