Grapefruit, Statins, for Multiple Sclerosis/CCSVI?

[Guest guest]

statins are very dangerous drugs with many side effects .if you have cholesterol,then go to a good thyroid doctor that works with armour.

[Guest guest]

My doctor, who is treating me for Lyme disease and MS, will not use Statins because they shut down the bodies CoQ10 production. CoQ10 is critical to cells and energy. He treats the root source of the diseases...infection...whether it is viral or bacterial. Once I was treated for the infections my cholesterol and other associated tests went back to normal range.

Interestingly, Vanderbilt University found that MS patients are infected with Chlamyedia pneumoniae, which is a common co-infection with Lyme disease. http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/browse_thread/thread/38cb7f20817b6309/c5eec0bcf74804c6?lnk=st & q=Bacteria+linked+to+MS

I don't know if the University ever tried to rule out Lyme disease....doesn't matter if they did...the first screening test misses up to 65% of culture proven positive Lyme cases www.ilads.org . I don't know if Vanderbilt states that MS is caused by c. pneumoniae or whether it is just common in MS patients...one thing I do know...I don't believe in coincidences when it comes to these diseases.

By the way, Vanderbilt treats MS (c. pneumoniae) successfully with antibiotics.

I doubt Vanderbilt knows about the corruption with the Lyme testing yet. You see....many of the IDSA 2000 and 2006 panel members make money from the sale of faulty Lyme disease test kits to commercial labs...

Attorney General Blumenthal's findings of the IDSA (Infectious Disease Society of America)

The IDSA failed to conduct a conflicts of interest review for any of the panelists prior to their appointment to the 2006 Lyme disease guideline panel;

• Subsequent disclosures demonstrate that several of the 2006 Lyme disease panelists had conflicts of interest;

• The IDSA failed to follow its own procedures for appointing the 2006 panel chairman and members, enabling the chairman, who held a bias regarding the existence of chronic Lyme, to handpick a likeminded panel without scrutiny by or formal approval of the IDSA’s oversight committee;

• The IDSA’s 2000 and 2006 Lyme disease panels refused to accept or meaningfully consider information regarding the existence of chronic Lyme disease, once removing a panelist from the 2000 panel who dissented from the group’s position on chronic Lyme disease to achieve "consensus";

• The IDSA blocked appointment of scientists and physicians with divergent views on chronic Lyme who sought to serve on the 2006 guidelines panel by informing them that the panel was fully staffed, even though it was later expanded;

• The IDSA portrayed another medical association’s Lyme disease guidelines as corroborating its own when it knew that the two panels shared several authors, including the chairmen of both groups, and were working on guidelines at the same time. In allowing its panelists to serve on both groups at the same time, IDSA violated its own conflicts of interest policy.