Linus Pauling’s Unified Theory and Therapy for Heart Disease

Submitted by Sue Potter

Further information on this and more at: http://www.paulingtherapy.com

Linus Pauling claimed that specific non-toxic substances called Lp(a) binding inhibitors taken orally will prevent and may even dissolve existing atherosclerotic plaque build-ups. This work is based on at least two Nobel Prizes in Medicine and the efforts of countless medical researchers. The theory and conclusions offered represent the final contribution of an American scientific giant.

The fact that you have not heard about this discovery in the mainstream media is disturbing. It speaks volumes about how powerful interests can somehow suppress vital information that would be detrimental to their financial interests.

In 1989, the eminent American scientist Linus Pauling and his associate Matthias Rath, MD, unlocked a medical mystery. They found the reason human beings suffer heart disease.

Then in 1991, Linus Pauling invented a non-prescription cure. The twice Nobel prize winning genius, chemist, and medical researcher made the strong (and so far unreported) claim that heart disease can be controlled, even cured, by a specific “mega-nutrient” therapy. Heart patients using the Pauling Therapy routinely avoid angioplasty and open-heart surgery. Not by lowering cholesterol, as the media would have us believe, but by attacking the root cause. Rapid recovery has been the rule, not the exception. Strangely, there are no known adverse side effects, yet the medical profession ignores Pauling and Rath.

You Must Unlearn What You Have Learned

Atherosclerotic plaques deposit in response to injury. This major finding led to the 1985 Brown-Goldstein Nobel prize in medicine. The confusion in the media is cause and effect. The fallacy is that cholesterol causes heart disease, but plaque build-ups are the effect of heart disease. G. C. Willis, MD, made the crucial observation in the early 1950s. A Canadian doctor, he noticed that atherosclerotic plaques in his patients kept forming in the same places. Usually near the heart where the blood vessels are stretched and bent.

Willis was the first to implicate high blood pressures and the mechanical stress caused by the heartbeat. The Pauling-Rath theory relies on this observation that plaque does not form randomly throughout the blood stream. (Note: In a heart bypass, veins from the leg are used, which are without plaque.) Accordingly, it is unlikely that the primary cause of the lesions leading to heart disease are “poisons” circulating in the blood. What causes the stress fractures in the walls of blood vessels that leads to heart disease? The Pauling-Rath unified theory blames a lack of a specific protein caused by a specific vitamin deficiency.

Visualize a garden hose being continually stepped on 70-80 times per minute. A fate similar to the coronary arteries feeding the heart. Like the garden hose, the arteries lose their strength and stability over time from wear and tear. (Curious: shouldn’t this be taken care of by the body’s normal arterial cell reproduction/replacement cycle?) According to Pauling, the atherosclerotic plaques of coronary heart disease form only after cracks or stress fractures appear. This healing process begins with one very important “sticky” form of cholesterol.

What is Lp(a) and Why is it Important?

Lipoprotein(a) “small a” or Lp(a) is a variant of the so called “bad” LDL cholesterol. (See end note.) Lp(a) is “sticky” substance in the blood that Pauling and Rath believe is the lipid that begins the process of forming atherosclerotic plaques in heart disease. The 1985 Nobel prize in medicine was awarded for the discovery of the cholesterol binding sites; the so-called Lysine Binding Sites. We now know that it is Lp(a) and not ordinary cholesterol which binds to form plaque.

Briefly, Lp(a) has lysine (and proline) receptors. You can think of a chemical receptor as a simple lock and key. Only one key (e.g. lysine) will fit into the lock (receptor on the Lp(a) molecule).

There may be multiple receptors on the molecule, but once they are all filled up with keys (lysine or proline) the Lp(a) molecule looses its ability to bind with any more “keys.” When all the Lp(a) locks have keys, Lp(a) will no longer be able to create plaque.

Once Pauling learned that Lp(a) has receptors for lysine, he knew how to counter the atherosclerosis process chemically. His invention, the Pauling Therapy, is to increase the concentration of this essential and non-toxic amino acid (and proline) in the blood serum.

