Cholesterol - side conversation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Drummer

Drummer

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
High TC, HDL and LDL are associated with lower all cause mortality in the elderly, compared to those with the recommended lower levels - L Bathum et al Scandinavian Journal of Primary Healthcare, 2013; 31; 172 -180.
I knew I'd got the reference written down somewhere.
 
Drummer said:
High TC, HDL and LDL are associated with lower all cause mortality in the elderly, compared to those with the recommended lower levels - L Bathum et al Scandinavian Journal of Primary Healthcare, 2013; 31; 172 -180.
I knew I'd got the reference written down somewhere.
Click to expand...
True.
"All cause"
Totally debunked as nonsense in context, but it has been used by many to churn out a lot of books to those that want to hear it.
Look at the deaths in the elderly from covid.
Covid didn't care if they all had low cholesterol.
Look at third world deaths, if you die from starvation, you certainly won't be having high cholesterol.
Does high cholesterol stop you being run over by a bus?
But if you look specifically at cholesterol related causes, such as chronic heart disease, that's the biggest killer of elderly in the world.
But fortunately it has decreased since the drive on statins.
Each to their own though.
 
travellor said:
True.
"All cause"
Totally debunked as nonsense in context, but it has been used by many to churn out a lot of books to those that want to hear it.
Look at the deaths in the elderly from covid.
Covid didn't care if they all had low cholesterol.
Look at third world deaths, if you die from starvation, you certainly won't be having high cholesterol.
Does high cholesterol stop you being run over by a bus?
But if you look specifically at cholesterol related causes, such as chronic heart disease, that's the biggest killer of elderly in the world.
But fortunately it has decreased since the drive on statins.
Each to their own though.
Click to expand...
It was done using a count of who was dead and who alive - which seems rather undebunkable. Also highly unlikely that people would starve to death in Scandinavian countries.
There are a few cardiologists who are wondering why over half their patients - both medicated and requiring surgery - have below average cholesterol and are prepared to say so anonymously. They point out that to say so to their peers would be professional suicide.
At one time there was a big reduction in statin taking in France, and the number of deaths was supposed to rise as a result - but death rates actually fell in the period up until people could be persuaded to go back on the tablets - after which the death rate went back to 'normal'.
You will note that the study was pre covid.
 
Drummer said:
There are a few cardiologists who are wondering why over half their patients - both medicated and requiring surgery - have below average cholesterol and are prepared to say so anonymously. They point out that to say so to their peers would be professional suicide.
Click to expand...

There's heart surgeon on Twitter who keeps posting this.
 
No, it's an American surgeon who's published a book on the subject. He doesn't say that cholesterol doesn't contribute to heart problems, but he quite often comments than over half of his patients have normal cholesterol and he doesn't believe it's the main factor.

That Maholtra guy is an anti-vaxxer, isn't he?
 
harbottle said:
No, it's an American surgeon who's published a book on the subject. He doesn't say that cholesterol doesn't contribute to heart problems, but he quite often comments than over half of his patients have normal cholesterol and he doesn't believe it's the main factor.

That Maholtra guy is an anti-vaxxer, isn't he?
Click to expand...
Cardiologist, cholesterol/statin denier, anti-vaxxer, diet book grifter ...
 
Drummer said:
It was done using a count of who was dead and who alive - which seems rather undebunkable. Also highly unlikely that people would starve to death in Scandinavian countries.
There are a few cardiologists who are wondering why over half their patients - both medicated and requiring surgery - have below average cholesterol and are prepared to say so anonymously. They point out that to say so to their peers would be professional suicide.
At one time there was a big reduction in statin taking in France, and the number of deaths was supposed to rise as a result - but death rates actually fell in the period up until people could be persuaded to go back on the tablets - after which the death rate went back to 'normal'.
You will note that the study was pre covid.
Click to expand...

Yep.
Test dead people.
All causes of death.
"Was he hit by a bus?"
"Yes, but the corpse has low cholesterol"
"Ah, well, high cholesterol saves lives"

And that's a valid study to you?

I'll never be convinced that holds up.
 
harbottle said:
No, it's an American surgeon who's published a book on the subject. He doesn't say that cholesterol doesn't contribute to heart problems, but he quite often comments than over half of his patients have normal cholesterol and he doesn't believe it's the main factor.

That Maholtra guy is an anti-vaxxer, isn't he?
Click to expand...
So, half his patients have high cholesterol, half have normal, but cholesterol isn't the "main" factor?
But still "a" factor?
A pretty big one maybe, but not the "main" one?
Or just a contributor?
I'll risk living with normal cholesterol then, and avoiding other factors where I can, regardless of whether they are the main one, or just one of many.
I still won't be buying his book either though.
 
harbottle said:
No, it's an American surgeon who's published a book on the subject. He doesn't say that cholesterol doesn't contribute to heart problems, but he quite often comments than over half of his patients have normal cholesterol and he doesn't believe it's the main factor.

That Maholtra guy is an anti-vaxxer, isn't he?
Click to expand...
Who's the surgeon? I'd be interested in seeing his stuff.
 
travellor said:
Yep.
Test dead people.
All causes of death.
"Was he hit by a bus?"
"Yes, but the corpse has low cholesterol"
"Ah, well, high cholesterol saves lives"

And that's a valid study to you?

I'll never be convinced that holds up.
Click to expand...
No - the valid study is the one done. You don't have to believe the findings published in a legitimate medical journal, or any of the data which others have been puzzling over for some considerable time due to things not adding up - but I don't believe that mockery is at all helpful in what could be a factor in the well being of so many people.
Having experienced a bad reaction to Atorvastatin myself I do wonder how many people have been aversely affected by a medication which could possibly be being prescribed in error and which will actually reduce both the quality and length of life they experience.
 
Drummer said:
No - the valid study is the one done. You don't have to believe the findings published in a legitimate medical journal, or any of the data which others have been puzzling over for some considerable time due to things not adding up - but I don't believe that mockery is at all helpful in what could be a factor in the well being of so many people.
Having experienced a bad reaction to Atorvastatin myself I do wonder how many people have been aversely affected by a medication which could possibly be being prescribed in error and which will actually reduce both the quality and length of life they experience.
Click to expand...
It's not mockery.
You seem to have misunderstood the study.
"All cause" of death included road accidents, and recording the results of the blood tests where available.
So, death by bus is now caused by low cholesterol it seems.
You include cancer in all causes.
Can you actually believe low cholesterol causes that too?

Or maybe that conclusion is utterly meaningless?

The warped statistics has simply been picked up as a tag line by people selling books to earn them a few pounds from people looking to believe.
 
Drummer said:
At one time there was a big reduction in statin taking in France, and the number of deaths was supposed to rise as a result - but death rates actually fell in the period up until people could be persuaded to go back on the tablets - after which the death rate went back to 'normal'.
Click to expand...
Do you have any reference to news about that (or a study?). All I can find with google is mentions of statin use dropping after the February 2013 publication of a book (presumably the event you're referring to) but the stories I get are just about statin use falling and this (possibly) being clinically significant. Nothing about CVD events falling (and nothing about them rising again as statin use returned).

Come to think of it, 2013 is kind of recent to expect any big impact from statin use, isn't it? (Unless statin side effects are big enough and immediate enough, of course.)
 
I believe the story goes the death rate changed within months, this proving statins actually end people's lives.
Stop taking them, everyone lived, start again, the mortality rate rocketed.
In reality as you say it would take a decade or longer to actually have a meaningful result, but that doesn't sell books.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top