Vitamin B3 beats Big Pharma's Zetia cholesterol drug

Natural News ^

[Scythian]

(NaturalNews) The utter worthlessness of Big Pharma's cholesterol drugs was demonstrated recently by a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine which showed that niacin (a low-cost B vitamin) out-performs Merck's drug Zetia for preventing the build-up of arterial plaque, a symptom of cardiovascular disease.

As the study reveals, Zetia failed miserably. Patients taking niacin showed a "significant shrinkage" in artery wall thickness, while those on Zetia showed no such improvement. At the same time, the rate of "cardiovascular events" in the niacin group was only one-fifth that in the Zetia group, demonstrating that niacin is far more effective at preventing heart attacks and other similar events than Zetia.

But curiously, as soon as niacin started to show a real benefit over Zetia, researchers cancelled the study. The premature ending of the clinical trial stopped the process by which even more useful information about the benefits of niacin might have been learned.

5,800% higher price than niacin

Merck, the maker of Zetia, was likely horrified to learn that a low-cost B vitamin out-performed its blockbuster drug. Sales of its Zetia drug are reportedly over $5 billion. It's no wonder: Zetia sells for as much as $3.89 per pill.

Niacin, on the other hand, costs as little as 6.7 cents per pill, even in a "no-flush" time-release formula from a quality source like the NSI brand from Vitacost: http://www.vitacost.com/NSI-No-Flus...

These price differences make Zetia 5,800% more expensive than niacin. And yet niacin works better.

So if niacin works better, and if modern medicine claims to be serving patients instead of profits, why don't doctors recommend B vitamins instead of expensive cholesterol drugs? As you have already guessed, the reason is because Zetia earns all kinds of ridiculous profits for Big Pharma and B vitamins don't.

The fact that doctors continue to prescribe Zetia, in fact, demonstrates how thoroughly our modern medical system has failed to recognize and embrace things that work to help patients rather than things that make the most money for powerful drug companies. If our modern system were actually based on what works, doctors would be prescribing various vitamins, minerals, herbs, superfoods and nutritional supplements (including anti-cancer mushroms).

But no... our system isn't based on what helps patients. It's based on what makes the most money, and so patients are put on dangerous (even deadly) pharmaceuticals that can cost 5,800% more than low-cost natural remedies that actually work better!

The big question: Does modern medicine help society at all?

It really makes you wonder: Beyond emergency treatments and critical care, does modern medicine offer any net benefit to society at all? More and more people are now coming to the conclusion that no, modern medicine harms far more people than it helps.

The key question to ask is this: What if our medical system disappeared tomorrow? Would we be better off or worse off?

The startling (but true) answer is that we would be better off. Without cancer screening, for example, breast cancer rates would plummet (because screening causes cancer). Without cholesterol drugs, blood pressure drugs, diabetes drugs and chemotherapy, people would live far longer, with less liver damage, kidney damage and brain damage.

In all, pharmaceuticals do not save lives. They destroy lives while making huge profits for drug companies. And yet much of western medicine is based on the administration of these dangerous, over-priced chemicals.

There's a fascinating book entitled What if Medicine Disappeared? by Gerald Markle and Frances McCrea. (http://www.amazon.com/What-Medicine...)

This book explains why modern medicine does far more harm than good. It doesn't explain, however, why doctors who think they're so smart continue to prescribe a patented medication that's 5,800% more expensive than a nutritional solution that works better.

[jammer]

This post is B.S. opinion wrapped in a news headline.

In a lot of cases, I argue on your side. But in this case, you're incorrect. I don't have the references here, but the evidence was overwhelming in a CE conference I did two years ago that high dose niacin is the ONLY medication to actually reduce plaque in the arteries. I'll try to find the references.

[glorgau]

I had my cholesterol measured at 240 and started taking fish oil, plant sterols, and 500-1000 mg of niacin daily. All available over the counter for maybe $30/month total.

Lowered my cholesterol to 170 in 3 months.

Love the flush!

