It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by pause4thought
reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd
Could you provide any links for further reading?
The cholesterol-lowering drug trials published in 2008-2009 were either negative (ENHANCE, SEAS, GISSI-HF, AURORA) or obviously biased and therefore not credible (JUPITER). How can we explain this wave of negative cholesterol-lowering drug trials? In this article, authors review and comment the results of these recent trials. It is also noteworthy that most cholesterol-lowering drug trials published between 2005 (the year of the Vioxx affair and of enforcement of new clinical trial regulations) and 2007 were also negative or ambiguous. Taken together, these recent trials, including those of 2008-2009, strongly suggest that the results of previous, highly positive trials with statins - particularly in the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease - published between 1994 and 2004 and that were used to issue guidelines for medical practitioners should be carefully re-examined by experts independent from the pharmaceutical industry. The next question would be whether it is not time for a full reappraisal of the theory according to which cholesterol-lowering results in a significant protection against cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
Conclusions: A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD. More data are needed to elucidate whether CVD risks are likely to be influenced by the specific nutrients used to replace saturated fat.
How often does someone develop coronary heart disease from high cholesterol alone?
Believe drug industry propaganda and you'd think that everyone does. Physicians have bought into this concept also, driving the $27 billion annual sales in statin cholesterol drugs.
In my experience, I can count the number of people who develop coronary disease from high cholesterol alone on one hand. It happens--but rarely.
That's not to say that cholesterol is not an issue. That rant populates many of the kook websites and conversations on the internet that argue that high cholesterol is a surrogate for some other health issue, or that it is part of a medical conspiracy.
If you are submitting that high blood cholesterol is not generally a cause of disease how does that relate to issues of diet and exercise, using the current paradigm?
And are you saying this study doesn't progress understanding and/or health care?
Ghrelin and leptin research seems a little overkill for general health science. There are other, more easily controlled hormones, such as insulin, that affect both of these little hormones.