Hello Everyone. This accidentally got sent out on Friday instead of the typical Saturday post. There were a few grammar and spelling errors that have been corrected (I usually do a final read on Friday night.) Thanks for your comments and hope you enjoyed the read!! ~~ Dr. Tenpenny
Dr.Tenpenny, what’s your take on cholesterol in the presence of familial hypercholesterolemia, where ldl is very high but hdl @ 100 and triglycerides low in the 70’s?
Can someone tell me if you can have to much cholesterol? I really need help, when I am not raking crestor my cholesterol number are in the 400's, I really need some answers.
Hydration underpins our physiology not oxygenation.
Cholesterol is needed to repair blood vessels that get damaged. Dehydration leads to dryness and tissue tearing instead of stretching. Blood vessels get hernias and cholesterol is the mesh ready to make repair.
The bad rap is silly as it is like accusing men repairing pot holes of causing the holes. When we know they turn up to remedy the damage after the fact.
It’s easy to debunk the gaseous exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide. It’s a left over from when men believed animals were machines running on gases of combustion and exhaust.
Instead we run on SALT plus water. We breathe to remain hydrated and in equilibrium with the external pressure, a bit like fish.
Oxygen is a man made product not naturally occurring in air. Oxygen is made from air by removing moisture to the parts per million of water contamination. Oxygen is an extremely DRY air. Oxygen is an industrial product never designed for medical use.
It’s the exact opposite of what our lungs require. Just like salt restriction is the exact opposite of what our physiology requires.
Funny how medical practice has been shifted to cause dis-ease instead of curing dis-ease. Profiting from suffering is the medical model we have accepted. Perhaps it’s time we changed that?
Air is measured by its moisture or humidity.
Can you see why oxygen can’t co-exist with air?
Once oxygen is released from containment it extracts moisture from its surroundings and resumes its natural form as moist air.
Oxygen released inside the respiratory tract extracts moisture and dehydrates.
Oxygen used with poorly draining lungs will give relief by extracting moisture, this is its only merited use. Because drs have little regard for the damage oxygen can do in normal lungs, its general use causes damage.
The term Reactive Oxygen Species is describing pathological damage from dehydration. Oxygen toxicity arises from its POWER to dehydrate.
Oxygen can kill, this is why it is a Dr prescribed drug. Oxygen is prescribed primarily to the terminally ill. Palliative care is not kind.
Anytime you see a reference to oxidation, swap it out for dryness. Dehydration or dryness is our Achilles heel.
Hydration equals SALT plus water. Water follows salt.
The lungs use air not oxygen. Zero oxygen is required.
The lungs are rehydrating the red blood cells with salt water.
Just like an IV saline infusion.
There is more …
Read my articles titled:
We breathe air not oxygen
And
How does salt restriction lead to heart dis-ease and fear based reactionary thinking?
I find myself sharing this pertinent information on cholesterol over and over again! I'm always running in to people who tell me their doctor wants them on a statin and they don't know what to do! That's when I provide them with a copy of this article! It's the most clear and concise truthful information I have come across on this topic - especially with docs now saying that it won't be long before the AMA revises their current position that high HDL is cardio protective. How in the world can they get away with doing that??
Hi I commented before but have a new updated blood work after a heartattach in sept 23 my cholesterol. Was 232 now its 290 and lol is 214 they want me on rapatha do you have any data on this or praluvent ? Ty
You were the first medical doctor I ran across to warn me about the Covid mNRA vax and you were right way before it came out. I am going to believe you on this as well. My HDL is 76 and LDL 118. I am not sure why one is considered good and one bad but I sure as hell am not going to take any prescription drugs. I am 70 and prescription drug free.
Thank you Dr.T Can I suggest writing about ways to increase one’s cholesterol levels. I have low overall cholesterol , I usually run between 150-190 levels. I’m very healthy and I don’t take any vaccines. But I would like to increase my levels.
