Louisa Williams Discusses Heart Disease and Biological Dentistry IABDM 2011 Carmel (Transcript)

Operator

I take great pleasure in introducing Dr. Louisa Williams, who received the naturopathic training at Bastyr University. She holds a Master’s degree in psychology, [always raised me] and a degree in chiropractic and is the author of Radical Medicine which is in itself a wonderful departure from the world of, well, drill, fill, and bill dentistry and see it, and that is, you know what that is, right? You show up, we see you and see you, that’s it. So Dr. Williams?

Louisa Williams

Thank you, John. Appreciate it. So thank you for asking me here, it’s such an honor to present in front of my favorite dental group and it’s so great to see friends, some of them I hadn’t seen in 20, 25 years. Feel like we have been through the wars together. You know, as holistic physicians and biological dentists, we have been through the wars together. So thank you so much for allowing me to present here.

So my first presentation is on naturopathic prophylaxis, it’s there in your notes. I have changed the name of your time, sorry. And I never know how long these talks are going to go. So why don’t we go ahead and get started because at the end, I have a – I am going to be having you guys workshop together on a new test I want you to try and perform in your office. So I want to have enough time for that.

All right. So you all know this but what changed in April 2007? After over 50 years, what standard of care was largely discarded that was very significant for all dentists but especially biological dentists? There you go. Antibiotic prophylaxis, it’s no longer — it was no longer advised for mitral valve prolapse and mitral valve disease typically, which is a big population, rheumatic heart disease, bicuspid valve disease, aortic stenosis and regular congenital heart conditions. However, it was still advised for high-risk patients, serious congenital heart conditions, patients that had undergone surgery, artificial heart valves, a significant history of infective endocarditis. And I think this is in your notes but I added recently the first two years following joint replacement, which is a sizable percentage nowadays, right? Lots of patients of ours are getting hip and joint surgery.

So what happened is American Heart Association, a group of 23 doctors along with American Dental Association dentists got together and did a retrospective study for 56 years. They did this huge longitudinal study of a MEDLINE search to try to figure out if giving antibiotics for the transient bacteremia after dental drilling or any kind of dental procedure was indeed worthwhile. And Walter Wilson, the head of the group concluded that only an extremely small number of bacterial endocarditis affecting the valves or infective endocarditis might be prevented by antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures, if – if it was even effective. And he went on to say, there is actually no evidence that it works after 56 years of giving patients preventive antibiotics. This is a huge population.

And I kept looking in the article, you’re like, where is the I am sorry or anything? Can you imagine it, naturopaths for 56 years had been giving statin and we found out it doesn’t even work? Anyway, no, I’m sorry, just this is what they had found. So no research, no prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled studies. Of course, this policy, this recommendation began in the 1950s throwing antibiotics at everything, right? It was kind of like that was the style, that was the standard of care at that time, and it just kept going, which for many people it still does overprescribing of antibiotics.

So for us biological dentists and biological physicians, I like that John biological physicians too, we look in the mouth and work with dentists or biological physicians, yeah I like that new term. So for us, it was an excellent change because you know, we don’t like giving any antibiotics unless it’s really necessary, because we know the side effects and the real damage to the gut and dysbiosis that it can cause. George Vithoulkas, a very famous Greek homeopath, wrote a good book on the damage from antibiotics and other drugs and “A New Model for Health and Disease” is the title and he said that our quality of health depends almost entirely on the quality of microorganisms that exist normally within our bodies. If our gut is healthy, our immune system is functioning just as simple as that.

So antibiotics have been labeled as ecological marauders by Dr. Nigel Plummer. He’s a British microbiologist and expert on antibiotics and dysbiosis and also probiotic. So he has found that cephalosporin erythromycin families are capable of eliminating 99% of Lactobacillus species, the most common microorganisms, in our esophagus tube. By the way there is lactobacillus predominately in our esophagus as well as in our intestines, especially small intestine. Of course, we know that our bodies have the ability to recolonize afterwards after a bout of antibiotics but if you’re eating sugar and a toxic diet and you’ve had a lot of rounds of antibiotics that gets less and less possible.

Alexander Fleming who accidentally discovered penicillin, right, was quite honest in the early 1940s, mid-1940s. He cautioned people the misuse of penicillin could lead to mutant forms of bacteria resistant to the drug back in 1945, long time ago. So good for him and his honesty. He was already seeing this in his laboratory. So now we have MRSA, we’ve had MRSA for quite a while. In the 1950s, penicillin was 95% effective in killing staph aureus, 95% effective in the 1950s. Now we have methicillin resistant staph aureus, these little bugs have figured out how to be resistant to the methicillin. And so doctors and hospitals where these infections ran rampant, started using vancomycin.

Well then vancomycin started having a resistance to Staphylococcus. The vancomycin-resistant staph aureus bug, bacteria figured out how to thicken cell walls so that vancomycin couldn’t get in. And we know that MRSA infections are very dangerous, these are the flesh eating bacteria, so called necrotizing fasciitis where it eats away of the skin and the subcu tissue and even the organs, causes toxic shock syndrome and cause death. So it’s a very serious problem. So antibiotics aren’t the answer, they were in the ‘50s, they were amazing at first but as anything that’s toxic and synthetic, it won’t hold up in the long run, right? We know that, it just won’t hold up and it’s not holding up.

So nosocomial infections, hospital-induced infections, another one is the Clostridium difficile, this bacteria is resistant to antibiotics. This one is so pathogenic it literally peels off the lining of the intestine, very dangerous. I have a patient in Rhode Island. He’s 85 years old and he’s just gone through that. And we’ve got him back in good shape but he was in the hospital twice and almost died. So it results in a very explosive debilitating and often lethal form of diarrhea. So often what they use for Clostridium difficile is vancomycin, and that’s not working for Clostridium all the time now anyway and so sometimes they’ll use metronidazole which is Flagyl which nowadays has a warning label, has caused cancer in mice and rats. Literally that’s a dangerous drug to take, but it’s like, what is the biggest gun, what do we do now? If this doesn’t work, then what do we do? This is a very important study.

Antibiotics, overuse of antibiotics can cause cancer. This is a Washington State study, more than 10,000 women, there were exactly 2266 women older than 19 with primary invasive breast cancer and then they had this huge control group, 7953 random control group. And they found that women who have taken more courses of antibiotics have doubled the chances of getting breast cancer. I can’t tell you exactly how many rounds of antibiotics that was because it was based on the age. So it’s more a percentage thing but this is a very important study well-controlled study. There was only one other study before that, when you think about it, who’s going to fund these studies? It’s not like the drug companies are going to fund this.

So there was a Finland study in 1999 before that was reported in the British Journal of Cancer in 2000 and in Finland, they found that women with chronic urinary tract infections that took antibiotics a lot were much more prone to get cancer. And they even controlled for the urinary tract infection bacteria. So it wasn’t the bacteria, it was the antibiotic use.