Minichan

lol

AND-


https://www.nhs.uk/news/heart-and-lungs/study-says-theres-no-link-between-cholesterol-and-heart-disease/

Syntax claims his Docs have him in tip top shape RE: pipes cleaned BUT it's bunk bunk bunk!!

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-cholesterol-myth-that_b_676817

LOTS of cold hard cash WASTED on outdated and WRONG Science!!!


How foolish.

@1,068,340 (A)
re: QUACK QUACK QUACK

(Edited 16 seconds later.)

Wait a second, let me check I'm understanding you correctly here: are you saying Syntax wrote something that wasn't true?

@previous (C)
Impossible.

You three cannot shut up about each other. It's very boring.

@previous (D)
Just trying to help.

@1,068,348 (D)
YOURE boring
(unless you are Becky)

Oh look! Another thread about syntax made by Matt the stalker!

@1,068,338 (A)

> AND-
>
>
> https://www.nhs.uk/news/heart-and-lungs/study-says-theres-no-link-between-cholesterol-and-heart-disease/

You one dumb as all fuck stupid Idiot

You did not even read the report - I sure did

Serious studies that show CUT LDL reduce death rate

And how did you miss the words Controversial???????????

Sure there are studies that disagree with OTHER Studies

I love the Studies that show that HDL HIGH and LDL LOW = Far Far Less Heart Problems and so far NOT one Study disagrees with that.

Also there are more than one form of LDL'S and one needs a MORE EXPENSIVE Study of Blood to C how one is Doing

For a fact I once had been ordered to get Cloggged artery to my brain Cleaned OUT - Serious Life threating Stuff 95% blocked with Docs telling me only way to clear that is to chop Chop CHOP IT Out and put in Stent and then take Drugs like Lipitor for the Rest of my Life

Bless UCLA Medical Library with a few weeks of Study and I followed the change DIET and Start Aerobics (I chose swimming Laps 30 to 45 minutes daily but one can do that in 23 Minutes )

Totally with Doppler Proof - Got that Fatty Mess out which was blocking my Brain and now my Brain has been working so good my Wallet tends to burst Open all 2Often

So because so few here can Read English - Reports are CORRECT







and FROM Both Links Cited - Damn Y Y Y R so many here Dumb Dumb Dumb - Because they R!









I SHOULD QUADTRUPLE QuinTRUPLe the BAD BAD VERY VERY VERY BAD LDL - Alas people will copypasta like ninjj who is in serious Incel mode of current form SO I wont




AND THE REAL BOTTOM LINE IS THAT NO ONE IN SCIENCE Disagrees with Importance of HDL AND LDL components that make up the Total Cholesterol

AND ALL THEY ARE SAYING IS - You need to Know HDL HDL and More About HDL and how to get it UP UP UP and How to get the BAD BAD LDL Down Down Down and If you do that and keep Triglycerides DOWN DOWN DOWN

By Magic your Total Cholesterol ends UP LOW LOW LOW - Shocking

And Yes one can eat a Food with very high Cholesterol like Calamari (NOT Fried) and it will be GOOD for your body - Key is to understand what foods with High Cholesterol are good for you and which ones are NOT -

Regular Hamburger meat BAD BAD BAD - Low Fat Hamburger Meat Good Good but NOT as Good as say Lobster or Shrimp for the Body

Now IF one is looking to eat and die quickly avoid Roach Coaches UNLESS one finds those people as I have who server Fresh Main Lobster (Just make sure to hold that Lobster up to Nose and breath reallllll Deeep - If it smells Sweet - Hot damn good eats - If Ammonia - Only use to clean the floors - You can scrub your floors with Bad Lobster - Just rinse with lots of water AFTER

(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
Shocking just shocking that I could wood make a Mistrake

Again I am NOT in the Running for 2nd Cumming of Jesus - And Even God admits to making a Mistrake - C chapter on Noah need for Ark

Notice we do not have colony's of 50,000 types of fleas and mites cause Noah had no room for all of them. Wait we do have more than 50,000 species - Weird how Noah did not follow Gods directions eh

THAT SAID U U U R NOT
'''Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 5 hours ago,
You three cannot shut up about each other. It's very boring.

