Oops, they got it wrong about cholesterol

[claig]

"We've all spent time worrying about our cholesterol levels, but what if it was all... a conspiracy! What if the truth was that eating lots of fat doesn't clog your arteries and kill you, and that there's been a deliberate effort to ignore that evidence in order to secure the financial fortunes of Big Pharma's major anti-cholesterol drugs?"

www.cbsnews.com/news/dawn-of-the-cholesterol-skeptics-big-pharma-conspiracy-theorists-get-a-turn-in-the-spotlight/

"Flawed science triggers U-turn on cholesterol fears"
...
Its Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee plans to no longer warn people to avoid eggs, shellfish and other cholesterol-laden foods.

The U-turn, based on a report by the committee, will undo almost 40 years of public health warnings about eating food laden with cholesterol. US cardiologist Dr Steven Nissen, of the Cleveland Clinic, said: 'It's the right decision. We got the dietary guidelines wrong. They've been wrong for decades.'

Doctors are now shifting away from warnings about cholesterol and saturated fat and focusing concern on sugar as the biggest dietary threat.

The Daily Mail's GP Martin Scurr predicts that advice will change here in the UK too.
...
He added that the food industry had effectively contributed to heart disease by lowering saturated fat levels in food and replacing it with sugar.

Matt Ridley, a Tory peer and science author, yesterday said there should be an inquiry 'into how the medical and scientific profession made such an epic blunder'.

He described the change of advice in the US as a 'mighty U-turn' and said studies linking high cholesterol and saturated fat in food to heart disease were 'tinged with scandal'."

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3096634/Why-butter-eggs-won-t-kill-Flawed-science-triggers-U-turn-cholesterol-fears.html

I wonder if a similar thing will happen in about 40 years to the "save the planet" climate change warnings.

Oops!

Reading this thread, it seems I've got a very good dr. my cholesterol was "on the high side" (6.1) recently but the dr said as my blood pressure is low and I'm a normal weight I do not need to be concerned about it.

Bakeoff my GP said the same and when I was sceptical he showed me the NHS programme which they plug all the numbers into. Cholesterol levels are not the only thing taken into account before prescribing statins - though you would think from some people on this thread that there was a conspiracy afoot to prescribe!

In fact 2/3rds of GP's underprescribe statins compared to NICE guidelines

"Give statins to all over-50s: Even the healthy should take heart drug, says British expert"

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2194892/All-50s-statins-regardless-health-history-says-Oxford-professor.html

The Daily Mail often prints these type of articles from the experts and it doesn't have to say anything. Most Daily Mail readers seem to have a good understanding of the game.

"GIVING a daily cholesterol-busting pill to all men over 50 would be the quickest way to cut deaths from coronary disease, the heart and stroke tsar said yesterday.

A mass medication programme that would also include all women over 65 would save money as well as lives.

The daily “polypill” would contain cholesterol-busting statins, aspirin, agents to lower blood pressure and folic acid.

But the scheme will never be introduced because patients dislike being forced into treatment, said Professor Roger Boyle, the national director for heart disease and stroke.

Instead, most would prefer to be given medication only when they were found to be at risk of an illness."

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/14868/Give-all-men-over-50-wonder-drug

Express reader comments don't appear to understand the game.

"All over 50s 'should be offered polypill': Four-in-one drug could extend life by 11 years and prevent thousands of strokes and heart attacks"

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2175493/Polypills-Why-50s-offered-slash-risk-strokes-heart-attacks.html

On the ball, sceptical Mail readers again not convinced by Big Government and Big Pharma. One comment says

"I suffer from low blood pressure, why do I need it reduced another twelve per cent?Madness."

The Mail only has to quote Big Government without needing to give any judgement, it already knows how Mail readers will react.

"Statins should even be put in the water supply, according to one of Britain’s leading heart experts, Dr Mahendra Varma, who is vice-chairman of the Northern Ireland Chest, Heart and Stroke Association.

But a big scientific row has broken out this year over the Jupiter study. According to three expert articles in the journal, Archives of Internal Medicine, the Jupiter trial was deeply flawed.

Close analysis of the figures by French doctors found that statins did not actually achieve any real reduction in deaths, and the ­figures had been warped by commercial interference. Nine of the 14 Jupiter researchers had financial ties with AstraZeneca.

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1340299/Why-taking-statins-pointless--bad-you.html

"Statin wars: Doctors are bitterly divided over calls for half of all adults to be put on pills to cut cholesterol. Here's what you need to know

Having reached the age of 72, Professor Klim McPherson was prepared to accept some deterioration in his physical capabilities. But when, earlier this year, he found he was struggling to bend over to tie up his shoelaces, he decided enough was enough.

And so it was that little more than a month ago, the Oxford don stopped taking the little orange tablets his doctor had prescribed him and which he had been swallowing before bedtime every night for the past three years.

To his great surprise, within seven days, the aches and pains that had so restricted his movements had almost entirely disappeared.

'I'd been finding it difficult getting down the stairs and had to negotiate them step by step,' says Professor McPherson, one of the country's most eminent public health experts.

