this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
7 points (100.0% liked)
Metabolic Health
63 readers
2 users here now
A place to discuss metabolic health research, papers, talks, etc.
This topic can touch upon many people's personal triggers, so please be civil.
Rules
- Be nice
- Stay on topic
- Don't farm rage
- Be respectful of other diets, choices, lifestyles!!!!
- No Blanket down voting - If you only come to this community to downvote its the wrong community for you
The banner poster in high resolution can be found here
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Notes:
The bad cholesterol hypothesis is showing its age, and does not account for mortality data.
The great thing about looking at mortality and LDL measurements is its not a FFQ! So there is less debate about the reality of the study participants.
LDL was seen as PROTECTIVE in 92% of the participants!!! In two studies low LDL was a risk factor for bad endpoints.
ha, thats a academic burn! Side eye on the RR trumpets for small real benefit.
So LDL is protective (1.35 HR which is nothing, but the case against LDL is made with LOWER HRs)
This makes sense, the body makes cholesterol to function, its necessary, a diet that attacks the functioning of cholesterol should have some negative impact on mortality.
I think this is a direct calling out of pharmacological corruption medicine, but said through a academic lens.
LDL are the firemen in our city, and they go where the fire is, you reduce the firemen your going to have a bad time.
The shade in this paper!
Summary:
Systematic Review of published cohorts, high value science.
evidence pyramid