New Guidelines: Cholesterol Should Be On Everyone's Radar, Beginning Early In Life

[tankasnowgod]

I'm a millenial too, and I'm baffled when I see how so many of us don't even try or are very happy to go with the flow. That's the majority of us.

The lipid theory is not a failed theory; if your lipids go up way above a healthy baseline your health isn't improving. Saying that bad lipids are causal to a host of disease might be failed, but screening them remains cheap and interesting.

Not as cheap as a full iron panel. And the iron panel is far more useful.

 

[thomas00]

Ravnksov's newsletters are always good reading.

The lipid nerd's ever-changing theories are just silly.

So many of them are shills for really bad anti cholesterol products, too.

 

[Sourdoughbanana]

Not as cheap as a full iron panel. And the iron panel is far more useful.

That could be true. But guys who act like they don’t even want to hear of cholesterol numbers are deluded. So people should pass on a cheap test but would do extended thyroid function testing maybe? I think it’s a decent marker. Poor cholesterol metabolism is highly concerning because ubiquitous. Why would it raise when it’s supposed to be properly metabolized and kept nice and “optimal”. I absolutely don’t believe it’s that badly causative among the other (better) risk factors for CVD.

That is unlike huh, free Androgens and hair loss, even though I kinda like to go one step up and focus on SHBG and liver function instead of micromanaging downstream hormones. Some people here like their conspiracy theories a bit too much and bury their head into the ground whenever an argument may challenge their tin foil views.

If we can screen teenagers and get more people to do more bloodworks, whatever bloods we’re talking about, I don’t see an issue at all. Educating health professionals with regards to reading a damn blood test could be very useful too.

 

[ecstatichamster]

That could be true. But guys who act like they don’t even want to hear of cholesterol numbers are deluded. So people should pass on a cheap test but would do extended thyroid function testing maybe? I think it’s a decent marker. Poor cholesterol metabolism is highly concerning because ubiquitous. Why would it raise when it’s supposed to be properly metabolized and kept nice and “optimal”. I absolutely don’t believe it’s that badly causative among the other (better) risk factors for CVD.

That is unlike huh, free Androgens and hair loss, even though I kinda like to go one step up and focus on SHBG and liver function instead of micromanaging downstream hormones. Some people here like their conspiracy theories a bit too much and bury their head into the ground whenever an argument may challenge their tin foil views.

If we can screen teenagers and get more people to do more bloodworks, whatever bloods we’re talking about, I don’t see an issue at all. Educating health professionals with regards to reading a damn blood test could be very useful too.

the issue is they will test and accept drug company recommendations and be in the medical rathole at an early age. It's a terrible idea.

 

[tankasnowgod]

That could be true. But guys who act like they don’t even want to hear of cholesterol numbers are deluded. So people should pass on a cheap test but would do extended thyroid function testing maybe? I think it’s a decent marker. Poor cholesterol metabolism is highly concerning because ubiquitous. Why would it raise when it’s supposed to be properly metabolized and kept nice and “optimal”. I absolutely don’t believe it’s that badly causative among the other (better) risk factors for CVD.

On Directlabs, Total Cholesterol only costs $32.00 A full Cholesterol panel costs $99.00

By comparison, a full iron panel (with ferritin) costs $64.00 Ferritin alone costs $39.00

The full iron panel is significantly cheaper than the full cholesterol panel, and is far more useful in regards to health.

I didn't bring up a thyroid panel, as I think a cheap thermometer does a better job, but even there are two thyroid panels on Directlabs listed at $49.00 and $99.00. Still, I think those panels are more useful than a Cholesterol panel, as they only thing a cholesterol panel would suggest is to check your thyroid status. So, in my eyes, that's a waste of money.

Curious...... why do you think a cholesterol test is so important?

 

[tankasnowgod]

the issue is they will test and accept drug company recommendations and be in the medical rathole at an early age. It's a terrible idea.

This. That is the entire point. When it comes to statins, the ONLY group it has ever shown to have a positive health outcome for is men under 60 who have previously who had a heart attack, and only then in studies conducted before 2006. They have never been shown to help any man over 60, any man without previous history of heart disease, or women of any age and any status of heart disease. Yet, they are prescribed freely.

