I've been getting good control with 300 Avalide and 300 Diltiazem XL.
Of the three medicines embedded there, I've been most worried about
the long-term effects of the diuretic (and weight loss would be easier without it). (I was also convinced that it wasn't
really helping me--I drink plenty of caffeine and water and am a pretty low-salt eater.) I also lost nearly 60 pounds and have lived better generally since my original problem. So I experimented with cutting the Avalides in half--no significant change for the first couple of days. But then a spike into the 160s systolic on the third. Naturally, I got myself home and took a whole Avalide, but with with great disappointment. The difference in bp control with 150 and 300 A. aren't supposed to be that great, of course. Is the evidence that the diuretic really makes that much difference? I'm just whining here I guess, but I would like to benefit from the vast wisdom about these things out there.

Avalide is a combination of ARB and diuretic isn't it? So you cut the ARB in half too. If you want to continue your experiment, you might see if you can get the ARB and diuretic as separate prescriptions and try varying each of them to see what happens. It still could be that most of the work for you is done by the ARB and CCB, rather than the diuretic.

mgraylorn, I was hoping that was right, so: Cutting the Avalide in half would negate the effect of diuretic (which is already low strength) while still having some ARB effect.
But the rapid increase--I expected a slow and manageabe one--suggests pretty strongly the role of the diuretic. Plus my bp is already back down to 140, and diuretics act quickly.