Lysine and proline supplements increase the concentration of free lysine and proline in the blood. The higher the concentration of the free lysine (and proline) in the blood, the more likely it is that Lp (a) molecules will bind with this lysine, rather than the lysine strands that have been exposed by cracks in blood vessels, or the other lysine that has been attracted to the Lp(a) already attached to the blood vessel wall.

According to Pauling, a high concentration of free lysine can destroy existing plaques.

It is important to keep all this in perspective using the Pauling-Rath Unified theory. If you are not getting enough vitamin C to produce collagen, and your blood vessels are wearing down, then the Lp(a) plaque is of great benefit to you. Simply removing plaque without restoring the vein or artery to health is like tearing a scab off a wound. You do not want to remove the scab until after the tissue underneath has started healing. Your body needs sufficient vitamin C so your veins and arteries can heal.

The Unified Theory blames mechanical stresses (high blood pressures, stretching and bending, etc.) on the blood vessels for exposing lysine that Lp(a) is attracted to. This explains why plaque doesn’t always form. Atherosclerosis is [actually an attempt by your body at] a healing process. Like a scab, plaques form after a lesion or injury to the blood vessel wall.

There is an awesome elegance that these binding inhibitors (vitamin C/lysine) are completely non-toxic. They are also the basic building blocks of collagen. The Unified Theory blames poor collagen production for the entire problem of heart disease. Therefore, the Pauling Therapy not only melts plaque, but it attacks the root cause by stimulating the bodies’ production of collagen.

With enough collagen, arteries remain strong and plaque free. The Pauling-Rath theory postulates that the root cause of atherosclerotic plaque deposits is a chronic vitamin C deficiency which limits the collagen our bodies can make. A surprising body of experimental research supports the Pauling-Rath view. Careful studies with animals that do not make their own endogenous vitamin C prove that when the dietary intake of the vitamin is low, collagen production is limited, and blood vessels tend to become thinner and weaker from wear and tear. Plaque deposits then form to compensate for this weakness.

Large population studies also support the view that increased vitamin C intake results in lower incidence of cardiovascular disease and lower death rates.

Heart Disease is Chronic Scurvy

If you suffer plaque deposits, it is likely you owe your life to this material that narrows your arteries. Without plaques, your weakened blood vessels would rupture or leak causing a slow death from internal bleeding; a slower version of scurvy, the disease long dreaded by ancient sailors. (James Lind discovered around 1753 that eating [citrus] fruit prevents this disease (which is why British sailors became known as Limeys). Acute scurvy can be prevented by a mere 10 mg of vitamin C per day.

This process by itself rarely kills people, but plaque-lined arteries make heart attacks more likely from a blood clot or blockage. (Plaque-lined arteries can not easily dilate in response to a clot.) It is currently unknown what amount of vitamin C prevents the atherosclerotic plaques of chronic scurvy, but Linus Pauling often recommended 3000 mg.

Many experts think something circulating in the blood must cause these cracks in our blood “pipes.” For many years, ordinary LDL cholesterol has been blamed because elevated levels have been correlated with heart disease. (This is akin to saying skid marks cause traffic accidents, because there are usually skid marks present at all traffic accidents.)  Other scientists correlated elevated homocysteine and oxidized cholesterol. Again, the confusion is cause and effect. If cholesterol causes cracks or lesions, plaque should be more randomly distributed throughout the blood stream. According to the Pauling-Rath Unified Theory, both elevated homocysteine and oxidized cholesterol are [also] symptoms of scurvy.

Is the Mainstream Finally Catching up with Pauling?

Before teaming with Pauling, Dr. Rath’s German research team examined plaque from human aortas (blood vessels near the heart) post-mortem. They discovered that atherosclerotic plaques are composed primarily of Lp(a), not ordinary LDL cholesterol.

Mainstream medical science has known since 1989 that Lp(a) binds to form plaque, not ordinary LDL. (see end note) Dr. Rath realized that Lp(a) was connected somehow with vitamin C and joined the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine.

Together, Pauling and Rath developed their Unified Theory, which holds that increased Lp(a) acts as a surrogate for low vitamin C and hardens weak blood vessels. Their experiments to test this theory proved that low vitamin C intake will increase blood levels of Lp(a) in test animals compared to controls.