What about the 2006 date? That's the year more stringent rules where placed on clinical trials. So either statins magically stopped working for men under 60 with a previous case of heart disease (in which case, they should stop taking statins), or these drugs only appeared to work due to fraud within the clinical trial process, which, again, shows that no one should be taking these drugs.

 

[jondoeuk]

First they came for the overweight, and I did not speak out—because I was not overweight.

Plant Positive has done some good YouTube video's

 

[tankasnowgod]

By the way, if anyone had any doubts about what the American Heart Association's agenda is, look no further than their CEO Roundtable-

https://ceoroundtable.heart.org/members/

 

[Queequeg]

Plant Positive has done some good YouTube video's

not that impressed. He's using the usual logical fallacies to confuse and shame people into not thinking for themselves and shut-up and listen to the experts. That's how a scientific dictatorship is built.
remember correlation doesn't confer causation

 

[jondoeuk]

not that impressed. He's using the usual logical fallacies to confuse and shame people into not thinking for themselves and shut-up and listen to the experts. That's how a scientific dictatorship is built.
remember correlation doesn't confer causation

What logical fallacies? He also cites the papers in all the video's he has produced.

Currently, all the evidence points in one direction Dietary lipids and blood cholesterol: quantitative meta-analysis of metabolic ward studies † European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: executive summary : Fourth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (Constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts) Should the facts change, I change my mind. When you consider an estimated 90% of CVD is preventable https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.717033 and remains one of our biggest killers FastStats then more needs to be done to combat denialists like Gary Taubes.

 

[jondoeuk]

By the way, if anyone had any doubts about what the American Heart Association's agenda is, look no further than their CEO Roundtable-

https://ceoroundtable.heart.org/members/

The same can be said about others. From this: ''According to Politico, before the Nutrition Coalition was officially formed, Teicholz attended a meeting with representatives for ConAgra, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, among others, to talk about whether criticizing the guidelines from the scientific standpoint would “create new opportunities” for rewriting the recommendations.'' The Meat Industry's Political Sway Has Had Ongoing Influence on Nutrition Guidelines - The Atlantic

 

[tankasnowgod]

The same can be said about others. From this: ''According to Politico, before the Nutrition Coalition was officially formed, Teicholz attended a meeting with representatives for ConAgra, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, among others, to talk about whether criticizing the guidelines from the scientific standpoint would “create new opportunities” for rewriting the recommendations.'' The Meat Industry's Political Sway Has Had Ongoing Influence on Nutrition Guidelines - The Atlantic

True, but none of the interests mentioned in that article are drug companies that profit off the utterly bogus and unproven theory that somehow, cholesterol causes heart disease in humans, who are omnivores. Although I do think the USDA and Department of Health and Human Services are wildly unconstitutional and should be disbanded immediately. Nor should there be any sort of government guidelines regarding what an individual should eat.

 

[Mito]

It's not cholesterol,

I believe you are right about it not being the cholesterol per se, it the LDL particles that are involved in plaque formation and cholesterol just makes up the structural core of each LDL particle.

The LDL particles are capable of penetrating the artirial endothelial cells. Once the LDL particles move out of the blood serum and into the subendothelial space, they are more likely to oxidize because there are less antioxidants in the subendothelial space. But it’s not the “cholesterol” that first oxidizes, rather it’s the phospholipids that surround the cholesterol core of the LDL particles. Phospholipids are made up of different types of fatty acids, but it’s the PUFA in the phospholipids that are uniquely vulnerable to oxidizing. So in theory if your LDL particles are surrounded by phospholipids that are mostly non-PUFA fatty acids, then maybe you don’t need to be as concerned about elevated LDL particle counts.

 

[yerrag]

I recall a thread of @haidut that explained the process of plaque formation where white blood cells are involved in countering the inflammatory process caused by some factors which isn't pinning it on LDL. Does anyone know which thread that is?

I feel that the mechanism is more involved than having high LDL levels. This seems to be about moving the discussion away from the discredited high cholesterol theory to a possibly equally spurious argument about the danger of high LDL. If the treatment is again statins, doesn't statins just lower the LDL levels simply by lowering cholesterol levels? And doesn't this approach continue to lower the individuals ability to produce CoQ10 as well as limit the production of the substrate needed to produce protective hormones? Isn't this approach going to create more problems thereby creating more opportunities to sell drugs to the populace?

