80yo Doc Mallach Glutenfree 50yrs, Stick of Butter as Popsicle Daily!

a reply to: BrianFlanders

Exactly. I don't know that I'd agree that it's all down to genetics...

I agree it's not ALL down to genetics. I could have worded that better than I did, but you got the gist.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: pressident
Butter is still bad,

Depends...

Butter from commercial dairy is not very good, loaded with hormones, antibiotics, etc.

Butter from grass-fed/finished cows is an amazing health food.

especially in those with high LDL.

Please stop spreading debunked myths.

There are no real, genuine studies showing causal links between high cholesterol - the good or bad kind - and heart disease/risk of heart attacks. In fact, there is actually more evidence accumulating that low cholesterol is very unhealthy and high risk for sudden heart attacks - possibly because the people looked at were on statins, that have other negative health side effects beyond artificially lowering cholesterol levels.

Cholesterol is not the problem. Inflammation is the problem.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: markovian

You'd be surprised. Nowadays you practically have to be one to pass med or nursing school. I'd say about 15% of testing is on nutrition.

Nutrition as defined by... who? The FDA? That is laughable.

Anyone with taste buds uses butter.

Figure out how to kill taste buds and we'll have won the war on obesity.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Please stop spreading debunked myths.

One person making a claim is not debunking. It's pure nonsense, we have longitudinal studies proving the relationship between LDL and CVD.

ASCVD event rates were 5 times as high and all‐cause mortality 4 times as high in the highest LDL cholesterol trajectory group compared with the optimal LDL cholesterol exposure group

www.ahajournals.org...

Please show me the longitudinal studies showing no link.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Please show me the longitudinal studies showing no link.

Probably not exactly the study you're looking for, but here's a 2016 study that showed no link between high LDL cholesterol in the elderly and mortality rates, except for perhaps an inverse effect. The cholesterol component as it relates to health is a complex one, since the human body needs cholesterol in various forms to live.
bmjopen.bmj.com...

a reply to: Blue Shift

That study agrees with me.

Objective It is well known that total cholesterol becomes less of a risk factor or not at all for all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality with increasing age, but as little is known as to whether low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), one component of total cholesterol, is associated with mortality in the elderly, we decided to investigate this issue.

It can not be LESS of a risk factor if it is not a risk factor. What that statement is saying is it is well known LDL is a risk factor for CVD and increases risk the younger the person is.

Basically the older you are when you start getting high LDL the less impact it will have. If it takes 30 years to kill you, and you are 70 when you start having problems, it won't have any impact unless you live to 100.

I just want to know if you think a review of studies where they picked what studies to include, and only deals with elderly, is more meaningful than a longitudinal study showing differences in group outcomes over 35 years?

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: pressident
Butter is still bad,

Depends...

Butter from commercial dairy is not very good, loaded with hormones, antibiotics, etc.

Butter from grass-fed/finished cows is an amazing health food.

especially in those with high LDL.

Please stop spreading debunked myths.



Cholesterol is not the problem. Inflammation is the problem.

Well said! So now where do we get butter from cows that arent being supplement fed/dosed with cow-byproducts, hormones? Ghee?? Cuz every farm around me including ours feeds grain but also pet foos kibble by the silo full on the side daily, too!

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
I just want to know if you think a review of studies where they picked what studies to include, and only deals with elderly, is more meaningful than a longitudinal study showing differences in group outcomes over 35 years?

I think that anyone who does any kind of study is going to narrow their data sources to help exclude unknown variants. That's just science. Karl Popper articulated this decades ago. But I understand your skepticism. I don't particularly trust scientific studies (on statins, for instance) done by people with billions of dollars of pharmaceutical sales at stake. So we agree there.

The question still remains, however, as to whether diet or genetics plays a greater role in systemic cholesterol levels. Even the study you link to downplays the lack of a link to dietary fat and cholesterol and primarily focuses on individuals who already have high LDL in youth.

Not that I'm encouraging people to go out and eat sticks of butter, but anyone who radically modifies their diet to reduce cholesterol, or fails to include enough fat in their diet, is asking for trouble just as much as someone who eats nothing but fat. We're omnivores and our bodies like a balance.

The fact (neither sad or happy) is that we're genetically programmed to die so that our younger, fitter generation of offspring can benefit from the freed up resources. We can shuffle off this mortal coil any number of ways, some of our choosing and some not. I don't think it's a sin to enjoy a nice buttery delicious steak once in a while while we wait for the Grim Reaper. If I die quickly of a heart attack before the cancer slowly eats me alive, I'm thinking that might be a better way to go.

a reply to: Blue Shift

The most reliable types of research that yield the highest level of reproducible results all say high LDL is a major factor in CVD, I already linked a 35 year study that proves this.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
One person making a claim is not debunking.

It is far more than one person. Yes, it is new information, and I totally understand that the establishment hates it when something they've been pushing - both the false claim that high cholesterol is bad and must be treated with drugs, and the drugs they've sold to the unsuspecting public raking in trillions in profits over the last 10 or 20 years - gets exposed for the fraud that it is.

It's pure nonsense, we have longitudinal studies proving the relationship between LDL and CVD.

Oh, you are unaware that observat ional studies can never prove anything. Understandable then. Might want to update your internal database.

originally posted by: pressident
So now where do we get butter from cows that arent being supplement fed/dosed with cow-byproducts, hormones? Ghee?? Cuz every farm around me including ours feeds grain but also pet foos kibble by the silo full on the side daily, too!

It isn't impossible. Try to find a local farm - local is always best, especially when you can tour the farm and see for yourself how they treat their animals. You want grass fed/finished. If it isn't grass finished, they feed them grain.

If you can't find it locally, you can always order it online.

ingested cholesterol =/= blood cholesterol.

our bodies make cholesterol from what we eat. Eating lots of cholesterol does not necessarily give you a high cholesterol level, just like eating a lot of fat does not necessarily make you fat.

fats and cholesterols come in different varieties. some are good for you, some are less good, some are bad.

a smallish amount of butter a day, of the organic variety, probably isn't going to do you long term damage, depending on all the other food you eat, and the amount of exercise you do, and your genetic make up. and might even be good for you compared to other alternatives. I would certainly use it instead of those highly processed vegetable oils, or margarines.