SO U U U must be a PERP as well
So Anon B which asshole R U

A wall of driveling blabber

@previous (I)
Best you continue to keep your LDL high HDL low and more quickly help local undertakers pay their bills.
And welcome to the clueless here that failed to take

<-------------

No need to read what I rite - Just read the links instead of crappy conclusions about nit picking about one Number that MAY be OF Much Value and Often IS!

(Edited 35 seconds later.)

@1,068,388 (Syntax)

> For a fact I once had been ordered to get Cloggged artery to my brain Cleaned OUT

I pray you will follow the doctors' advice and do so, my child.

@previous (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
Yo TG Comix
Have you turned urself in2 Police for you horrid acts of Child Molestation Yet.

I notice the Pope is now helping keep Pedophile Priests and Bishops in the Church even after they have been convicted of crimes.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/02/sean-omalley-pope-francis-catholic-church-sex-abuse/582658/


Why Does the Catholic Church Keep Failing on Sexual Abuse?

Cardinal Seán O'Malley has spent decades cleaning up after pedophile priests. Now he's once again found himself in the middle of a crisis.




A few years after Seán O’Malley took over the Archdiocese of Boston in 2003, at the peak of the clergy sexual-abuse crisis in America, he led novenas of penance at nine of the city’s most affected parishes. At each church he visited, he lay facedown on the floor before the altar, begging for forgiveness. This is how O’Malley has spent his life in ministry: cleaning up after pedophile priests and their apologists, and serving as the Catholic Church’s public face of repentance and reform.

Possibly more than any other cleric on Earth, O’Malley understands how deeply the Church’s errors on sexual abuse have damaged its mission and reputation. Today, he is one of Pope Francis’s closest advisers, the only American on a small committee of cardinals who meet regularly at the Vatican. He runs the pope’s special commission on the protection of minors. And he is a member of the influential Vatican office responsible for preserving and defending Catholic doctrine. He believes that the Church has changed, can change, and will change. But as the world’s top bishops prepare to meet later this month for an unprecedented summit on sexual abuse at the Vatican, O’Malley has found himself frustrated, unable to push reforms through at the top.

In an interview on a recent cold morning in Boston, the cardinal spoke about the progress he believes the Church, and Pope Francis, have made in recent years, and what’s still lacking. He detailed his proposal to establish Vatican tribunals to deal with bishops accused of wrongdoing—one of the major problems the Church has yet to address. The pope “was convinced to do it another way,” O’Malley said. “We’re still waiting for the procedures to be clearly articulated.” He often described problems in the Church passively, without directly assigning agency or fault. For example: American bishops have asked the Vatican for an investigation into Theodore McCarrick, the former cardinal who was consistently elevated despite widely acknowledged rumors of sexual misconduct, until he was removed from ministry last summer. After months of requests, an investigation appears to be under way. “Certainly, many of us have personally expressed to the Holy Father and the secretary of state the need to do something quickly,” O’Malley said. “I keep getting assurances. But we’re waiting for the documents to be produced.”

O’Malley believes that the pope understands how important the issue of sexual abuse is: “His encounter with victims has made a very profound impact on his life and his ministry,” the cardinal said. And yet, the Church faces enormous structural and cultural barriers to establishing worldwide policies and procedures to deal with abuse, which O’Malley acknowledged. As for the meeting in February, “My worry is that the expectations in the United States are that this meeting is going to address all of our local concerns here,” he said, “which is not necessarily the case.”

The majority of known child sexual-abuse cases in the U.S. Catholic Church took place in the 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s. Major national news outlets began covering those stories by the early ’90s, around the time that O’Malley got assigned to his first troubled parish. The Boston Globe’s now famous Spotlight investigation in 2002 made it clear that clergy sexual abuse was endemic, and the cover-up extensive. Within months, the U.S. bishops’ conference had passed the first of a series of reforms that overhauled the way adults in Catholic spaces can interact with children.