Besides, wasn't there a thread about how high LDL markers are not the biomarkers that spell for poor health? haidut also posted on this.

 

[Queequeg]

What logical fallacies? He also cites the papers in all the video's he has produced.

Currently, all the evidence points in one direction Dietary lipids and blood cholesterol: quantitative meta-analysis of metabolic ward studies † European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: executive summary : Fourth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (Constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts) Should the facts change, I change my mind. When you consider an estimated 90% of CVD is preventable https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.717033 and remains one of our biggest killers FastStats then more needs to be done to combat denialists like Gary Taubes.

His main argument in the first minute was a combination Appeal to Authority (trust the experts) and ad hominem attacks/strawmen (opposing views are only coming from random bloggers). But I would point to his main fallacy, common to most pro lipid theory scientists, that the correlation between LDL and artherosclerosis is the same as causation. This isnt the case. If it were so then the evidence for Statins would be far stronger. Look into the number needed to treat to get a real sense of just how ineffective statins are at saving lives.
Statins in Persons at Low Risk of Cardiovascular Disease – TheNNT
Statins for Heart Disease Prevention (With Known Heart Disease) – TheNNT
The case for statins: has it really been made?

 

[Queequeg]

I believe you are right about it not being the cholesterol per se, it the LDL particles that are involved in plaque formation and cholesterol just makes up the structural core of each LDL particle.
View attachment 11249

The LDL particles are capable of penetrating the artirial endothelial cells. Once the LDL particles move out of the blood serum and into the subendothelial space, they are more likely to oxidize because there are less antioxidants in the subendothelial space. But it’s not the “cholesterol” that first oxidizes, rather it’s the phospholipids that surround the cholesterol core of the LDL particles. Phospholipids are made up of different types of fatty acids, but it’s the PUFA in the phospholipids that are uniquely vulnerable to oxidizing. So in theory if your LDL particles are surrounded by phospholipids that are mostly non-PUFA fatty acids, then maybe you don’t need to be as concerned about elevated LDL particle counts.
View attachment 11250

Yes that describes the process of how arterial plaque occurs but not why. At the moment I am leaning towards Linus Pauling's theory. To him artherosclerosis is caused by a lack of collagen production needed to repair damaged arteries from mechanical stresses. This is due to our having lost the ability to produce the vitamin C needed for appropriate levels of collagen synthesis and why most animals (who do make Vitamin C) dont get artherosclerosis. LDL based plaques are just emergency repair operations of leaking arteries pending their proper repair that never comes. Check out the Dr Rath video I posted for a good overview.

 

[tankasnowgod]

By the way, if anyone had any doubts about what the American Heart Association's agenda is, look no further than their CEO Roundtable-

https://ceoroundtable.heart.org/members/

I get the drug companies, and the food companies, and the health insurance companies and such. I get the financial companies, since the banksters have their hands in everything. The fashion companies and Weight Watchers also make a bit of sense.

But Booz Allen Hamilton...... Why is a military contractor on their CEO Roundtable?

 

[yerrag]

I get the drug companies, and the food companies, and the health insurance companies and such. I get the financial companies, since the banksters have their hands in everything. The fashion companies and Weight Watchers also make a bit of sense.

But Booz Allen Hamilton...... Why is a military contractor on their CEO Roundtable?

I always thought of them as management consultants, not unlike McKinsey & Co. Maybe military contracting is an offshoot of their management consultancy? Managing public opinion maybe? After all, management involves managing threats as well as opportunities.

 

[CLASH]

@Mito

This directly vindicates your point of the type of lipid carried within the LDL particle leading to oxidation.

https://openheart.bmj.com/content/openhrt/5/2/e000898.full.pdf

 

[DaveFoster]

Me neither. I don't care to check this metric. There are many other markers I'd rather spend my money on. Or not spend on.

And what's this bull about screening a child for cholesterol at 2. When they have a family history of it? Bull again. Will they start the child on statins? And will the child be on a cocktail of prescription drugs as a result of taking statins before he reaches nursery? They sure know how to start them young. This is the road to perdition.

Yes, doctors will prescribe statins, SSRIs and amphetamines to children. The girls will take estrogen-based birth control pills, and some boys will also take exogenous estrogen through hormone replacement therapy and become girls. Boys who desire to retain their manhood will seek finasteride for their premature balding at 13 years of age.