|
|
| |
| Free Weekly Newsletter | Post a Question on this Site |
 |
Home |  |
About |
|
Daily Program | |
Lifestyle Tips | |
Why VRP? | |
Order Products | |
Checkout |
|
Account Information | |
Security | |
|
· · |
High Blood Pressure Linked To Hair Loss Hypertension has been linked to heart disease, diabetes and early mortality. But hair loss? A number of studies have suggested a relationship between blood pressure and men’s baldness, particularly the early-onset kind. In a study published in 2007, for example, researchers looked at 250 men ages 35 to 65. After controlling for age, high cholesterol, smoking and other variables, they found that hypertension was “strongly associated” with male pattern baldness: those with a blood pressure reading above 120 over 80 had twice the risk of the others. Other studies have suggested a link between baldness and heart disease. For a 2000 study in The Archives of Internal Medicine, for example, researchers analyzed health records for 22,000 male doctors over 11 years, examining many aspects of their health. Men with mild balding of the crown had a 23 percent higher risk for heart disease, and those whose crowns were completely bald had a 36 percent greater risk. But the relationship is only a correlation. Researchers suspect hair loss could be among many markers of an increased risk of hypertension, caused in part by higher levels of testosterone and other hormones, and more androgen receptors in the scalp. Studies suggest that hair loss may indicate an increased risk of high blood pressure and heart disease. Dr. Cinque's comments: Dr. John McDougall wrote an excellent article about hypertension last week, explaining why he rejects almost all of the prescription drugs used for high blood pressure, including: beta blockers, ACE inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers. However, he endorsed the use of the oral diuretic Chlorothalidone. I agree with Dr. McDougall that diet and lifestyle should be the bulwark of defense against high blood pressure- both preventatively and therapeutically. And there are safe, nutritional supplements you could try to help lower your blood pressure that would pose no risk at all. But, if despite all safe natural measures, the blood pressure remains stubbornly high, I think it's better to just live with it. I certainly do not think that adding pharmaceutically-induced dehydration to the mix of a person's problems is in his or her best interest. It only adds a new problem (an iatrogenic illness) to the existing problem in the hope that the two abnormalities together will somehow restore normality. No way! Two wrongs do not make a right, not in life, and not in health. (Note: I am here referring to common, ordinary high blood pressure- the kind that millions get. I am not talking about "acute malignant hypertension" where there is a sudden spike in pressure, severe headache, visual disurbances, nausea, and other symptoms indicating a medical emergency.) Dr. William Douglass, also an M.D., takes it one step further than Dr. McDougall by recommending the trashing of all blood pressure drugs, including diuretics. He says: "If I don't have edema (swelling), am I going to accomplish anything by draining my body of fluids? Those fluids contain many vital minerals such as potassium, sodium, magnesium, and calcium, and getting rid of them will cause electrolyte imbalances (loss of minerals) in your body. But electrolyte imbalance is only the beginning. Other problems caused by diuretics include: cardiac arrhythmias (irregular heart beat), gout, kidney damage or failure, uremia, hyperglycemia leading to diabetes, abnormal cholesterol, anemia, photosensitivity, indigestion, headaches, visual disturbances, and impotence." I would add that even if you have edema, nothing good comes from taking diuretics. They can only mask the problem. They can only camouflage the external symptom while wreaking havoc internally. I know of no condition in which taking diuretics has a restorative, corrective, normalizing effect. You can't get to normal that way. I realize there is some risk in doing nothing and just living with high blood pressure (although again: you always address the lifestyle factors; that's a must). But there is also risk (a lot of it) in taking drugs, including diuretics. If it were true that taking drugs completely eliminated the risk of heart attacks and strokes, it might be worth doing. But, the results are nothing like that. Their best reported results show only modest risk reduction, with plenty of people still having heart attacks and strokes (including fatal ones) after faithfully following drug regimens. For example, an Italian study published in July of this year found that "high adherers" to taking the BP drugs had 38 percent fewer cardiovascular events than uncooperative patients. They heralded the results, but as I see it, the obedient patients still had about two-thirds the incidence of heart attacks and strokes as the slackers. What's so great about that? And realize, in that situation, there may have been other, non-pharmacological factors at play. A large metanalysis this year found that beta blockers reduced the risk of stroke by only 22 percent, and ACE inhibitors cut the risk by only 16 percent. Figures like these are laughable. There are ordinary foods known to reduce stroke risk as much or more- and without having any dark side. Fortunately, I don't have high blood pressure, but if I did, I would reject the drugs. I would do everything I could to naturally and safely coax the pressure down, particularly through a plant-based diet, nutritional supplements, exercise, and a healthy lifestyle. And I would also consider fasting because fasting has been shown to have a powerful effect to reduce blood pressure, and it's much safer than taking drugs. Dangerous tinkering- that is what all the antihypertensive drugs amount to- and I do mean all of them. Worse yet: standard medical practice makes it a life sentence. E-mail to a friend Next Article |