But somehow, in terms of both technical reforms and moral reckoning, this issue remains unresolved. Nearly two decades after the Boston revelations, names of offenders and instances of abuse are still regularly being made public. It’s difficult to even know how many cases are still pending in the canon-law system, because the Vatican office in charge of overseeing sexual-abuse charges does not release those statistics. Some cases are known but haven’t been publicly acknowledged by the Church: Its disaggregated structure has enabled unevenness in how bishops address and publicize historical allegations of abuse. And a few Catholic leaders appear to have ignored or mishandled allegations, keeping accused clergy in ministry despite clear Church guidelines against that practice. Each time new revelations emerge, more survivors come forward: After a recent grand-jury report on the abuse was released in Pennsylvania, hundreds of people flooded a state clergy-abuse hotline with calls.

U Lie and say you cannot C images so let me tell you about the Image

Shows High Level Catholic Priests Bishops Cardinals etc Saying they WILL Not Report Child Abuse to Police because they approve of Child Abuse in the Church

@previous (Syntax)

> Yo TG Comix

And "yo" to you, my dear child!

> Have you turned urself in2 Police for you horrid acts of Child Molestation Yet.

I would like to ask if you can provide proof of these "acts of child molestation". To simplify the process for you I will provide 2 alternate answers. Kindly select one:

1) "I would love to provide proof of my claims but unfortunately I have an urgent meeting I need to zooooom off to"

2) "Unnamed mods who never vouch for anything I say can vouch for what I am now saying".

> I notice the Pope is now helping

That's what His Holiness does. He helps the sick and needy.

Bless you, child.

@previous (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
lol

@1,068,419 (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
> > I notice the Pope is now helping

That's what His Holiness does. He helps the sick and needy.

Bless you, child.

I C U took no note of

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/02/sean-omalley-pope-francis-catholic-church-sex-abuse/582658/

Why Does the Catholic Church Keep Failing on Sexual Abuse?

Cardinal Seán O'Malley has spent decades cleaning up after pedophile priests.

Remember when the Pope said he was taking action or Wood take some action MONTHS Ago about Pedophile Priests Bishops Cardinals and that was Months ago and NOT a Single word or Action since he gave the Hot Air Blow Job.

I place a Bet the Pope is a Pedophile Himself and he found someone like you to confess2 and feels his Sins are cleansed by some Fuckign over children type of God.

Anyway TG - U R as U wish to be - One more Catholic Pedophile and U and I have discussed this but alas that Scatchan discussions are currently not available for review -

NOW Stop fucking over children for Gods sake (even if it's a false God)

(Edited 46 seconds later.)

@1,068,417 (Syntax)

