THE HISTORY OF CHELATION THERAPY
A Safe and Effective Technique for Reversing Heart Disease or As an Adjuvant Treatment to “Standard Care”
In the United States today, more than 400 million men and women are afflicted with coronary artery disease. Each day, heart attacks kill 4,000 Americans – more than 1 million of us each year.
In 1987, more than 330,000 heart patients were subjected to coronary artery bypass surgery in an effort to open up blocked coronary arteries responsible for low blood supply to the heart. Interestingly, various studies have shown that long-term survival and risk of heart attack do not differ when comparing groups of patients treated surgically with those who did not undergo this operation. According to Thomas A. Preston, M.D., professor of medicine at the University of Washington School of Medicine, “A decade of scientific study has shown that except in certain well-defined situations, bypass surgery does not save lives or even prevent heart attacks. Among patients who suffer from coronary artery disease, those who are treated without surgery enjoy the same survival rates as those who undergo open-heart surgery. Yet, many American physicians continue to prescribe surgery immediately upon the appearance of angina or chest pain.
A nationwide study over ten years at eleven leading U.S. medical centers confirmed that there is no increase in survival rates of patients with coronary artery disease who undergo coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery versus those who do not.
Moreover, coronary artery bypass surgery poses significant physical and emotional risks. As Harvard trained M.D. Elmer Cranton stated in his book Bypassing Bypass, “In one to four percent of the cases, depending on the medical center and the surgical team, surgery is fatal, and in up to five percent, the surgery itself precipitates a heart attack. In twenty percent of the cases, serious-sometimes permanent-personality changes result (forgetfulness, irritability, insomnia, inability to concentrate, mental confusion)”.
Dr. Cranton’s book describes a nonsurgical treatment for coronary artery disease called chelation. This technique involves the administration of an intravenous medicine, EDTA, which is a synthetic amino acid compound. Chelation has been used in the United States in more than 400,000 patients. In 1969, a study by Dr. Efrain Olszewer, published in the Journal of Advancement in Medicine, described the results of some 3,000 patients treated with EDTA chelation for coronary artery disease, as well as other vascular problems. Ninety percent of these patients showed significant improvement.
In describing the usefulness of EDTA chelation, two-time Nobel prize winning scientist, Dr. Linus Pauling, stated, “Published research and extensive clinical experience showed that EDTA helps to reduce and prevent arteriosclerosis plaques, thus improving blood flow to the heart and other organs. The scientific evidence indicates that a course of EDTA chelation therapy might eliminate the need for bypass surgery. Chelation has an equally valid rationale for use as a preventive treatment.
Even though many scientific studies have confirmed the usefulness of EDTA chelation in improving blood supply to the heart, reducing angina, increasing blood supply to the legs, and other vascular problems, it is still not approved by the FDA. Why is this so? Simply stated, our profit-driven health care delivery system favors those techniques which produce the greatest revenue. Coronary artery bypass surgery is extremely profitable, not only for the small group of surgeons involved, but also for hospitals and manufacturers of the highly sophisticated equipment used in the surgery.
In my opinion, chelation therapy is a safe and highly effective treatment option for patients suffering from many forms of vascular disease including: coronary artery disease, angina, and poor blood supply to the legs. It also may be useful in the treatment of arthritis, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, poor healing of wounds, and visual problems stemming from inadequate blood supply to the eyes.
<<Back
|