Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Cholesterol: No longer a concern

  1. #11
    Senior Member willingtocope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pleasant Hill Iowa
    Posts
    1,097
    And in reply: from http://qjmed.oxfordjournals.org/content/95/6/397

    ‘The more LDL there is in the blood, the more rapidly atherosclerosis develops.’ This 1984 statement by the Nobel Award winners Michael Brown and Joseph Goldstein1 has dominated research on atherosclerosis since then. As shown here, this hypothesis appears to be falsified by the fact that degree of atherosclerosis, and atherosclerotic growth, were independent on the concentration or the change of LDL‐cholesterol in almost all studies. The role of LDL‐cholesterol for atherosclerosis growth has been exaggerated, a finding with consequences for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. For instance, as the statins exert their beneficial influence on the cardiovascular system by several mechanisms, it may be wiser to search for the lowest effective dose instead of the dose with maximal effect on LDL‐cholesterol. Neither should an elevated LDL‐cholesterol be the primary target in cardiovascular prevention, as recently claimed by the American National Cholesterol Education Program, and researchers should direct more attention to other hypotheses.

  2. #12
    From the same article you posted (a dubious one in my opinion, a single author paper from one of the half dozen writers listed on the first website you linked to):

    "If LDL‐cholesterol and ΔLDL‐cholesterol do not correlate with degree of atherosclerosis or with atherosclerosis growth, why does a high cholesterol predict cardiovascular disease? The answer may be that cardiovascular disease is not synonymous with atherosclerosis. A high LDL or total cholesterol may be secondary to uncontrolled factors that promote cardiovascular disease in other ways and cause hypercholesterolaemia at the same time."

    High LDL cholesterol is linked to heart disease. Lowering LDL cholesterol decreases heart disease. Even the article you linked to agreed with that.

    Certainly we are learning more about the intricacies of the different types of cholesterol and trying to learn better ways of treating them, but regardless of the mechanisms, no one is debating that high cholesterol leads to heart disease and can be prevented by statins (and exercise, healthy diets, etc, etc)

  3. #13
    Senior Member willingtocope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pleasant Hill Iowa
    Posts
    1,097
    Okay, here's another... http://www.ahjonline.com/article/S00...717-5/abstract

    They reviewed cholesterol values for 136,905 patients admitted to 541 hospitals with coronary artery disease. They statistics showed:

    Conclusions

    In a large cohort of patients hospitalized with CAD, almost half have admission LDL levels <100 mg/dL. More than half the patients have admission HDL levels <40 mg/dL, whereas <10% have HDL ≥60 mg/dL. These findings may provide further support for recent guideline revisions with even lower LDL goals and for developing effective treatments to raise HDL.
    ...which the big pharma funded researchers chose to interpret as meaning that LDL level targets should be lowered to <100mg/dl, instead of realizing that LDL levels HAVE NO RELATIONSHIP to risk for heart attack.

    There is another study of autopsied patients (I'm looking for the reference) that found that the vast majority of people who actually died from a heart attack had little or no arterial scarring.

  4. #14
    Senior Member willingtocope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pleasant Hill Iowa
    Posts
    1,097
    And yet another... http://www.ahjonline.com/article/S00...495-0/fulltext

    I'm not going to copy the pertinent sections here but I found the part titled "Chlamydia and atherosclerosis" of particular interest. Vanderbilt University has investigated the part that the Chlamydia Pneumonia bacteria may play in SOME cases of multiple sclerosis and has developed a "combined antibiotic protocol" for treating the infection. For what its worth, I'm following that protocol and I can report the it has halted progression of my SPMS.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by willingtocope View Post
    ...which the big pharma funded researchers chose to interpret as meaning that LDL level targets should be lowered to <100mg/dl, instead of realizing that LDL levels HAVE NO RELATIONSHIP to risk for heart attack.
    I'm not sure why you would post an article that came to the conclusion which is opposite of the opinion you hold. They seem to believe quite strongly that the evidence suggests a lower LDL means less CAD. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning that "LDL levels have no relationship to risk for heart attack", because I personally didn't see anything in that article to suggest that (and in fact they concluded the opposite).



    Quote Originally Posted by willingtocope View Post
    And yet another... http://www.ahjonline.com/article/S00...495-0/fulltext

    I'm not going to copy the pertinent sections here but I found the part titled "Chlamydia and atherosclerosis" of particular interest. Vanderbilt University has investigated the part that the Chlamydia Pneumonia bacteria may play in SOME cases of multiple sclerosis and has developed a "combined antibiotic protocol" for treating the infection. For what its worth, I'm following that protocol and I can report the it has halted progression of my SPMS.
    From the infectious article you posted.

    "On the basis of these findings, these authors postulated that viral infection may induce metabolic changes in the vessel wall, including altering cholesterol ester activity, stimulating increasing uptake of LDL-bound cholesterol, and decreasing lipolytic activity of certain cells."

    The article does suggest that there is an inflammatory factor involved in formation of atherosclerosis (which is well known in the medical community), however it does not suggest that this component contributes to more mortality than hypercholesterolemia. And besides, we don't have a safe way to just lower inflammation in general. We do however, have a very safe and effective way of lowering LDL and thereby improving mortality with statins.

    Your cardiologist isn't getting paid to prescribe them, he's prescribing them because they work, and there is a large mountain of evidence to support this.


    I'm happy to hear that your MS is doing well, and I hope it continues that way.

  6. #16
    Senior Member willingtocope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pleasant Hill Iowa
    Posts
    1,097
    My cardiologist is indeed paid to prescribe statins. I've met the very attractive blond pharmaceutical rep who takes him out for 3 hour "lunches" every Thursday. She could convince me to push her drugs any day.

    I referenced the article implying that patients with <100mg/dl LDL still have heart attacks to illustrate statistics can be misinterpreted (even by people who should know better). For example, I note that 90% of all people who have cancer eat lunch...therefore, "Lunch causes cancer". True?

    And, there is indeed a safe way to lower inflammation caused by bacterial infections...its called "combined antibiotic protocol".

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Whately, MA United States
    Posts
    2,685
    Blog Entries
    2
    I've seen a couple of papers stating that the main reason the medical community has been pushing so hard to get cholesterol levels down is because they can - with statins.
    Don - Grad Student Emeritus
    T3 ASIA A 26 years post injury

Similar Threads

  1. Cholesterol
    By shamrock88 in forum Care
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-20-2012, 09:53 AM
  2. How's your cholesterol
    By flying in forum Care
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-01-2012, 07:31 PM
  3. Another cholesterol question
    By CraigP in forum Care
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-10-2010, 02:06 PM
  4. Low HDL Cholesterol....
    By Emi2 in forum Care
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-21-2010, 11:25 AM
  5. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 05-03-2006, 11:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •