Kristen Sparrow • November 05, 2012
NYTimes article reads “Chelation Therapy Shows Slight Benefit for Heart Disease.” I was amazed at that and read on, only to find that the study showed no such thing. The results were not statistically significant and there were so many confounding factors in the $30 MILLION study that it was pretty much worthless. How many people will get the wrong impression from that headline and undergo this expensive (at least $5,000 a year) treatment? Bah. The theory was that chelation will reduce the calcium in arterial plaque, but there were so many faults with the study that it’s meaningless. Diet and exercise people.
Much-Debated Treatment for Heart Disease Shows Slight Benefit in Clinical Trial
By ANDREW POLLACK
LOS ANGELES — To the surprise of many cardiologists, a controversial alternative therapy proved beneficial to people with heart disease, reducing the rate of death and cardiovascular problems in a clinical trial, researchers said on Sunday.
The benefit of the treatment, known as chelation therapy, barely reached statistical significance, and there were questions about the reliability of the study. Even the investigators in the trial said the results were insufficient by themselves to justify recommending use of the treatment.