Cardiovascular Disease

[Steve Kramer]

I just opened a book purporting to describe the best plan(s) for health for
men with Prostate Cancer. I obtained it with the intent of learning more
about supplements, vitamins, capsacin, etc. In the first three pages
(including the Intro), the author thrice states that cardiovascular disease
is the No. 1 killer of men; cancer being second. Also within those first
pages is a chart showing the Top 5 as if saying it three times was not
enough. And, of course, he asserts that one's ability to fight Prostate
Cancer is increased with general overall health including low BP, low
cholesterol, low weight, etc. Even then I was not prepared for this
statement: Cardiovascular disease is the No. 1 killer of men WITH Prostate
Cancer!

I have not read far enough to cite any stats on the subject, but it is
apparent that your ability to fight this bastard is contingent upon sound
judgments with regard to the rest of your daily regimen. And, once beaten,
don't spoil it by setting yourself up for a heart attack.

Now, if you have terminal cancer.... Well, I'll just have to think about
that one.



--
PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
PSA <.1 <.1 <.1 .27 .37 .75 PSAD 0.19 years
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after
PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years
Casodex added daily 07/06
PSA undetectable since; last checked on 06/04/09
Illegitimati non carborundum

[Ron]

Steve I personally don't know how many prostate victims have CAD.
I do however, and my uroligist stated that it seemed a large portion of his
practice did.
No scientific fact just a generalization.
Ron
"Steve Kramer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:heglm0$f69$[email protected]..
>I just opened a book purporting to describe the best plan(s) for health for
> men with Prostate Cancer. I obtained it with the intent of learning more
> about supplements, vitamins, capsacin, etc. In the first three pages
> (including the Intro), the author thrice states that cardiovascular
> disease
> is the No. 1 killer of men; cancer being second. Also within those first
> pages is a chart showing the Top 5 as if saying it three times was not
> enough. And, of course, he asserts that one's ability to fight Prostate
> Cancer is increased with general overall health including low BP, low
> cholesterol, low weight, etc. Even then I was not prepared for this
> statement: Cardiovascular disease is the No. 1 killer of men WITH
> Prostate
> Cancer!
>
> I have not read far enough to cite any stats on the subject, but it is
> apparent that your ability to fight this bastard is contingent upon sound
> judgments with regard to the rest of your daily regimen. And, once
> beaten,
> don't spoil it by setting yourself up for a heart attack.
>
> Now, if you have terminal cancer.... Well, I'll just have to think about
> that one.
>
>
>
> --
> PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
> Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
> RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
> PSA <.1 <.1 <.1 .27 .37 .75 PSAD 0.19 years
> EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
> PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years
> Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after
> PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years
> Casodex added daily 07/06
> PSA undetectable since; last checked on 06/04/09
> Illegitimati non carborundum
>
>

[gvk2]

On Nov 24, 5:05*am, "Steve Kramer" <skra...@cinci.rr.com> wrote:

including low BP, low
> cholesterol, low weight, etc. *Even then I was not prepared for this
> statement: *Cardiovascular disease is the No. 1 killer of men WITH Prostate

You might say which book and which author you are speaking about.

However the data, which is something I've known for years, only
makes sense.
If about 16 to 17 percent of men are diagnosed with PCa but only about
3% die of it, then as often stated, only about 1 in 6 men with
prostate cancer die because of it.

Far more than 1 in 6 men die from cardio-vascular disease and all of
its closely related conditions.
Heart attacks, congestive heart failure, strokes, type 2 diabetes.
I'd guess those four alone cause the deaths of over half of those who
have been diagnose with prostate cancer.

All of those are or can be directly related to diet.
It just so happens that the same diet to alter the course of those
conditions is essentially the same diet thought by some to slow or
delay the progression of some cases of prostate cancer.
If eaten from childhood many think such a diet would cut the number of
those ever diagnosed. Such as we see in many Asian nations.

So, as often said, a significant change in diet might have some
benefit for prostate cancer, but it certainly will have some benefit
for cardiovascular disease and its cousin conditions.

As they say, it can't hurt.

I'd say, once diagnosed, radical dietary changes are still a
somewhat weak tool for prostate cancer, but a strong tool for
cardiovascular disease, strokes, diabetes.

[Gogarty]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>On Nov 24, 5:05*am, "Steve Kramer" <skra...@cinci.rr.com> wrote:
>
> including low BP, low
>> cholesterol, low weight, etc. *Even then I was not prepared for this
>> statement: *Cardiovascular disease is the No. 1 killer of men WITH Prostate
>
>You might say which book and which author you are speaking about.
>
>However the data, which is something I've known for years, only
>makes sense.
>If about 16 to 17 percent of men are diagnosed with PCa but only about
>3% die of it, then as often stated, only about 1 in 6 men with
>prostate cancer die because of it.
>
>Far more than 1 in 6 men die from cardio-vascular disease and all of
>its closely related conditions.
>Heart attacks, congestive heart failure, strokes, type 2 diabetes.
>I'd guess those four alone cause the deaths of over half of those who
>have been diagnose with prostate cancer.
>
>All of those are or can be directly related to diet.
>It just so happens that the same diet to alter the course of those
>conditions is essentially the same diet thought by some to slow or
>delay the progression of some cases of prostate cancer.
>If eaten from childhood many think such a diet would cut the number of
>those ever diagnosed. Such as we see in many Asian nations.
>
>So, as often said, a significant change in diet might have some
>benefit for prostate cancer, but it certainly will have some benefit
>for cardiovascular disease and its cousin conditions.
>
>As they say, it can't hurt.
>
>I'd say, once diagnosed, radical dietary changes are still a
>somewhat weak tool for prostate cancer, but a strong tool for
>cardiovascular disease, strokes, diabetes.
>
>
You are too, too depressing,

[gvk2]

On Nov 24, 1:00*pm, Gogarty <Goga...@Clongowes.edu.ie> wrote:


>
> You are too, too depressing,

Sorry, I look upon dietary changes as one of the areas where positive
steps can be taken.
One of the things people can personally do to take some sense of
control.
It may be of some value for those already diagnosed with PCa and its
almost certainly beneficial for the general public and for most
diagnosed PCa men regarding their longevity in terms of cardio issues.

It can actually have striking and almost immediate effects on those
cardio-vascular conditions.

Clearly however, its a long way from being a cure-all for PCa.
Wish it were.
All things being equal, I'd rather have good genes than a perfect
diet.

[I.P. Freely]

gvk2 wrote:
>
> All of those are or can be directly related to diet.

And exercise.

I.P.

[I.P. Freely]

gvk2 wrote:

> All things being equal, I'd rather have good genes than a perfect
> diet.

If I knew I had flawless genes, I would eat the same foods I did 25
years ago, considering the people who eat crap and smoke and get no
exercise but live "forever" due to good genes.

I.P.