An important finding is that this sticky Lp(a) (an LDL-like cholesterol substance) has only been found in the very few animal species that do not make their own vitamin C, including humans.

Today, most animals: Make vitamin C in their livers or kidneys, in large mega-amounts (9,000 mg to 12,000 mg adjusted for body weight - which is high by current medical standards), and rarely suffer cardiovascular disease.

We humans are almost unique among life on Earth in that we must get our vitamin C entirely from the diet (or supplements, many of which are not sufficiently converted to usable forms).

The Cause of Heart Disease

Science has known for almost two decades that damage to the walls of blood vessels (or lesions) are a necessary precondition for the formation of atherosclerotic plaques in human beings. The most popular competing theories as to why these lesions occur include: Oxidized cholesterol in the blood, elevated levels and oxidized homocysteine in the blood, and Vitamin deficiencies.

(It is safe to say that few researchers believe that high levels of fat or cholesterol in the diet are the primary cause of heart disease. An exception may be researchers working for companies that offer high-priced cholesterol-lowering medications.)

In our view, all competing theories must be able to explain:

1. Why occlusive cardiovascular disease does not occur in animals, and
2. Why infarctions in humans usually occur in the arteries at locations where the mechanical stress (blood pressure, arterial bending and stretching, etc.) is a factor, rather than more randomly distributed throughout the body.

These two observations are the cornerstones of the vitamin C theory. Furthermore, the early findings of Canadian doctors Patterson and Willis should not be forgotten. Their research indicated that arterial tissue levels of ascorbate (vitamin C) are much lower in heart patients when compared with controls, and that ascorbate supplementation could reduce arterial deposits. This pioneering work should have been immediately followed up.

End Note: Given that we have already established that LDL cholesterol is created by fungi, then what is the true root cause of heart disease? Oh, and fungi are also the root cause of many cellular mutations (e.g., that “cancer” word), so perhaps they are responsible or contributors to the variant of LDL known as Lp(a). What effect does Vitamin C have on fungi? It is a pretty strong antifingal. So, perhaps Pauling’s belief that he got to the root cause was premature; he stopped one block short (as most allopaths are prone to do) and the “cause of his cause” was actually fungal. So where’s my Nobel Prize? J

Miscellaneous BS

1. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, no doubt hoping to limit public controversy, has announced a very short public comment period (ends May 12, 2006, only two days after this announcement) on proposed new federal regulations that will weaken organic standards. USDA’s proposed amendments, supported by grocery store chains and large food corporations, will allow so-called organic dairy feedlots to continuously import calves from conventional farms-where the calves have been weaned on blood, dosed with antibiotics, and fed genetically engineered grains and slaughterhouse waste. USDA’s new rules will also allow over 500 artificial (synthetic) substances in organic processed foods without prior scrutiny and review by the National Organic Standards Board. USDA’s latest efforts are basically an attempt to codify last fall’s controversial “Sneak Attack” in Congress, when industry players and the Organic Trade Association convinced the Republican Party majority to attach a last minute rider to the 2006 Agricultural Appropriations Bill. More at: http://www.organicconsumers.org/sos.cfm And you thought “organic” meant “all natural”? Ha!!!

2. The USDA is also seeking public comments on revisions it has made to the National Organic Program regarding pasture access for organic dairy cattle. Two of the largest organic dairy companies in the nation, Horizon Organic (a subsidiary of Dean Foods), a supplier to Wal-Mart and many health food stores; and Aurora Organic, a supplier of private brand name organic milk to Costco, Safeway, Giant, Wild Oats and others, are purchasing the majority of their milk from so-called organic feedlot dairies where the cows are kept in intensive confinement, with little or no access to pasture. Together, Horizon and Aurora control nearly 65% of the organic dairy market. Recent scientific studies have shown that humanely raised, grass-fed dairy and beef are qualitatively better for human health and the environment. Imagine that - organic standards that currently allow factory farm dairies to call their products “organic.” What bull! By the way, many co-ops have banned the sale of Horizon and Organic products because they clearly are not truly organic. More at: http://www.organicconsumers.org/nosb2.htm