[AZFolks]

I do not want to get into the argument about statins: poison or not poisons. However, this study looked at something we should expect with an FDA process for approval in the future (maybe). Why do I say maybe? The FDA looks at classes of drugs. Now if every antihypertensive required proof of extending life in hypertensive patients, the approval process would stretch out to years, perhaps even decades. If every anti cholesterol medication relied on artery thickness the same would occur. Therefore they use “surrogate markers.” The surrogate marker for antihypertensives is lowering the BP, the surrogate marker for anti cholesterol drugs is the cholesterol level. For those who believe statins are evil and that all medications are evil, I have no response and don’t want to argue about it. Accusations are easy to make but it is impossible to prove a negative so it is almost impossible to defend against an accusation. The burden of proof rests on the person making the accusations. They have their opinions and they must be respected but unless proven, they must be taken with a grain of salt. I do not know this literature as I was an Oncologist but all of you can go to Pub Med which is the library of the NIH (I think). Whoever runs it, NIH or some other Government entity) allows anyone to type in a drug name and references pop up. If you are one who believes all medical research is “fixed” your position must be respected. For others, Pub Med is a good point to start if you want to understand diseases and drugs. In addition Goodman and Gilman is an excellent pharmacology reference. Although retired, I buy it for my Kindle. I am sure you can go to any hospital library and they will help you. You do not need to be on-staff.

[kruss3]

A really smart thing to do would be to review the actual study and critique the design for it’s flaws before you blast the study as BS.

[Moonman62]

Niacin has its own side effects, so it should be monitored with blood tests like other cholesterol drugs.

[Scythian]

BTW, weren't you the one posting about being on your deathbed from "Morgellons"? Yes, and I'm alive and well and doing fine thanks to Natural Supplements, I'm on of the few that has been able to walk away from it.

[wardaddy]

Zetia does work as a lipids improver but it does not reduce calcium buildup which is what they first hoped

that is what started all this Zetia bashing

[wardaddy]

Niacin does not work as good as Statins btw...I know this because I tried.

Pravachol is very good to me,...and cheap..20/month

[Scythian]

By the way, I bought a great fish oil to, with the highest DHA ratio, all tested for heavy metals, loving it ...

http://www.xtend-life.com/product/Omega_3_DHA_Fish_Oil.aspx

View the label, also, Magnesium will reduce plaque buildup along with L-Arginine, but don’t take L-Arginine if you have had a heart attack or stroke ...

[kalee]

ping

[ErnBatavia]

Mine's never been above borderline bad (maybe 212 to 220), but three years ago the doc suggested I take a prescription; instead I just started taking an underdosage - only one tab a day, versus the 4 to 6 recommened - and at the next annual I was about 202......he told me "just continue what you're doing".

[joe fonebone]

my psoriasis is cured....no messy creams, oiontments or jels....the answer is UVB narrow band...have your doc write you a script, and buy a light box ( from 800 to 4000, depending on the type you get ) 6 weeks, every other day, 4 weeks at twice a week, and it will be gone...maintenance of about 1 time a week and eventurally you will not even need it much

[libertarian27]

What’s the Government recommended Cholesterol level suppose to be this week? They keep changing it...pretty soon most everyone will be requested (Healthscare mandated?) to take a statin.

[gitmogrunt]

"Make sure you take B3 as actual NIACIN and not the “non-flush” types as they are worthless.'

That's odd, because I took Whole Foods Non-flush Niacin 500mg, and credit it for lowering my Cholestrol from 220 to 180.

[BOBTHENAILER]

ARE you saying they cured or stopped PADS?

I believe I’ve got PADS myself.

[Mase]

It's interesting that your article fails to mention that this study was supported by another evil drug company called Abbott Labs, and that they weren't comparing Merck's Zetia to OTC niacin but to Abbot's proprietary formulation of niacin called Niaspan.

This study is not an indictment of other cholesterol lowering drugs like Lipitor and Crestor that stop cholesterol production in the liver. These two drugs have a long and solid track record of saving lives.

The lead investigator of the study said the study was concluded early because the results were clear and there was no need continue subjecting the Zetia patients to something that wasn't working. Mindlessly bashing the pharmaceutical industry should be left to the mindless.

If you are on a niacin therapy, you better be getting your liver enzymes checked regularly.

[woodbutcher1963]

I take 2000 mg CVS flush free niacin daily. I have been for about a year. At first my cholesterol went down, now I am not so sure.

[Scythian]

Fish oil is better than niacin in my opinion, but you need to get a good, heavy metal tested fish oil.

[Pessimist]

I used to do that, and it did help. But it never completely went away.

It does get much better in the summer though.

[madmomma]

bookmark for later