> Yo TG Comix
> Have you turned urself in2 Police for you horrid acts of Child Molestation Yet.
>
> I notice the Pope is now helping keep Pedophile Priests and Bishops in the Church even after they have been convicted of crimes.
>
> https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/02/sean-omalley-pope-francis-catholic-church-sex-abuse/582658/
>
>
> Why Does the Catholic Church Keep Failing on Sexual Abuse?
>
> Cardinal Seán O'Malley has spent decades cleaning up after pedophile priests. Now he's once again found himself in the middle of a crisis.
>
>
>
>
> A few years after Seán O’Malley took over the Archdiocese of Boston in 2003, at the peak of the clergy sexual-abuse crisis in America, he led novenas of penance at nine of the city’s most affected parishes. At each church he visited, he lay facedown on the floor before the altar, begging for forgiveness. This is how O’Malley has spent his life in ministry: cleaning up after pedophile priests and their apologists, and serving as the Catholic Church’s public face of repentance and reform.
>
> Possibly more than any other cleric on Earth, O’Malley understands how deeply the Church’s errors on sexual abuse have damaged its mission and reputation. Today, he is one of Pope Francis’s closest advisers, the only American on a small committee of cardinals who meet regularly at the Vatican. He runs the pope’s special commission on the protection of minors. And he is a member of the influential Vatican office responsible for preserving and defending Catholic doctrine. He believes that the Church has changed, can change, and will change. But as the world’s top bishops prepare to meet later this month for an unprecedented summit on sexual abuse at the Vatican, O’Malley has found himself frustrated, unable to push reforms through at the top.
>
> In an interview on a recent cold morning in Boston, the cardinal spoke about the progress he believes the Church, and Pope Francis, have made in recent years, and what’s still lacking. He detailed his proposal to establish Vatican tribunals to deal with bishops accused of wrongdoing—one of the major problems the Church has yet to address. The pope “was convinced to do it another way,” O’Malley said. “We’re still waiting for the procedures to be clearly articulated.” He often described problems in the Church passively, without directly assigning agency or fault. For example: American bishops have asked the Vatican for an investigation into Theodore McCarrick, the former cardinal who was consistently elevated despite widely acknowledged rumors of sexual misconduct, until he was removed from ministry last summer. After months of requests, an investigation appears to be under way. “Certainly, many of us have personally expressed to the Holy Father and the secretary of state the need to do something quickly,” O’Malley said. “I keep getting assurances. But we’re waiting for the documents to be produced.”
>
> O’Malley believes that the pope understands how important the issue of sexual abuse is: “His encounter with victims has made a very profound impact on his life and his ministry,” the cardinal said. And yet, the Church faces enormous structural and cultural barriers to establishing worldwide policies and procedures to deal with abuse, which O’Malley acknowledged. As for the meeting in February, “My worry is that the expectations in the United States are that this meeting is going to address all of our local concerns here,” he said, “which is not necessarily the case.”
>
> The majority of known child sexual-abuse cases in the U.S. Catholic Church took place in the 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s. Major national news outlets began covering those stories by the early ’90s, around the time that O’Malley got assigned to his first troubled parish. The Boston Globe’s now famous Spotlight investigation in 2002 made it clear that clergy sexual abuse was endemic, and the cover-up extensive. Within months, the U.S. bishops’ conference had passed the first of a series of reforms that overhauled the way adults in Catholic spaces can interact with children.
>
> But somehow, in terms of both technical reforms and moral reckoning, this issue remains unresolved. Nearly two decades after the Boston revelations, names of offenders and instances of abuse are still regularly being made public. It’s difficult to even know how many cases are still pending in the canon-law system, because the Vatican office in charge of overseeing sexual-abuse charges does not release those statistics. Some cases are known but haven’t been publicly acknowledged by the Church: Its disaggregated structure has enabled unevenness in how bishops address and publicize historical allegations of abuse. And a few Catholic leaders appear to have ignored or mishandled allegations, keeping accused clergy in ministry despite clear Church guidelines against that practice. Each time new revelations emerge, more survivors come forward: After a recent grand-jury report on the abuse was released in Pennsylvania, hundreds of people flooded a state clergy-abuse hotline with calls.
>
> U Lie and say you cannot C images so let me tell you about the Image
>
> Shows High Level Catholic Priests Bishops Cardinals etc Saying they WILL Not Report Child Abuse to Police because they approve of Child Abuse in the Church

@1,068,421 (Syntax)
> pedophile...Pedophile...Pedophile...F*ckign over children...Pedophile...f*cking over children

You seem rather obsessed with a certain subject, my dear child. Kindly calm yourself for a moment and address the task I set you:

I would like to ask if you can provide proof of these "acts of child molestation". To simplify the process for you I will provide 2 alternate answers. Kindly select one:

1) "I would love to provide proof of my claims but unfortunately I have an urgent meeting I need to zooooom off to"

2) "Unnamed mods who never vouch for anything I say can vouch for what I am now saying".

Syntax:


You can be a fool or NOT, you doddering old gasbag.
Thhey say- You can't teach an old dog new facts, lol.

Yes, we see you've regurgitated all the nonsense of the befuddled old Doctors about Chloresterol.