'As for reaching my laces, that was painful and uncomfortable. But now I can once again do all the things I couldn't do before.'

The medication that Professor McPherson has chosen to go without is a statin called Simvastatin"

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2700573/Statin-wars-Doctors-bitterly-divided-calls-half-adults-pills-cut-cholesterol-Heres-need-know.html

"Millions of healthy Britons are set to be prescribed them, but why do many GPs say they won't take statins?

He’d been a GP for a quarter of a century and had written ‘tens of thousands of statin prescriptions’.

Then two years ago, Dr Kailash Chand, too, started taking the cholesterol-lowering pills to protect his heart.

As Dr Chand, who is the deputy chairman of the British Medical Association — the doctors’ union — explains: ‘I was in my late 50s and I’m Asian, so I ticked various boxes for being at raised risk of heart disease. It seemed the sensible thing to do.’

Within two weeks, however, Dr Chand, who is now 60, began experiencing pains in his back and legs unlike anything he’d suffered before.
...
I didn’t even consider statins,’ he says. ‘I was wondering instead about things like too much travelling or bad posture when sitting.

'I did various checks, like a liver function test, X-rays and an MRI scan. All came back clear.

‘So last year I thought it was worth seeing what would happen if I stopped taking the drug.

'Within two to three weeks my back and legs began to feel a lot better and my sleep improved.

‘For me that was the litmus test that showed that the statin was the cause of the problem.’

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2582958/Statins-Millions-healthy-Britons-set-prescribed-GPs-say-wont-statins.html

I know a couple of doctors socially and none would take statins or ibuprofen??

Umm.What do you know about how cholesterol works in the body?

HDL, LDL cholesterol
Different types of fat
Plaques
Atherosclerosis
Cholesterol synthesis and dietary cholesterol
Lipoproteins
Triglycerides
Plaque formation
Clots

You may have an issue with statins - but there is a link between cholesterol and disease. It's just not as simple as high cholesterol bad.

Atherosclerosis is the cause of death on my dads death certificate
His cholesterol was normal

His cholesterol was normal

Sorry about your Dad.

That unfortunately doesn't mean anything. Cholesterol is complicated and "normal" is not as simple as that. People get lung cancer but don't smoke. Some people who smoke don't get lung cancer. But there is a link between smoking and lung cancer -in the same way there is a link between cholesterol (in all its forms) and heart disease.

Thank you.
I put my dads death down to smoking for decades.
I don't think his cholesterol level had anything to do with it.
As you say....it's complicated and I'm not sure Drs have figured out the role of cholesterol in heart disease.

From what I have read and thought about low fat in itself is not a bad thing. Low fat means eating mainly natural food but without adding extra fats and oils. So salmon and veg and potato but not adding fats that wouldn't normally be there. See that's what I don't get about low carb. It doesn't seem natural at all. Fair enough to eat natural again. Meat, veg, fruit, fish, nuts but then low carbers seem to then add loads of butter and oils into the mix which isn't natural unless they occur naturally in the food itself. So I feel that is a problem waiting to happen in the future. Coconut oil and fats are processed foods too. Eat the coconut as it is meant to be eaten. The more natural and close to foods in their natural state then surely that cant be bad.

Someone mentioned that our ancestors wouldn't have eaten much fruit. Well I think that depends upon where in the world you live. In tropical areas then I would think a lot of fruit would have been consumed.

I don't know, maybe you just have to do what you think is right for you in the end.

The tool usually used for deciding whether a patient should be started on statins is here
A score of over 10% (so risk of having heart attack or stroke in the next 10 years) is usually the trigger to recommend statins.

Senigallia

I don't care what the flaming tool is Statins crippled my Husband, nearly destroyed his life and our marriage, and surely you DONT START a patient on statins you recommend them and give a patient all the facts to make an informed choice.

GPS are fucking useless IMO, when you get a 61 yo man who within a space of a couple of months goes from being active to having to use 2 fucking sticks to walk and you KNOW he is on statins, and you KNOW that's one of the side effects, you don't just tell him there no reason you cant walk part from old age.

Luckily I read the leaflet and researched the side effects and he went straight off them.

eating mainly natural food

Why this obsession with netural? It doesn't make any sense to me at all. there is nothing inherently "good" about "natural", and most people who claim there is don't actually understand what "natural" means anyway. if you are talking about what food human evolved eating, then we are evolved to COOK or food, ( and never never never to eat fish)

"This is the diet that Dr. Weston A. Price recommended, based on years of travelling, researching and studying traditional societies as they were in the process of changing from their native diets to western processed foods.

Characteristics of a Traditional Diet

1. The diets of healthy primitive and nonindustrialized peoples contain no refined or denatured foods such as refined sugar or corn syrup; white flour; canned foods; pasteurized, homogenized, skim or low-fat milk; refined or hydrogenated vegetable oils; protein powders; artificial vitamins or toxic additives and colorings.

1. All traditional cultures consume some sort of animal protein and fat from fish and other seafood; water and land fowl; land animals; eggs; milk and milk products; reptiles; and insects.

