Ornish Program

Pratoman,

With your cardio history, it is probably money/time well spent. Kind of like joining a gym ..... if you make the commitment you are more likely to stick with it. Most of what you'll learn can be found in books and done at home, but it will take more time and effort. Maybe think of it as investing in a few more end of life years.

Prat,
Two good friends of mine with lots of what I call f... you money did the Ornish program. They loved it, I think both benefited more from the stress relief stuff than the diet. They even seem more relaxed and happy.Both had CAD, 3 stents, LAD, RC and Circumflex..so they were heading down the sudden cardiac death path. Neither has shown any reversal of CAD on further angiograms,no progression wither, but like I say, they sure seem a lot better.

Once we have been de-bulked of cancer via radiation-surgery-hormones-chemo, these approaches may help:

1. Diet (Mediterranean, Ketogenic)
2. Supplements (turmeric, green tea, broccoli, pro-biotics)
3. Exercise
4. Stress reduction

If we can get our PSA doubling up to a year or more, we most likely will die of something else. Else, live long enough to take an effective immune therapy drug.

===============================================================

Age 64 in 2015
12/02 PSA 2.9 age 51
9/03 BX/DX, Gleason 6, 4 of 12 cores
9/03 Low dose brachytherapy
5/08 PSA nadir 1.1
12/08 PSA 1.8
2/09 BX/DX, Gleason 8, 1 of 12 cores
6/09 Hyperthermic Radiation, Hormone (short term), IMRT (10 fractions) spring 2009
10/09 PSA nadir < 0.1 10/09 through 01/12
4/12 PSA 0.2
3/14 PSA 2.9
5/14 C11 Acetate PT/CT, found 2.0 cm lymph node
5/14 Lupron/Casodex (9 months)
8/14 nadir <0.01
2/15 SBRT to node, at UCSD
3/15 PSA 0.02,T=0
6/15 PSA<0.015,T=105
9/15 PSA<0.1,T=278 Quest Lab

I've also read "The Spectrum" and try to follow the advice in the book to the best of my ability. I would say taking the actual program would be well worthwhile if you can afford it.

Prato, I am reading a book right now that you might like: "How Not to Die" by Dr. Michael Greger. It is a fascinating read(as is his website " NutritionFacts.org "), and he makes a powerful case for avoiding meat.

As I am reading the book, I find myself thinking "I have got to do this for my overall health, weight and PC". But then I remember the evidence for the opposite approach backed up at least for CV and weight, and I go back to "not so sure". A big plus for his side is that for a lifetime I ate in ways that he insists leads to cancer in general and PC in particular, and I for sure got aggressive PC. Coincidence, or did my lifestyle cause my PC? And could I improve my prognosis by reversing what I have done for a lifetime? Quite possibly. I sure do think so when I am reading his book or watching his videos.

But I wish I could attend one of his seminars so I could ask him questions. In addition to my previous bias based on personal experience(but only related to vascular and weight loss), saw an article on news yesterday titles something like "top 10 things that changed in 2015 in health". Saying that the recommendations are changing based on new evidence(or lack of evidence for past recommendations) and linked to this:
journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0139817

Somebody said...
Dietary Intervention for Overweight and Obese Adults: Comparison of Low-Carbohydrate and Low-Fat Diets. A Meta-Analysis ...................
Limitations

Lack of patient-level data and heterogeneity in dropout rates and outcomes reported.
Conclusions

This trial-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing LoCHO diets with LoFAT diets in strictly adherent populations demonstrates that each diet was associated with significant weight loss and reduction in predicted risk of ASCVD events. However, LoCHO diet was associated with modest but significantly greater improvements in weight loss and predicted ASCVD risk in studies from 8 weeks to 24 months in duration.

So in this recent Meta-analysis, the(slightly) low carb approach- which usually means more meat compared to a low fat approach- not only resulted in more weight loss, but better cardio-vascular related blood testing. Which certainly confirms my personal experience in the past.

Dr. Greger emphasizes cholesterol, particularly LDL, as a main contributor to heart and brain problems. And he insists that the best way to reduce that is by reducing or totally avoiding animal products. And the case he makes, based on studies he presents, is excellent and convincing. But, I would not only like to ask him about the results of that above linked study(are they biased?), but also my personal experience. In the past, when I have followed a low-carb (can vegan be low carb?) approach for 6 months, I not only had spectacular weight loss with no hunger, but my heart related blood work and blood pressure also improved just as spectacularly.

So(I would like to ask him), if cholesterol really is the villain, and it is raised by a meat based diet, then why did mine(and a friend at the same time) improve so much on a meat based, low carb diet? My total cholesterol went up slightly, my HDL went up by a lot, my LDL and triglycerides plummeted, triglycerides down by 75%. BP down from 140/90 to 105/60, weight down from 216 to 174. (no statins could touch this overall result, and all without muscle pain)Therefore, if cholesterol, especially LDL, is such a villain, then wasn't my meat based diet extremely good for me? These are questions I would like to ask him. Just because it all leaves me undecided. One study vs another, we know how that goes around here! LOL!

But a fascinating thing about this Dr. Greger is how he got started with this nutritional emphasis in his practice. When he was a little boy, his 60 something years old grandmother was sent home to die with heart disease. She had been given all the coronary bypasses possible, scar tissue prohibited any further attempts. She was given from a few weeks to months to live, and was a total invalid. But she read about Nathan Pritikin(like Ornish today), and managed to get herself across the country and into his live in program. As he says, she was rolled in and walked out. Within a few weeks she was walking 10 miles a day. She lived to 96.