OF COURSE the HOAX (bad outdated science) had a multitude of propaganda associated to prop it up before the new truths came along...Duuuhh?

All you have done is repeat all the bullshit that the Medical field was WRONG about!!
How ignorant of you.
Any person back in history would do the same thing talk until they were blue in the face about so called accepted Sience of the period they were living in...were it challenged as misguided by new ideas which shook the world of medicine and challenged the Old Guard.
I guess you can't be blamed for shaking your wrinkled old fists at the sky and crying out- 'But they're DOCTORS and they've said this is the way things have been done for years!!"


Well stick you head I the San and be stubborn if you want, it makes no difference, you have a right to your opinion even if it's wrong.

NCE-
Cholesterol is a waxy substance found in nearly every cell of your body and is essential to good health. It plays a role in hormone production, digestion, the manufacture of vitamin D following sun exposure, and helps protect your cell membranes
The most concerning risk factors for cardiovascular disease are insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes and the chronic inflammation associated with these conditions
Other factors at play as well, such as how you eat — whether you’re rushing or taking your time — and other stress-related factors, both physical and psychological
Damage of the interior layers of your arteries precedes heart disease, and this damage can be induced by a number of factors, including smoking, high blood pressure, elevated blood sugar and inflammation
Once the artery is damaged, cholesterol-rich plaque begins to build up as a protective mechanism. Problems arise when the rate of damage and resultant blood clot formation outpace or outstrip your body’s ability to repair

Cholesterol is a waxy substance found in nearly every cell of your body and is essential to good health. It plays a role in hormone production, digestion and the manufacture of vitamin D following sun exposure, and helps protect your cell membranes.

As noted by Zoe Harcombe, Ph.D.,1 "It is virtually impossible to explain how vital cholesterol is to the human body. If you had no cholesterol in your body you would be dead."

Your liver manufactures most, about 80 percent, of the cholesterol your body requires, which in and of itself suggests your body cannot survive without it. The remaining 20 percent comes from your diet. However, dietary cholesterol is absorbed at a rate of 20 to 60 percent, depending on the individual,2 and if you consume less, your body will compensate by making more and vice versa.

Animals use cholesterol in much the same way, hence beef, pork and chicken have similar levels of cholesterol, averaging 25 milligrams of cholesterol per ounce.3

Cholesterol has long been vilified as a primary cause of cardiovascular disease (CVD), yet numerous studies refute this hypothesis, demonstrating that cholesterol has virtually nothing to do with heart disease — at least not in the way conventional medicine presents it.

As noted by Harcombe, the notion that there is good and bad cholesterol is also wrong. Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) are not actually cholesterol; they're carriers and transporters of cholesterol, triglycerides (fat), phospholipids and proteins.

"LDL would more accurately be called the carrier of fresh cholesterol and HDL would more accurately be called the carrier of recycled cholesterol," she says.4 What's more, dietary cholesterol has no impact on the cholesterol level in your blood, so how could dietary cholesterol pose a health risk?

Does High Cholesterol Cause Cardiovascular Disease?

In an April 16, 2018, podcast (embedded at the top of this article), Christopher Kelly with Nourish Balance Thrive interviewed Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, a British physician and author of "Doctoring Data: How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense," "The Great Cholesterol Con," and "A Statin Nation: Damaging Millions in a Brave New Post-Health World."

An outline5 and transcript6 of the interview can be found on the Nourish Balance Thrive website. In this interview, Kendrick discusses the true cause of cardiovascular disease and "the specific environmental and psychosocial factors that cause the most harm." You can also view the video above, in which Kendrick delivers a half-hour lecture on "Why Cholesterol Does Not and Cannot Cause Heart Disease."

In short, the most concerning risk factors for cardiovascular disease are actually insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes and the chronic inflammation associated with these conditions. However, Kendrick argues there are other factors at play as well, such as how you eat.

Americans are notorious for rushing through their meals, while some other countries, such as France, encourage a slower, more leisurely pace during meals, which may affect how the food is metabolized.

