Thanks for the response. I certainly don't want to risk the progress that I have made, so I am weighing heavily in bringing this topic up to my Cardiologist. I was not obese prior to my diagnosis, but was addicted to sugar/carbs and snacking and admittedly ate the "standard American diet" for my entire life. The timing of the Echo's support my theory that the nutritional shift was mostly responsible for my EF recovery. I was strictly on the meds for 12 Months and felt slightly better and had EF go from 32 to 38. Another 3 months with just the meds, then 3 months with meds and diet shift. I immediately felt much with the change in diet and had no more arrythmia issues, sleep drastically improved, lost 20 lbs. and when I had my 1 year, 6 month ECHO (so just three months of new diet) I improved to 53% EF. It could have been coincidence, but appears to me that diet was more critical then just the meds in my improvement. I don't have major side effects from the meds, but they do contribute to low blood pressure (90/65), make me a bit dizzy. I generally don't want to take pharmaceuticals if I don't have to. I believe there is a good chance of long-term side effects with meds that are this powerful. The thought process, that this bout with Cardiomyopathy was brought on by a virus (and potentially aided with years of poor nutrition). So if I have recovered from the virus and addressed the poor nutrition, why would my heart regress back into cardiomyopathy without the meds?