OK, I know it is just a study of one, anecdotal, etc. I don't care, impresses the heck out of me and I can understand how, when he was accepted to 20 medical schools, he made his decision on who had the most nutrition training. Even though that still was not a whole lot.

Of course, that is CV disease, and I apparently don't have that despite being slightly over weight and with not great cholesterol readings. However, I have a zero calcium scoring which most 18 year olds probably would envy, and I have zero heart symptoms even when hiking quickly up steep hills with a pack(I better stop bragging boy am I asking for it). What I have is PC. And he insists that the way I ate most of my life leads to at least 5 or 10+ times more PC than people who eat the opposite. And he says that when those people are put on a SAD (standard American diet), they quickly revert to our lousy stats. Which, again, is a huge argument in favor of vegan or something close to it. I am almost convinced to go through that big change. But there is a big fly in the ointment, next post.
(I must quit now, supper is ready. Massively hi carb spaghetti and meat sauce, lots of bread dipped in olive oil, salad, all washed down with cabernet sauv.)

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 1/1/2016 3:48:22 PM (GMT-7)

Billybob, yes, I've read the data that say there is a growing belief that fat is less important. Its all so confusing. Thats why i made an appointment with a nutritionist today, for February 1st (earliest appointment i could get). She is highly credentialed, and i think i can have a conversation with her at a pretty high level, as having seen two other nutritionists in my time, and spending a lot of time over the last three years learninga bout proper nutrition. I am hoping she can give me some clarity on stuff like fat vs carbs and sugar.
Meanwhile, i have gotten my LDL down as low as 34 (from 100) and currently t is 42. This was done with a combination of better diet and 10mg Crestor daily. And my total Cholesterol has been fluctuating between 97 and 112. Unfortunately my HDL just cant seem to get above 34. My Cardiologist seems unconcerned about that saying that with my LDL at such low, "therapeutic" levels, the HDL level is not a big deal.
And my triglycerides have been around 150, although this last test showed they had risen to 208, so i cut down more on sugar (actually cut it out mostly).

I don't know what more i can do, but with a calcium score, last June at the time i had stents put in, of 937, i fear i am a ticking bomb, even though i feel good with no cardiac symptoms. As nervous as i am about my upcoming PSA next week, i do obsess more about my cardiac issues. Thus I'm thinking Ornish. But i was disappointed to hear about the two friends of Sheepguy, who went thru the Ornish program and stopped progression, but did not see any reversal.

We shall see, right now i am doing what i can. Walked 4 miles on the treadmill today, have been walking about 2-3 miles most days.

All very confusing.
I'll update you in February after seeing the nutritionist

sheepguy said...
Don't get too jiggy about the lack of reversal I mentioned, Prato. Typically, their caridiologist tell them..there is a least some narrowing of the stents at 2-3 years post implantation..they are at 4 years almost and there has been none. Neither of them had observable plaques anywhere but the stent sites..so there would be nothing to see. But there has been nothing new..at all, not just the old "nothing to worry about"..they are sticklers like you for medical details. So, it seems like a reversal of sorts in that many stents are occluded at 10 years . I think they did the Ornish thing almost immediately after the stents were placed..like maybe 2 months maximum.

Actually, "there is a least some narrowing of the stents at 2-3 years post implantation..they are at 4 years almost and there has been none." is pretty darn good. Just as you would expect heart disease to worsen in most people over several years. Sure a reversal would be great, but just not worsening is not too shabby.

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 12/31/2015 7:26:46 AM (GMT-7)

You would have been ideal for the Ornish/Carroll study, Pratoman; are you familiar with Pete Carroll?

Ornish/Carroll did a study with 200 men diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer, just like your diagnosis. You went very quickly--less than 2 months from diagnosis to treatment--but all the men in this trial agreed to forego any sort of aggressive treatment for at least one year to participate in the study.

The men were randomized into two equally sized groups but were otherwise the same; the average PSAs (as a measure of their PC) were essentially the same. One group, the control group, did nothing different from their normal lifestyle. The other group, the study group, underwent three types of lifestyle changes: healthy diet changes, increased exercise and stress reduction practices.

A year later the average PSA of the control group went up slightly. The average PSA of the study group went DOWN.

I would venture that after they shared the results with the entire group after the year ended, they were ALL glad that they didn't rush into aggressive treatments.

You got off-base...re-read. I said it WOULD have been a good study for you.

But since you brought it up, it should be noted for others who may follow that having 3+4 even at diagnosis is not necessarily a disqualified for AS.

Sheepguy, LOL, thanks, point well taken.

Yes, i am pretty sure i read that about 50% of CAD patients on the Ornish program see reversal, while the other 50% are mostly stopping progression. It's just that reading that typically, after 2-3 years, expect some narrowing, despite the stents, well, its a bit disconcerting. But hey, i appreciate the data, i'm looking for truth.
Thanks for taking the time to write the second post, and calm my usual lunacy LOL

Prat:

Rather than invest so much inconvenience in terms of time and effort in the Ornish program, wouldn't it make more sense to do the Medit. Diet? There seems to be a commonality among experts that this is the way to go.

Mel (not really practicing what I preach, especially during this Holiday Season!)