"I still think that probably is partly the case because clearly if you eat in a rushed fashion and you gobble it down and then you rush around immediately afterwards, your body is not in the correct metabolic rate to digest your food," Kendrick says,7 adding:

"I was looking at some studies8 from Japan where they got people to eat a meal whilst being read a boring lecture and asked to eat the same meal whilst a comedian was telling jokes. And when the comedian was telling jokes, the blood sugar level was considerably lower."

Stress Increases Your Cardiovascular Disease Risk
Kendrick also notes the links between stress and elevations in insulin levels (as insulin is counteracted by stress hormones) and blood clotting factors, and cites data showing that death rates from cardiovascular disease parallel stressful events that affect an entire nation.

For example, in 1989, the heart disease rate skyrocketed in Lithuania, the same year the Soviet Union collapsed. This pattern can also be seen in other European countries. Meanwhile, the LDL hypothesis has failed to hold in a number of studies.

As just one example, Kendrick cites a BMJ study where they looked at LDL levels in people over 60, finding that those with the highest LDL levels actually had the lowest overall mortality, including CVD mortality.9

For Cardiovascular Disease to Occur, There Must be Arterial Wall Damage
Kendrick has written an extensive series of articles on the cardiovascular disease process. A summary of this voluminous work can be found in "What Causes Heart Disease — Part 59,"10 posted on his blog November 27, 2018. In it, he dissects the fallacies inherent in the conventional LDL/cholesterol hypothesis, and explains the thrombogenic theory of cardiovascular disease as a more reliable counterhypothesis. He writes in part:11

"For the LDL hypothesis to be correct, it requires that LDL can travel past the lining of the artery, the endothelial cells, and into the artery wall behind. This is considered the starting point for atherosclerotic plaques to form.

The problem with this hypothesis is that LDL cannot get into any cell, let alone an endothelial cell, unless that cell wants it to. We know this, for certain, because the only way for LDL to enter any cell, is if the cell manufactures an LDL receptor — which locks onto, and then pulls the LDL molecule inside. There is no other passageway. This is an inarguable fact …

Others have argued that … the LDL simply slips through the gaps between endothelial cells and that is how it gets into the artery wall. Again, this is impossible. There are no gaps between endothelial cells. Endothelial cells are tightly bound to each other by strong protein bridges, known as 'tight junctions.'

These tight junctions can prevent the passage of single ions — charged atoms — which makes it impossible for an LDL molecule to slip through, as it is many thousands of times bigger than an ion. This, too, is an inarguable fact.

Ergo, the initiation of an atherosclerotic plaque (the underlying problem in cardiovascular disease) cannot be triggered by LDL leaking into an undamaged artery wall. Which means that, if you want to get LDL (or anything else) into the artery wall, you first must damage the endothelium/lining of the artery."

The American National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute admits that damage of the interior layers of your arteries precedes heart disease, and that this damage can be induced by a number of factors, including smoking, high blood pressure, elevated blood sugar, inflammation and, as Dr. Zach Bush and Stefanie Seneff, Ph.D., promote: glyphosate. Once the artery is damaged, cholesterol-rich plaque begins to build up as a protective mechanism.

"However, it is what happens next, where we rapidly diverge in our thinking," Kendrick writes.12 "The mainstream believes that, after damage has occurred, it is LDL, and only LDL, leaking into the artery wall that triggers a whole series of downstream reactions that lead to plaques forming.

However, once you have damaged the endothelium there is no longer a barrier to stop anything getting into the artery wall. So, why pick on LDL? You also have proteins, red blood cells, platelets and Lp(a) and VLDL. Indeed, anything in the bloodstream now has free entry."

