Notes on the Heart

• Look at Skrabanek on blood pressure measurement. It's not as simple as it seems; in particular, with ageing, the readings tend to go up purely because the artery walls are tougher. There's plenty of opportunity for readings to be wrong, as in the 'white coat effect', but also since blood pressure varies a lot naturally. I wonder whether very obese people have artificially low blood pressure readings: can a huge wad of fat muffle the reading?
• It's worth looking at diagrams and accounts of the heart online, for example on Youtube. The heart has been known to move blood since the time of Harvey, but the explanations are usually alarmingly bad—in the USA, often inferior Jewish accounts by inferior 'academics'. Festooned with adverts, pleas for more money, and so on.
• Part of the problem is the classical vocabulary: a strange mixture of slang and simile—an 'atrium' is an ante-chamber, a 'ventricle' is a tummy. The 'aorta' is something rising high up. 'Superior' and 'inferior' mean above and below. The diagrams are usually hard to follow—it's often difficult to know whether the view is from the front or back. The diagrams are often too symmetrical.
• It's a bit misleading to describe the heart as a 'pump', since it seems to rely on expulsion. It's not a rotary pump. Both parts of the cycle—pushing out blood to the arteries, in an elegant loop from the aorta and out to the head, both arms, and the legs, and the pushing out to the lungs, seem one-way only. The circuit is completed by blood and its corpuscles finding their way through tiny capillaries back to the heart
• The emphasis on oxygenation through the lungs is usually incomplete: the lungs also emit carbon dioxide, formed from the heating effect of sugar and oxygen, metabolised by intricate chemical changes. Blood also carries nutrients, hormones, and vitamins such as vitamin C (which distributes oxygen). Blood can also carry poisons, toxins, intruder cells, cancer cells.
• There doesn't seem to be agreement on whether the difference between systole (high) and diastole (low) is an important measure.

Overweight and the Heart

• This appears to be purely statistical, measured by life insurance companies, and in the processes of medical examination. Fatter people die younger, according to these figures. With very obese people, this is easy to believe: many can only move with difficulty, and make a lot of effort—mental, not physical—to walk as little as they can.
• Assuming there is some ideal or desirable weight range, all extra body weight needs oxygen, nutrients, heat, removal of carbon dioxide, and so on. Other things being equal, this needs higher blood pressure, in a similar way to an extra room in a house needing more heating water in radiators.
• I'll assume here that an increase in weight needs pro rata about the same amount of blood to service it. This may not be quite true: fat and its tissue doesn't tend to accumulate in finger and toes, for example.
• Body mass of course is measured in three dimensions, as cubic centimetres, or cubic inches, or the weight equivalent. But pressure is measured by the area, for example pounds per square inch.
• A lot of fat can be stored under the skin (subcutaneously). An adult has about 20 square feet of skin, if you think in square feet. Say 1.8 m^2, or 1.8 x 100^2 square centimetres = 18,000 sq cm. If skin on average could have 1 cm of fat under it, you have 18,000 cubic centimetres of fat, = 18 litres, something like 4 or 5 gallons depending on whose gallon. That's not a realistic average, but it does suggest that the belly is not the only place extra mass is stored. It's unsurprising that marathon runners look, literally, skinny.
• This means every percent increase in weight means about 2/3 of the same increase in area.
• [Because volume is proportional to area^2/3. For example, a cube which doubles in volume has sides larger by about 1.25]
• There are complications caused by varying pulse rates, which I'm assuming are short-terms changes to allow short-term variations in blood supply]
• So, for example, if you weigh 160 lb and lose 10 lb, that's a loss of one sixteenth body weight, or about 6%. Two thirds of that is 4%. So blood pressure can be expected to drop 4%.
      If you weigh 210 lb, with diastolic pressure 110, and your aim is to get your diastolic pressure below 100, reducing b.p. 10% implies a weight reduction of about 15%, a possibly discouraging 30+ pounds.

Losing Weight

• Some medicaments claim to work by methods including for example calcium channels and cell receptors. The work of Harold Hillman suggests these biological structures are errors—they don't exist. Don't be surprised if they don't work.
• The claim that salt causes elevated blood pressure seems likely to be false. (Probably the effect is caused by fatty 'junk' food being high in salt).
• The body's mechanism for causing the feeling of hunger must depend to some extent on nutrition, so probably supplements are a good idea. Shortages of trace elements and vitamins may trigger feelings of hunger. It may be best to spread these throughout the day, since nutrition isn't normally taken in heavy doses.
• There is a lot of advice on weight loss, no doubt largely ignored. In food, aim for low calorie:weight ratio, and high bulk:calorie ratio. In activity, aim for physical work output.
• In drink, avoid alcohol, which gives calories but not much else. (Alcoholic drinks have escaped the move to mark food with contents: a 70-cl, ordinary-sized, bottle of creamy spirit or fruity spirit is 1000 - 1500 Calories; I personally think food metabolism and hunger has evolved in a way bypassed by alcohol; as a result, provided you can digest it, it's perhaps the fastest way to put on weight, involving little digestion effort and leaving no solid waste. And it bypasses satiety: if you've eaten a bit of everything else, and are literally 'fed up', alcohol gives something more. It's deliberately difficult to find the calorie content of commercial alcoholic drinks: online accounts give 'portions', 'units', 'small glasses' and so on, and the measurement systems (percent by weight, by volume, ABV, proof) contain historical evidences of the difficulties there used to be in estimating alcohol, sugar, and other content).
• Off the wall advice might include hard work in cold weather in jewish GULag style, drinking cold non-fluoridated water as calories are needed to bring it to body temperature (a litre of ice at say -10°C supplies about -110 Cals, including latent heat to melt, if my calculation is right; but this can cause stomach ulcers; 1 litre of water at 4°C is about -33 Cals, removing about half a banana), getting ill so someone doesn't want to eat, ingesting a tapeworm (tried in the 1920s or 1930s), substituting non-fattening sweet-tasting stuff for sugars, and substituting indigestible fat-like stuff for fats. Various pills for e.g. widening blood vessels, and obstructing the digestion of fats, have been tried. Examination of other creatures might prompt new ideas: how about gills, for example?
• The effects of obesity are pretty much censored out of discussions on blood pressure and heart attacks: yesterday (22 July 2015) the BBC ran a typically shallow show Trust Me, I'm a Doctor which along with its Jewish-format dark medicos, assumptions about e.g. cholesterol, managed not to mention obesity at all, apart from a word on a chart. I wonder if the food industry has a hand in keeping up consumption: maybe the nauseating race freak 'Danny' Cohen gets bribes? Who knows.
• Hope this is of some help. I'm assuming fairly normal metabolism, heart, and vascular system operations. I accept no responsibility for this advice—I am not a doctor, and even if I were there are problems.




---

HTML, notes Rae West big-lies.org. First upload 2015-07-16