These are all effective approaches for dealing with vessel blockages and have differing mechanisms of action. So, we would not say one is superior and the others can be ignored, because the key in helping any individual is to bring those tools to bear that are most relevant to the pathology underway which undermines them and needs correction. So without knowing the individual particulars of why there is an impairment, it is not possible to assign just one of these adjuncts in a meaningful way because it might miss the boat entirely, if one of the others is the very best match to what needs correcting in the body of an individual. So we would say the best approach would be for those knowing they have an impairment, for example, having diagnosed coronary artery disease, would be to take all three of these to have the best chance of turning the tide sooner than divine healing can usually provide.
Please login or Register to submit your answer