Viagra 'cures' heart disease?

A comment on Kendrick's blog :

Moving on from all the diet hypotheses and to a different field as suggested by Dr. Kendrick : How many of us remember the post on Viagra by Dr Kendrick earlier this year and how it reduced CVD attacks. By way of evidence here is a link to Swedish study of 47,000 men all less than 80, none of whom had had an MI at the start of the study.

http://heart.bmj.com/content/early/2017/03/14/heartjnl-2016-310746Conclusion : Viagra prevents heart attacks ! And more is better !
And bugger me : none of them changed their diets at all !!
🙂
Also Dennis Mangan has also just released a post on the impact of Viagra as an effective anti-aging ‘supplement’.
http://roguehealthandfitness.com/will-viagra-and-cialis-extend-lifespan/Usually Dennis always includes recommendations about changing diet (paleo preferred) in his posts. But not this time. He’s keeping it simple.
Now this is interesting. I wonder though if there are any studies of women using Viagra tp cure CVD and whether it is beneficial for them also.

I looked at viagra side effects on web md. I don't usually use of the phrase side effects. They are direct effects of generally unwanted consequence.
The idea that viagra cures CVD strikes me as wishful at best.
A failing heart can be kept alive longer by various manipulations. An artificial one can 'outlive you'. That is not to say there is no place for tinkering, but the idea of holding back the consequences - often by redirecting to different areas of the body - or in the collective sense, by redistributing to different facets of society and the environment - is exactly the pattern I associate with the pharmacological approach.

I agree that it is NOT the doctor's job to TELL patients how to live, whether by claiming higher authority, or by morally guilting them into compliance. In theory, this may be  why corporately owned and directed technologism cultivates and feeds upon the right to engage in egocentric and illusory 'freedom' at expense of the health of ourselves and of society. Of course 'scientism' is being used to enforce the extreme dictate of such 'choice' in the state sanctioned illusion of 'immunising' and attaining 'herd' compliance and conformity.

But I DO hold that anyone who has any alignment in health as a living balance rather than targets and check boxes, will look for and take the opportunity to reflect where poor choices are bringing poor results, and inspire the willingness to align in better choices. This does not only help the situation at hand, but grows a relationship of informed choice within relationships of trust. Lots of people submit to 'experts; because they do NOT want responsibility.

Taking responsibility for our life is very stressful relative to running on auto under a managed environment. Yet the stresses that disempower us are those that deliver us unto evil. The irony is that true responsibility does not call upon guilting or blaming, but enquiry and recognition by which to make better choices. But the apparent 'escape' from self-responsibility is deeply predicated in blame.

When one can assign the fear of blame to any official diagnosis - you  become 'real' to the medical system instead of being fobbed off as all in the mind  - which is then invoking fears and doubts of one's sanity while not being seen or heard, and both of these work together as a social rejection.

This really is about where we assign and accept authority. I believe the heart knows. But to align in this is to release what seems true in a mind of dissociation. Many prefer to die, than question and release self-asserting judgemental certainties. On the other hand, many find the willingness to release judgements in their dying process. Why wait?