The Thrombogenic Theory
Kendrick presents the thrombogenic theory — initially suggested by Karl von Rokitansky in 185213 — as a counter-theory to the flawed LDL/cholesterol hypothesis. In summary, the thrombogenic theory goes as follows:

Endothelial damage occurs, resulting in the formation of a blood clot
The resulting blood clot is minimized in size by plasmin, an enzyme that breaks up blood clots
A new endothelial layer grows over top of the remnants of the blood clot, thereby incorporating it into the artery wall
Macrophages (white blood cells specializing in repair) break down and digest any remnants of the blood clot. The macrophages are in turn broken down along with their contents, and eliminated from your body through your lymph glands.
While this process leads to inflammation, it is a healthy response and not a disease state per se. Problems only arise "when the rate of damage, and resultant blood clot formation, outstrips the ability of the repair systems to clear up the mess," Kendrick explains.

So, while endothelial damage and resulting blood clotting is at the heart of cardiovascular disease, the only time this natural repair process will cause problems is when damage outstrips repair.

Factors That Raise Your Cardiovascular Disease Risk
As noted by Kendrick, "For good health, you want to maintain a balance between the blood being too ready to clot, and the blood not clotting when you need it to."14 So, what factors might lead to a situation in which the arterial damage is greater than your body's ability to repair it? Kendrick's "short list" includes over 30 factors, and there are many others. On this list are:

Use of certain drugs, including oral steroids, omeprazole, Avastin and thalidomide
Diseases such as Cushing's disease, Kawasaki's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, chronic kidney disease and acute renal failure, sickle cell disease, malaria and Type 2 diabetes, as well as bacterial and viral infections
Acute physical and mental stress, and chronic mental stress
Heavy metal exposure, including lead and mercury
Certain nutritional deficiencies, including vitamins B and C deficiencies
Next there are factors that promote blood clot formation and/or inhibit the dissolution of blood clots, all of which also raise your CVD risk. Again, there are many factors that can do this, including but not limited to:

Raised levels of lipoprotein (a), blood sugar, very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) and fibrinogen (fibrinogen binds tightly to the blood clot, creating a tough plug; with excess fibrinogen in your blood, you may end up with larger, more tough to dissolve blood clots)
Dehydration
Stress hormones such as cortisol
Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
Acute mental and/or physical stress
Lastly, there are factors that impair your body's repair system, i.e., the formation of a new endothelial layer over the blood clot, and the clearing of debris from the blood clot, and these also raise your risk for CVD. Factors that prevent new endothelial cells from being formed include but are not limited to:

Certain drugs such as Avastin, thalidomide, omeprazole and any drug that lowers synthesis of nitric oxide (conversely, anything that increases nitric oxide in our body will reduce your risk of heart disease15)
Old age
Chronic kidney disease
Type 2 diabetes
Inactivity (lack of exercise)
Factors that impair clearance of debris from within the arterial wall include:

Use of oral steroids, immunosuppressant drugs, certain anti-inflammatory drugs and many anticancer drugs
Age
Chronic negative psychological stress
The Role of Inflammation in Cardiovascular Disease
According to Kendrick, while chronic inflammation is recognized as a contributing factor for cardiovascular disease, not all inflammation is bad. In fact, the use of anti-inflammatory drugs (which can impair useful acute inflammation) has been linked to an increase in cardiovascular disease risk, "Which suggests that if you interfere with the healing response to arterial injury, you are going to make thing worse — not better," he says, adding:16

"[T]he real reason why [chronic] inflammation is being seen as a possible cause of CVD is because inflammatory markers can be raised in CVD. To my mind this just demonstrates that in people with CVD, lots of damage is occurring, therefore there is more repair going on, so the inflammatory markers are raised.

However, the mainstream has decided to look at this from the opposite side. They see a lot inflammation going on and have decreed that the inflammation is causing the CVD — rather than the other way around. Frankly, I think this is bonkers. But there you go.

Anyway, where has all this got us to? I shall try to achieve a quick summary. The LDL hypothesis is nonsense, it is wrong, and it does not remotely fit with any other factors known to cause CVD.