... Dietary Guidelines

1. Eat whole, natural foods.

1. Eat only foods that will spoil, but eat them before they do.

1. Eat naturally-raised meat including fish, seafood, poultry, beef, lamb, game, organ meats and eggs.

1. Eat whole, naturally-produced milk products from pasture-fed cows, preferably raw and/or fermented, such as whole yogurt, cultured butter, whole cheeses and fresh and sour cream.

1. Use only traditional fats and oils including butter and other animal fats, extra virgin olive oil, expeller expressed sesame and flax oil and the tropical oils—coconut and palm.

1. Eat fresh fruits and vegetables, preferably organic, in salads and soups, or lightly steamed.

... www.traditionalnutritional.com/weston-price-philosophy.html

claig

What do you know about cholesterol?

What is this thread about? Statins or cholesterol levels?

I'd love to hear your scientific explanation for the stuff you've quoted.

Some of the stuff on that list is useful - a diet of processed food is not brilliant. But some of that stuff has no real scientific basis.

But anyway - is this thread about raised cholesterol? Statins? Or the human diet and health?

Wasn't the initial guidance on lowering cholesterol brought about to protect the small minority of the population who are genetically predisposed to high cholesterol and subsequent heart attacks whilst young. So for the majority of people this advice is meaningless.

For my part we try and eat relatively unprocessed foods at home and also try and avoid sugar-free opting for real sugar instead of artificial sweeteners. we buy the more expensive jams with sugar rather than corn syrup etc.

If people want to eat a lot of processed foods let them but those of us who choose not to tend to feel happier and healthier so even if a report sponsored by the Sugar Industry were sent to me every day saying candyfloss should comprise 10% of my diet I would ignore it.

Many many doctors are now realising good fats in food (as M says above) are good for you (not junk trans fats etc) and and doctor's previous honestly held beliefs about cholesterol is junk science which has conned people for decades.

Cholesterol is incredibly complicated. The cholesterol in blood is not just cholesterol by itself. It's carried as a complex molecule with phospholipids, triglycerides and proteins. Each of these molecules varies depending on our diet - we all know that different oils, vegetable fats, animal fats etc contain different forms of such things all affecting their composition.

Then there's fatty acids. Again -loads of different types and all have an effect on health and metabolism. The metabolism depends on a lot of things - such as the rest of your diet. Bacteria in the gut affect the intake as well.

Atherosclerosis is getting more and more well known.

This paper is interesting - discusses the role of oxidation of LDL and atherosclerosis.

www.researchgate.net/publication/14594219_Low-densitylipoprotein_oxidationantioxidants_and_atherosclerosisa_clinicalbiochemistry_perspective

'What do you know about cholesterol?

What is this thread about? Statins or cholesterol levels?

I'd love to hear your scientific explanation for the stuff you've quoted. '

I'm not a scientist. I just quote from newspaper articles and scientists.

"Its Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee plans to no longer warn people to avoid eggs, shellfish and other cholesterol-laden foods.

The U-turn, based on a report by the committee, will undo almost 40 years of public health warnings about eating food laden with cholesterol. US cardiologist Dr Steven Nissen, of the Cleveland Clinic, said: 'It's the right decision. We got the dietary guidelines wrong. They've been wrong for decades.'

Doctors are now shifting away from warnings about cholesterol and saturated fat and focusing concern on sugar as the biggest dietary threat.

The Daily Mail's GP Martin Scurr predicts that advice will change here in the UK too.
...
He added that the food industry had effectively contributed to heart disease by lowering saturated fat levels in food and replacing it with sugar.

Matt Ridley, a Tory peer and science author, yesterday said there should be an inquiry 'into how the medical and scientific profession made such an epic blunder'.

He described the change of advice in the US as a 'mighty U-turn' and said studies linking high cholesterol and saturated fat in food to heart disease were 'tinged with scandal'."

"But anyway - is this thread about raised cholesterol? Statins? Or the human diet and health?"

This thread started off about cholesterol but posters then brought up statins, so it is now about both and diet and health as it is all important stuff.

Doctors are now shifting away from warnings about cholesterol and saturated fat and focusing concern on sugar as the biggest dietary threat

True - but cholesterol and diet are really important. All the food you eat and the types of food you eat affect your body biochemistry.

If you eat vegetables and fruit, you are providing essential anti oxidants, vitamins and minerals which affect the metabolism of fats in your body.

If you have a lot of animal fats, you are affecting the type of cholesterol and HDL /LDL ratio

Sugar - what do you understand by that word? Are you talking about refined sugar, complex carbohydrates, simple sugars?

Biochemistry is complicated. We are what we eat. In so so many ways.

It's not as simple as high cholesterol, high fats bad. But doctors have to give a message out. The reality is far far more complicated.

He added that the food industry had effectively contributed to heart disease by lowering saturated fat levels in food and replacing it with sugar

Do you even know what this means?

Are you talking about refined sugars or complex carbohydrates?

Do you known how they are metabolised in the gut? Do you understand what happens to them when they are absorbed?