Did you know that whatever benefit statins may have, it is almost certainly NOT due to their power to lower cholesterol, especially LDL? How do we know this? Well, we may not “know” it, but numerous other substances to lower lipids were studied over the decades. Many of these did in fact reduce cholesterol or LDL. Problem: in many cases they did not improve the actual symptoms of cardiovascular disease (primarily heart attacks/strokes). They barely altered the all-cause death rate. In some cases, they increased it.
When statins were found to have a net benefit even though it was small, they were seized upon as a wonder drug. This is probably explained primarily because of the huge profit potential that Pharma hoped for and indeed obtained. Successful drugs were a billions of dollars a year moneymaker, at least until patent protections expired. You can be assured they are pushing newer, patentable and thus highly profitable successor treatments for the "problem."
I had my own epiphany in the past two years, about the low value of statin treatment and much else besides. My small Substack has several articles that address these issues, many spring boarding from the work of Kendrick*. I’ve even checked some of his claims, which usually means looking up a cited clinical trial or other scholarly article. Many of these are available for free online. Guess what? I’ve found no errors of fact. Or at least, Kendrick accurately reports what his sources say.
Expanding a bit upon on of Tenpenny’s comments: ALL patients “…should reconsider the risk/benefit of…” well, darned near anything I suspect.
Recently during a routine visit with my cardiologist, I had to explain why I no longer took the baby aspirin, the blood pressure medication, or the statin. Basically I reported that I had educated myself and was convinced that they were very low value interventions, especially for a man with no prior history of heart disease unless you count elevated lipids (which, of course, they see as a threshold for treatment.) The fact that my weigh was 20-30 pounds lower than a year ago, or that my lipids had improved (except LDL), or that my blood pressure was below even the ever-lower official threshold (I think it’s currently 130/80) did not faze my nurse in the least. And her response? It was basically this: “Standard of care requires me to recommend that you go back on the statin.” I don’t fault her, because the medical system is basically bound to promote certain guidelines. Even so, the entire experience was a bit surreal.
Granted not everyone has the time or the inclination to go down these rabbit holes. I’m a pretty smart guy but have no background in medicine. I have a technical background so I’m able to grasp some, certainly not all, of the important details. Following on a few exercises Kendrick does in his book, I was able to gauge – very roughly – what the expected benefit (and cost!) of taking a statin for the rest of my life might offer. On the cost side, I could expect to pay for 20 or more years of drugs, tests and medical office vists, at a ballpark cost of call it $20,000. I would also run the risk of potential adverse effects of the drug. And the expected benefit? That’s probably the hardest to figure out, simply due to what I suspect are unreliable figures in the studies. My life expectancy might be increased by several months, but other authorities claim the benefit might only be a few weeks.
Oh yeah, the point of that prior paragraph is basically to say that the responsibility is upon you, the patient, to educate yourself. It’s sad to say, but my personal experience suggests that your front line doctor or nurse, for all their years of training, is basically doing cookbook medicine. Apparently the pronouncements of a board of “experts” thousands of miles away, most of whom have glaring conflicts of interest, carry more weight when it comes to the treatments you will receive than the latest, or even the not no recent medical discoveries. In other words, while they may not be out to deliberately harm you, and your individual health care provider may not be actually trying to fleece you for fees, it sure seems that the system as a whole puts profit ahead of what’s actually best for the patient. If I’m even halfway correct, then you’ve got to look out for yourself because no one else will.
*In fact, originally I started my Substack so I could post a few articles and link to them, rather than repeatedly pontificate about the issues in random postings like I'm still doing here. As you can see, the effort was well intended but not entirely successful!
Hello Everyone. This accidentally got sent out on Friday instead of the typical Saturday post. There were a few grammar and spelling errors that have been corrected (I usually do a final read on Friday night.) Thanks for your comments and hope you enjoyed the read!! ~~ Dr. Tenpenny
Dr.Tenpenny, what’s your take on cholesterol in the presence of familial hypercholesterolemia, where ldl is very high but hdl @ 100 and triglycerides low in the 70’s?
Can someone tell me if you can have to much cholesterol? I really need help, when I am not raking crestor my cholesterol number are in the 400's, I really need some answers.
