Beta blockers do not reduce so-called Hypertension. -it's both theoretically and physically impossible for them to do so, and this is the reason they've been withdrawn in UK as first-line treatment for hypertension, having been shown clearly that many more cardiac patients die when treated with beta blockers than with other medications. In point of fact, for any cardiac work-level beta-blockers MUST raise systolic pressure, which is what causes fatal ruptures of small blood vessels, -stroke, etc. The source of this is the ASCOT trial, which was (and still remains) the largest ever conducted, (which was in fact halted midway through due to the graphic evidence of the devastating mortality produced by beta blockers on hypertensive patients) and subsequent decision of the N.I.C.E committee, which thoroughly and comprehensively discredited Atenolol and other beta blockers as a first-line treatment for "hypertension". It's all on record. I refer you to the BMJ, 2006 (Quote headline) : NICE Removes Beta-Blockers As First-line Treatment For Hypertension..." et seq. I would not expect nurses to keep up to speed on this, but perhaps, ... the Good Doctor?... ("Good Doctor Who?" I hear you ask, . well, now, let's just say any on-line Buddy or Yahoo Answers Contact) Any doctor who practices in the UK and isn't aware that beta blockers have been officially withdrawn by NICE as first-line treatment for (so-called) hypertension is - how can one put it?,... "Derelict" ? Too old? Irresponsible? Been practising for too many years they care to remember? Whatever,............. -either one agrees with NICE recommendations or one doesn't .. Which is it to be? Further evidence comes from the findings of Dr. P.J. Devereaux, in Canada, who showed only recently that approximately 800,000 patients were estimated to have been killed needlessly by beta-blockade after cardiac surgery. This too is on record and like the ASCOT (and CAFE) papers, is readily available to read on-line, -even in America, I believe,( although they are about 6 hrs behind, as the crow flies... !) Contrary to what you'll read here, slowing the heart has absolutely no effect on the work-load of the heart. This is because the cardiac work** is quantifiable as (Cardiac output x Mean arterial Pressure) - and is therefore unaffected by pulse-rate. ** It may also be calculated as (Cardiac output x {TPR squared} ) - It is the same, and equally independent of how fast the heart beats, so the old-fashioned -(well, for many years longer than I care to remember) idea of 'slowing down the heart' 'reducing the cardiac work-load' which although taught to older MD's and is still being taught to nurses, medical students, "paramedics" and the like-, is quite absurd. - Any physicist , engineer, or mathematician will be able to demolish this particularly inept medical blunder. Of course, it IS possible ( at great risk to the patient) to prevent the heart from doing its job properly and thus perform less work. But in this case, of course although the cardiac work is reduced, the "work not done" is work that SHOULD be done, and as a result, all organs suffer. (Insufficient blood is being circulated.) The ultimate absurdity of course, is complete cessation of cardiac work. i.e., death.,but is that really the aim? EDIT ; Thanks ditsy! .. I've been so long in the wilderness it's like catching sight of an oasis, reading your posting! But you forgot to include one side-effect of beta-blockers .. impotence.. I know, it's not your bag, but nonetheless, it causes much distress.