Coronary Artery calcium scan...

Ryan,
I read your post and decided that I must respond. Let me start by saying that I respect your interest and insight along with your knowledge of human health and medical practice as well as theory. At first I could not decide how to respond. I didn’t want to come off as attacking your opinion or the research that you did.
I recently had the Calcium Screening to which you refer. My screening was prompted by myself, taking into account my age (49½), family history (father had quad by-pass at age 64. Minimal heart damage, still living and doing great. Grandfather, same side of family, double by-pass in his late 60’s post MI. He passed away in his mid 70’s from complication of CHF.) I have also had high cholesterol which also runs in the family. All family members are otherwise healthy, normal weight and don’t smoke. My Screening results did in fact come up with a high number (244) which put me into the 90th percentile. What that translates into is that 10% of the male population, age 46-50, have a higher score. I don’t know where the numbers came from but I didn’t like the way they sounded. The next step from this Screening was to undergo another CT using 64 slice definition (higher resolution) with the addition of iodine dye which gives a better indication of any blockage with a 3D rendering. This in effect rules out the false positive you mentioned. This relatively simple, non-invasive (except IV) test confirmed what the Calcium scoring screening showed. I had calcium build up from damage and plaque build up in my Right Coronary Artery (approx. 70% proximal and 40% distal) also in my Left Anterior Descending (approx. 20% distal of the circumflex branch). These tests took approximately an hour each as an outpatient over the course of two days due to scheduling. On the third day I was speaking to a Cardiologist who informed me that, in his opinion, I had significant Coronary Artery Disease and needed at least angioplasty to determine blood flow beyond the perceived blockage(s). I decided he knew more about hearts than me so I agreed. One week from walking into CFR for the screening I was now lying in CFR’s Cardiac Cath Operating Room. Under the fun effects of a local and Versed, my procedure took about two and a half hours. When it was over I had one 4.5 mm bare metal stainless steel stent and one 3.5 mm coated stent in my RCA. The final #’s: 95%+ occlusion of proximal RCA with 75% occlusion distal. Oh yeah, LAD was 60%+ but had 90-95% positive blood flow beyond occlusion,the good flow and my age prevented a trip across the hall for open heart by-pass. A positive positive if you ask me. The actual plaque blockage was not only confirmed but was higher. Obviously the screening is just that. No damage to cardiac muscle. Making great progress in re-hab and should be back on the job very soon.
What I would like to do is address your words and some of the quoted text that you researched. Keep in mind that you are entitled to your opinions and beliefs. You are young and have lots of time to dedicate to finding what works for you. Good Luck.
Ø I think that undergoing any modern treatment these days should not be done in ignorance.

Calcium Scoring is not treatment. It is a simple outpatient CT screening that detects calcium in coronary vessels which is the body's response to injury. Through a computer based algorhythm, a numerical value is given.

Ø I asked myself Why should I live in fear because someone *a salesman* told us that this screening could potentially save lives.

My fear didn’t start until I was told I had CAD. No “salesman” pushed this test on me, it was all my decision. And by the way, it did save my life.

Ø The following link is a long read, and one that I came across after a quick google search, below are a few quotes that really stand out...

Good ole GOOGLE. It’s almost to the point that someone can sit at a PC, type in anything and within a short amount of time know enough to get them into trouble. If one were to type in, say ‘health benefits of eating dog crap’, I’m sure they would get a million hits. As a matter of fact, by typing in ‘calcium scoring’ 3,500,000 hits showed up in GOOGLE. That would take a long time to sift through to really make an informed opinion on any subject.

Ø "According to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), there is no evidence that routine cardiac calcium screening and other cardiac tests (electrocardiography, treadmill tests and carotid artery scans, for example) in otherwise healthy people will improve their health outcomes.
Now Ryan, this one really is a poor choice. Elsewhere in your text you mentioned that one shouldn’t trust the government experts and this quote is from who? SCFD has provided all of the above mentioned test to assure our health with one exception, Cardiac Calcium Screening. Guess which one found my CAD which was susequently treated and thus preventing my early death, at least from CAD. Dr. Grullon and Dr. Husty estimated I would have had a significant cardiac event within 2 weeks to 2 months. Who really knows? That truck could always be waiting for me to cross the street.

Ø keep an open mind to alternative theories?

I’m always open to theories and new ways of thinking but at the same time what is known is known. Recently Steve Jobs admitted that his pursuit of alternative, theoretical treatments for his cancer was going to (and did) end his life when a traditional treatment approach could have cured him.

Ø You can write or quote as many personal stories and testimonies about this scan as you want, but I can show you tens times that amount about how people have reversed and prevented HTN, heart disease, high cholesterol, etc... just by nutrition alone, people that have completely eliminated the need for the synthetic medications doled out by 'medical professionals.'

When I was told I had high cholesterol I was in my early thirties. I weighed 165 lbs., surfed, skateboarded, mountain biked, wake boarded, snow boarded and could rollerblade a 30 mile route over two highrise bridges in Daytona and still hit an afternoon session at the pier. My eating habits were not quite Jay Steiner like but close. I was into natural holistic health, I was doing everything I could do to keep fit. I was prescribed medication on several occasions. I tried this route and had undesirable side effects. I returned to attempting to “eliminate” the problem without “synthetic medication”. Obviously my approach had it’s own undesirable side effects. Another note on medication, although most are synthesized in production their chemical compounds are discovered and derived from nature. GOOGLE it.

Ø If someone had a high calcium score, their best option would be to undergo EDTA chelation, which is
a synthetic amino acid that has an affinity for calcium and the toxic metal, Lead (Pb).

Although this “treatment” may have some validity, under the circumstance of my situation, it was in my best interest to not take the time to try out this theory.

Ø what I wont do is stand by and watch people that I consider family ie. Stiver possibly make a huge mistake

You stated that you were not trying to force your opinion on others. If that is true, then I do not see your point in the above statement. What “huge mistake” could be made by utilizing a diagnostic screening tool to rule out possible illness and disruption of homeostasis? We do it everyday on the job. Think about it.

I was, for the most part, asymptomatic for cardiac related problems. My symptoms could be and were attributed to getting older and a stressful schedule of life events. I did have risk factors for cardiac disease. I had the screening done and it saved my life. I really don’t know what else to say except that if you have risk factors for anything that is known to cause death or illness and there is a way to check it out before it is too late, do it.