|
|
|
|
|
by LinuxBender
2378 days ago
|
|
I can only do the test once per year without the insurance company pushing back. Yes the vitamin C studies were quite flawed, especially since they were using ascorbic acid and not real vitamin C. Ascorbic acid is just the outer layer and is missing many components. I would love to see the tests done using the real deal. I too am a skeptic about many things. I've had no choice but to get into self research and self improvements, or I would be stuck right where I was, in the middle of a failed medical system. If it were up to them, I would just be taking BP meds for the rest of my life. The doctors back them expected me to last another five years. That was several years ago. I refuse to play that game. It would take an hour to explain all the things I am doing. People that have known me for a long time are seeing the results. I look and feel 20 years younger. I have started educating some of the doctors at Stanford about nutrition and a few of them are actually very open to learning new things. |
|
I found one commentary on a paper evaluating it: https://www.reliasmedia.com/articles/139983-utility-of-seria...
It probably doesn't matter, but getting a CAC does involve a little extra radiation each year, so I kind of worry about what benefit you are getting: ie hypothetical benefit of monitoring risk vs hypothetical risk of radiation exposure.