Hydration underpins our physiology not oxygenation.
Cholesterol is needed to repair blood vessels that get damaged. Dehydration leads to dryness and tissue tearing instead of stretching. Blood vessels get hernias and cholesterol is the mesh ready to make repair.
The bad rap is silly as it is like accusing men repairing pot holes of causing the holes. When we know they turn up to remedy the damage after the fact.
It’s easy to debunk the gaseous exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide. It’s a left over from when men believed animals were machines running on gases of combustion and exhaust.
Instead we run on SALT plus water. We breathe to remain hydrated and in equilibrium with the external pressure, a bit like fish.
Oxygen is a man made product not naturally occurring in air. Oxygen is made from air by removing moisture to the parts per million of water contamination. Oxygen is an extremely DRY air. Oxygen is an industrial product never designed for medical use.
It’s the exact opposite of what our lungs require. Just like salt restriction is the exact opposite of what our physiology requires.
Funny how medical practice has been shifted to cause dis-ease instead of curing dis-ease. Profiting from suffering is the medical model we have accepted. Perhaps it’s time we changed that?
Air is measured by its moisture or humidity.
Can you see why oxygen can’t co-exist with air?
Once oxygen is released from containment it extracts moisture from its surroundings and resumes its natural form as moist air.
Oxygen released inside the respiratory tract extracts moisture and dehydrates.
Oxygen used with poorly draining lungs will give relief by extracting moisture, this is its only merited use. Because drs have little regard for the damage oxygen can do in normal lungs, its general use causes damage.
The term Reactive Oxygen Species is describing pathological damage from dehydration. Oxygen toxicity arises from its POWER to dehydrate.
Oxygen can kill, this is why it is a Dr prescribed drug. Oxygen is prescribed primarily to the terminally ill. Palliative care is not kind.
Anytime you see a reference to oxidation, swap it out for dryness. Dehydration or dryness is our Achilles heel.
Hydration equals SALT plus water. Water follows salt.
The lungs use air not oxygen. Zero oxygen is required.
The lungs are rehydrating the red blood cells with salt water.
Just like an IV saline infusion.
There is more …
Read my articles titled:
We breathe air not oxygen
And
How does salt restriction lead to heart dis-ease and fear based reactionary thinking?
Click on my blue icon
I have been on crestor for 20 years I got off of it for months and my cholesterol was up to almost 400, should I continue to take it?
I find myself sharing this pertinent information on cholesterol over and over again! I'm always running in to people who tell me their doctor wants them on a statin and they don't know what to do! That's when I provide them with a copy of this article! It's the most clear and concise truthful information I have come across on this topic - especially with docs now saying that it won't be long before the AMA revises their current position that high HDL is cardio protective. How in the world can they get away with doing that??
Hi I commented before but have a new updated blood work after a heartattach in sept 23 my cholesterol. Was 232 now its 290 and lol is 214 they want me on rapatha do you have any data on this or praluvent ? Ty
Sherri,
You were the first medical doctor I ran across to warn me about the Covid mNRA vax and you were right way before it came out. I am going to believe you on this as well. My HDL is 76 and LDL 118. I am not sure why one is considered good and one bad but I sure as hell am not going to take any prescription drugs. I am 70 and prescription drug free.
Thank you Dr.T Can I suggest writing about ways to increase one’s cholesterol levels. I have low overall cholesterol , I usually run between 150-190 levels. I’m very healthy and I don’t take any vaccines. But I would like to increase my levels.
Eating walnuts regularly did it for me!
140-200 is perfect!!
Thanks for the post Dr. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-12861995/More-two-million-heart-patients-face-higher-doses-statins-extra-drugs-reduce-cholesterol.html
Very high LDL no impact on plaque progression
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2023/12/10/very-high-ldl-no-impact-on-plaque-progression/
This is HUGE NEWS! Please share far and wide!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hYLVF7VY3k
Done!
this is a better option: ECP Therapy - non invasive, fixes it
https://drtenpenny.substack.com/p/erectile-dysfunction-and-heart-disease
I highly recommend the few books by Dr. Malcolm Kendrick. I was referred to his work by Substack’s “A Midwestern Doctor.”
