this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
7 points (100.0% liked)

> !metabolic_health@dubvee.org

125 readers
1 users here now

Moved to !metabolic_health@dubvee.org

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

  1. Be nice
  2. Stay on topic
  3. Don't farm rage
  4. Be respectful of other diets, choices, lifestyles!!!!
  5. 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 11 months ago
MODERATORS
totallynotjet@lemm.ee
jet@hackertalks.com
jetlag@dubvee.org
inkjet@piefed.social
7
Paper - Lack of an association or an inverse association between low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol and mortality in the elderly: a systematic review - 2016 (hackertalks.com)
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by jet@hackertalks.com to c/metabolic_health@lemm.ee
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

TLDR: The current advice that LDL is "bad cholesterol", appears to be outdated, and the actual situation is more complex. In people over 60 high LDL appeared to be protective for mortality.

Conclusions: High LDL-C is inversely associated with mortality in most people over 60 years. This finding is inconsistent with the cholesterol hypothesis (ie, that cholesterol, particularly LDL-C, is inherently atherogenic). Since elderly people with high LDL-C live as long or longer than those with low LDL-C, our analysis provides reason to question the validity of the cholesterol hypothesis. Moreover, our study provides the rationale for a re-evaluation of guidelines recommending pharmacological reduction of LDL-C in the elderly as a component of cardiovascular disease prevention strategies.

Full Paper at https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27292972/

Related to, and following up on the LMHR paper from https://hackertalks.com/post/5835924

.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

A conversation about cholesterol in another community reminded me I needed to review this paper off my backlog.

https://hackertalks.com/post/6005633/6295546

When we see the flip flopping of advice I think it tells us the science is inconclusive or the relationship noisy.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27292972/ Here is a systematic review from 2016 saying high LDL is protective vs low LDL, which goes against the current lipid hypothesis - I just point this out because it goes to your point that the advice given flip flops!

This was a good video, but the core question is does LDL CAUSE atherosclerosis or is it associated with atherosclerosis? The video above even says the body will make LDL regardless of diet, so its clearly biologically necessary (that is to say LDL is not a disease). Bad Cholesterol is a poor name for LDL since it is biologically necessary.

There is literature currently saying decreasing LDL has a very small, but real risk reduction across a large population. But since its such a weak signal, I think LDL is a correlated biomarker and not the cause of atherosclerosis. i.e. If every fire you see has firefighters, you might start to think that firefighters start fires.

In the literature there are much stronger hazards to cardiovascular outcomes then LDL, such as metabolic dysfunction, diabetes, hypertension, etc. And very importantly differentiating healthy LDL that gets reused, vs damaged (glycated, oxidized) LDL

LDL is a risk factor, but it should be one datapoint in a panel (obesity, insulin sensitivity, hyper tension, CAC scores!!!, previous CVD events), not just a biomarker people try to treat in isolation.

If this is of interest, I recommend reading this writeup on LDL, its very balanced and cites its sources with confidence scores (the little numbers) https://www.dietdoctor.com/cholesterol/elevated-ldl-cholesterol

.

[โ€“] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I do think there is a case for lowering LDL - in patients with advanced atherosclerosis, where the LDL combined with plaque might prevent blood flow. In this limited scenario it is a net positive. Don't treat the metric (LDL), treat the disease (atherosclerosis). Demand a CAC (Coronary Artery Calcium Scan) before starting on medication that has huge metabolic implications (statins).

firefighter example

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bqkDjVyu80

If your body is already on fire, you don't want the firemen blocking the roads causing everything to seize up

.