3. A panel of Nigerian medical experts has concluded that Pfizer Inc. violated international law during a 1996 epidemic by testing an unapproved drug on children with brain infections at a field hospital. … Pfizer never obtained authorization from the Nigerian government to give the unproven drug to nearly 100 children and infants. Pfizer selected the patients at a field hospital in the city of Kano, where the children had been taken to be treated for an often-deadly strain of meningitis. At the time, Doctors Without Borders was dispensing approved antibiotics at the hospital. … Pfizer’s experiment was “an illegal trial of an unregistered drug,” the Nigerian panel concluded, and a “clear case of exploitation of the ignorant.” … The panel said an oral form of Trovan, the Pfizer drug used in the test, had apparently never been given to children with meningitis. There are no records indicating that Pfizer told the children or their parents that they were part of an experiment. An approval letter from a Nigerian ethics committee, which Pfizer used to justify its actions, actually was a falsified document that had been concocted and backdated by the company’s lead researcher in Kano, the report said. Get the full story at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12636315/

4. A study of office-based physicians in the United States suggests that about one-fifth of medications are prescribed to treat conditions for which they are not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and that nearly three-fourths of those uses lack strong scientific support, according to an article in the May 8 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine. More at: http://www.news-medical.net/?id=17838

5. The cholesterol-lowering medications known as statins may improve circulation in the eye, potentially reducing the risk of certain eye diseases, according to a study in the May issue of Archives of Ophthalmology. More at: http://www.news-medical.net/?id=17849 And why not? Statins are, basically, antifungal drugs (though not safe) and the eye is one of those areas highly prone to fungal issues (along with sinuses, throat, etc.).

6. Over 1600 sheep apparently died this month in India after ingesting genetically engineered cotton. The massive deaths occurred after several days of grazing in fields where Monsanto’s Bt and herbicide resistant spliced varieties of cotton were planted. Scientists from India’s Center for Sustainable Agriculture are calling on the government to launch a study into the impacts of GE cotton toxins. More at:

http://www.organicconsumers.org/2006/article_387.cfm

7. The portrayal of coma and awakening from a coma is grossly inaccurate in major motion pictures, research shows, and many moviegoers are unable to tell fact from fiction. They admit that what they see in films regarding coma may impact real-life decisions for a loved one. Full story at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12704190/ I know far too many people that think the movies portray real life. Even those who say they know movies are not real, when asked to recall some information they heard in the past on how X is done, will often recite some line or procedure they saw in a movie rather than what they read in a text book (as if many Americans ever bother to read anything besides fiction these days anyway). My ex-mother-in-law used to buy all the supermarket tabloids every week and, when chided by me for reading that crap, replied that it was “entertainment only” and she didn’t believe any of it, yet often she cited those very articles as fact when discussing similar subjects later on. The human memory does not know from where it gathered its data. You do not have a fact-versus-fiction memory bank in your head and must decide each time a memory is recalled whether or not that data is true. Even then, the very act of recall and discussion causes a refiling of the data, which is then modified before storage, and could therefore be corrupted the next time it is recalled. Think about it. Oh, and believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see (the visual cortex-to-storage process is also easily corrupted).

8. You probably heard the announcement last week, that former President Bill Clinton and the American Heart Association (AHA) brokered a deal to limit the sale of high-calorie, sugared soft drinks in elementary, middle and high schools. This was heralded by the media as a big deal. Finally! Someone is doing something about our ever-widening kids.

On one hand you could view this as a step in the right direction. It’s not going to end childhood obesity, but it will remove part of the problem. Or will it?

Exceptions to the new “100-calorie” limit will be made for milk and other drinks with “higher nutritional value.” Oh please! We’ll never convince the AHA or school administrators that the milk moustache is anything but wholesome, in spite of all the antibiotics and bovine growth hormones found in commercial milk.

But what really got me riled up is that diet soft drinks will still be available in high schools. Most of these diet drinks are sweetened with aspartame, which (according to a 1994 report from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) may cause adverse reactions that include chest pains, asthma, migraine headaches, insomnia, tremors, vertigo, and... weight gain. Weight gain!