Kendrick writes extensively about heart health in general and statins in depth.
If you don't wish to purchase his books, he's written extensively on the same topics on his website:
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/
Did you know that whatever benefit statins may have, it is almost certainly NOT due to their power to lower cholesterol, especially LDL? How do we know this? Well, we may not “know” it, but numerous other substances to lower lipids were studied over the decades. Many of these did in fact reduce cholesterol or LDL. Problem: in many cases they did not improve the actual symptoms of cardiovascular disease (primarily heart attacks/strokes). They barely altered the all-cause death rate. In some cases, they increased it.
When statins were found to have a net benefit even though it was small, they were seized upon as a wonder drug. This is probably explained primarily because of the huge profit potential that Pharma hoped for and indeed obtained. Successful drugs were a billions of dollars a year moneymaker, at least until patent protections expired. You can be assured they are pushing newer, patentable and thus highly profitable successor treatments for the "problem."
I had my own epiphany in the past two years, about the low value of statin treatment and much else besides. My small Substack has several articles that address these issues, many spring boarding from the work of Kendrick*. I’ve even checked some of his claims, which usually means looking up a cited clinical trial or other scholarly article. Many of these are available for free online. Guess what? I’ve found no errors of fact. Or at least, Kendrick accurately reports what his sources say.
Expanding a bit upon on of Tenpenny’s comments: ALL patients “…should reconsider the risk/benefit of…” well, darned near anything I suspect.
Recently during a routine visit with my cardiologist, I had to explain why I no longer took the baby aspirin, the blood pressure medication, or the statin. Basically I reported that I had educated myself and was convinced that they were very low value interventions, especially for a man with no prior history of heart disease unless you count elevated lipids (which, of course, they see as a threshold for treatment.) The fact that my weigh was 20-30 pounds lower than a year ago, or that my lipids had improved (except LDL), or that my blood pressure was below even the ever-lower official threshold (I think it’s currently 130/80) did not faze my nurse in the least. And her response? It was basically this: “Standard of care requires me to recommend that you go back on the statin.” I don’t fault her, because the medical system is basically bound to promote certain guidelines. Even so, the entire experience was a bit surreal.
Granted not everyone has the time or the inclination to go down these rabbit holes. I’m a pretty smart guy but have no background in medicine. I have a technical background so I’m able to grasp some, certainly not all, of the important details. Following on a few exercises Kendrick does in his book, I was able to gauge – very roughly – what the expected benefit (and cost!) of taking a statin for the rest of my life might offer. On the cost side, I could expect to pay for 20 or more years of drugs, tests and medical office vists, at a ballpark cost of call it $20,000. I would also run the risk of potential adverse effects of the drug. And the expected benefit? That’s probably the hardest to figure out, simply due to what I suspect are unreliable figures in the studies. My life expectancy might be increased by several months, but other authorities claim the benefit might only be a few weeks.
Oh yeah, the point of that prior paragraph is basically to say that the responsibility is upon you, the patient, to educate yourself. It’s sad to say, but my personal experience suggests that your front line doctor or nurse, for all their years of training, is basically doing cookbook medicine. Apparently the pronouncements of a board of “experts” thousands of miles away, most of whom have glaring conflicts of interest, carry more weight when it comes to the treatments you will receive than the latest, or even the not no recent medical discoveries. In other words, while they may not be out to deliberately harm you, and your individual health care provider may not be actually trying to fleece you for fees, it sure seems that the system as a whole puts profit ahead of what’s actually best for the patient. If I’m even halfway correct, then you’ve got to look out for yourself because no one else will.
*In fact, originally I started my Substack so I could post a few articles and link to them, rather than repeatedly pontificate about the issues in random postings like I'm still doing here. As you can see, the effort was well intended but not entirely successful!
All about liver
Right!
Well done. The more people know about this the better. amidwesterndoctor on substack thinks of statins as satans which is very suitable.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/statins-are-they-really-good-for