Homocysteine study misses the mark, but then, what would you

[HysteryDiagnosis]

expect from those who worship at the altar of toxic drugs and medications of questionable efficacy??

http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2006/jun2006_report_doctors_01.htm
The media then boldly proclaimed:

>>“Hope Abandoned for Benefit to Lowering Homocysteine” Contrary to these negative opinions, the two studies in the New England Journal of Medicine confirm what Life Extension long ago published about vascular disease and what steps are required to achieve optimal homocysteine control.

As a reader of Life Extension magazine, you have a front row seat to a raging debate that could very well affect how many Americans will develop heart disease, stroke, osteoporosis, Alzheimer’s disease, blindness, depression, and other disorders associated with excess homocysteine.<<

>>Homocysteine May Not Have Been Reduced Enough

Scientific studies dating back to the early 1990s indicate that optimal homocysteine levels should not exceed 9-10 micromoles per liter (µmol/L),51 and ideally should be even lower than that, perhaps under 7 µmol/L for optimal risk reduction.52

One epidemiological study demonstrated that homocysteine levels above 10 µmol/L are associated with an increase in heart attack risk.22 Another study showed that homocysteine levels as low as 9 carry long-term danger, with cardiac risk escalating more sharply when homocysteine levels are at 15 or greater.17 Still another (Japanese) study showed that those with a homocysteine level below 7 were much less likely to suffer a stroke than patients with homocysteine levels higher than 11.51<<

[jbnow]

1. Thanks for the article

I hadn't heard of the studies that said reducing the levels did not help but it's good to hear the shortcomings of those studies.