[ExI] nutrition again

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:37 AM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com
> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, I am quite convinced about that.  Not only does fat not raise
> cholesterol but raised cholesterol may not be as dangerous as once
> thought.  I am nearly sure about that one.  One nutrition book I read was
> by a nurse who is on a 80% fat diet.
>
>  ### High cholesterol is without doubt dangerous, and I do not think that
researchers overstated the degree of danger. Severe familial
hypercholesterolemias are associated with a massively increased risk of
stroke and myocardial infarction, and the garden variety age-related
hypercholesterolemia is also a significant risk factor for these outcomes.

However, the story is a bit more complicated: While treatment with statins,
which reduces cholesterol, is without doubt life-saving in the appropriate
patient populations, other cholesterol-lowering drugs are for the most part
useless or even harmful. This implies that age-related hypercholesterolemia
may be a proxy for another pathological process (e.g. inflammation) that is
responsible for bad outcomes and responds to statins, but is not affected
by other hyperlipidemic drugs. So, if you have high cholesterol and
otherwise meet criteria for statin treatment, you should be treated,
regardless of whether statins work their magic through their impact on
cholesterol or through other pathways. But there is no reason to waste
money on non-statin drugs.

Rafał
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160415/68429614/attachment.html>