Given the choice, I think kids would be better off consuming sugar than aspartame. Or better yet - I know, this sounds like a crazy alternative, but hear me out - how about water? H₂O! It’s refreshing, thirst quenching and 100 percent free of calories, sugar, hormones, and aspartame. (Hear! Hear! Do not consume sugar or aspartame! Drink lots of dihydrogen monoxide! J )

Follow the money

Here’s the really telling detail of this new deal: Clinton and the AHA made their arrangement with soft drink companies, not school districts. They’ve appealed to Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Cadbury Schweppes executives to show some restraint in how they stock school vending machines. But it’s school administrators who allow soft drink distributors to put those machines on school property in the first place.

Maybe it’s time for administrators to think about the kids and just say no to soft drinks altogether. But they can’t afford to do that because most school districts are already strapped for cash, especially with gas prices on the rise. (Those school buses don’t run on switchgrass and corn. Not yet, anyway). So school districts need soft drink revenue now more than ever.

But all this ruckus about beverage access in schools is really a very small part of the obesity problem. Kids can always bring high calorie, fully sugared soft drinks from home. And many high schools allow students to leave campus for lunch. Good luck to Mr. Clinton and the AHA when they try to convince fast food restaurants to curb soft drink choices for kids.

And finally, there’s still a problem back at school. When this new deal takes effect, high school kids will step up to the soft drink machines, choose milk, a sports drink or a diet soda, and then they’ll move over to the snack machines where plenty of candy and pastry treats are still available.

If they’re snacking on Mars bars and Ring Dings, a diet soda isn’t going to do much to solve the obesity problem. This info from Health Science Institute: http://www.hsibaltimore.com

9. Is the real reason for the bird flu scare as simple as our government wanting more control? A plan to quarantine sick airline and ship passengers in order to combat a potential bird flu outbreak has outraged health experts, airlines, and civil libertarians. Sick passengers would be identified by flight attendants, pilots and cruise ship crews. Passengers identified as sick could be detained in quarantine for as long as three days. The proposed rules would also require airlines to collect detailed contact information from their passengers, including the names of any traveling companions and precise information regarding travel plans. The information would be stored for at least two months, and would be provided to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) at any time the government asked for it. Read more at: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-04-24-flu-quarantine_x.htm

10. The Food and Drug Administration “lacks a clear and effective process” for managing post-market drug safety issues, says a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report out Monday. The report was requested in late 2004 by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Concerns about how the FDA handled high-profile drug safety cases — two were Vioxx, the painkiller linked to heart attacks and strokes, and antidepressants, linked to suicidal behavior in children — spurred the request. “GAO observed that there is a lack of criteria for determining what safety actions to take and when to take them,” the report states, noting that FDA officials, given a chance to review a draft, called its conclusions “reasonable” but did not comment on its recommendations. More at:

 http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-04-23-fda-safety_x.htm

11. After all these beautiful nights together, according to recent news reports, the Ambien zombies are arising against their will to gorge themselves at the fridge, or take the wheel, or do something illegal. More at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/05/AR2006050501801.html Even though this Washington Post writer appears to be serious, I found the article very funny. Possibly that is because I learned a little too much about psychology and how the human brain/mind functions. I am not defending Sanofi-Aventis here; it is my firm belief that taking any drug (even as radical as Lysergic Acid Dethylamide), or being hypnotized, cannot make you do something that you would not do anyway – if you thought you could get away with it without being caught. Now people have an easy excuse for their misdeeds (The devil made me do it – uh, I mean, it’s Ambien’s fault! Yeah, that’s the ticket!). I have no doubt that this drug is capable of releasing your inhibitions, just as hypnosis can, and some drugs can produce powerful hallucinations, but nothing makes (i.e., forces you against your will) you do something you are not willing to do. That idea has been programmed into our thought processes by too many fiction movies, and now it has become a great excuse for “it’s not my fault.” Pardon my horrible language here, but… caca del toro (i.e., Bull shit)!

Next issue, I will talk to you about one of the most important things that affect your ability to get healthy (or stay unhealthy): Attitude. Then I will give you a simple (albeit long-winded) solution on how you can change your mind, and therefore, your life. No, I can’t change anything for you, but I can show you how you can fix it yourself. Stay tuned.