The thrombogenic theory, on the other hand, fits with almost everything known about CVD. It states that there are three, interrelated, processes that increase the risk of CVD:

Increased rate of damage to the endothelial layer
Formation of a bigger or more difficult to remove blood clot at that point
Impaired repair/removal of remnant blood clot.
Any factor that does one of these three things can increase the risk of CVD … You need to have three or four, maybe more, and then things really get going … All of which means that — in most cases — CVD has no single, specific, cause. It should, instead, be seen as a process whereby damage exceeds repair, causing plaques to start developing, and grow — with a final, fatal, blood clot causing the terminal event."

More Evidence Cholesterol Is Not the Enemy
The Minnesota Coronary Experiment was a study performed between 1968 and 1973 that examined the relationship between diet and heart health.17 The researchers used a double-blind randomized trial to evaluate the effect of vegetable oil (high in omega-6 linoleic acid) versus saturated fats in coronary heart disease and death.

The results were left unpublished until 2016, when they appeared in the BMJ. An analysis of the collected data revealed lowering your cholesterol levels through dietary intervention did not reduce your risk of death from coronary heart disease. According to the researchers:18

"Available evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that replacement of saturated fat in the diet with linoleic acid effectively lowers serum cholesterol but does not support the hypothesis that this translates to a lower risk of death from coronary heart disease or all causes.

Findings from the Minnesota Coronary Experiment add to growing evidence that incomplete publication has contributed to overestimation of the benefits of replacing saturated fat with vegetable oils rich in linoleic acid."

The researchers found that for every 30-point drop in total cholesterol, there was a 22 percent increase in the risk of death from cardiac disease. Upon autopsy, the group eating vegetable oil and the group eating saturated fat had the same amount of atherosclerotic plaques in their arteries, but the group eating saturated fat experienced nearly half the number of heart attacks as the group eating vegetable oil.

Similarly, a scientific analysis19 of three large reviews published by statin advocates (which attempted to validate the current belief that statin treatment helps prevent cardiovascular disease) concluded the three studies in question failed to satisfy criteria for causality and drew faulty conclusions. Specifically, the authors found:20

There was no association between total cholesterol and the degree of atherosclerosis severity
Total cholesterol levels are generally not predictive of the risk of heart disease and may be absent or inverse in many studies
In many studies LDL was not associated with atherosclerosis and in a large U.S. based study of nearly 140,000 patients who suffered an acute myocardial infarction, LDL levels at the time of admission were lower than normal
Adults over the age of 60 with higher LDL levels generally live longer
Few adults who experience familial hypercholesterolemia die prematurely
The researchers concluded that high cholesterol levels cannot be the main cause of heart disease as those with low levels have nearly the same degree of sclerosis as those with high levels, and the risk of having a heart attack is the same or higher when cholesterol levels are low.

They believe the hypothesis has been kept alive by reviewers using misleading statistics and excluding results from unsuccessful trials while ignoring numerous contradictory observations.21 For a description of other studies debunking the saturated fat myth, often linked closely to increasing cholesterol levels, see my previous article, "The Cholesterol Myth Has Been Busted — Yet Again."

Why Statin Drugs Are Ill Advised for Most
While the dietary guidelines for Americans no longer focus on reducing dietary cholesterol to protect your heart, and U.S. cholesterol treatment guidelines have stopped using total cholesterol as a measure of heart disease risk, honing in on elevated LDL cholesterol instead, we're still far off the mark when it comes down to how to best prevent heart disease.

Refined sugar and processed fructose are in fact the primary drivers of heart disease, so that's where the focus needs to be — not on driving down your cholesterol with the aid of a statin drug (and/or avoiding healthy saturated fats in your diet).

The only subgroup that might benefit from a statin are those born with a genetic defect called familial hypercholesterolemia, as this makes them resistant to traditional measures of normalizing cholesterol.

There are many important reasons why you should not take a statin drug unless you have this genetic defect, including but not limited to the following. For more information about each of these, see "5 Great Reasons Why You Should Not Take Statins."

1.They don't work as advertised — A 2015 report22 published in the Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology concluded that statin advocates used a statistical tool called relative risk reduction to amplify statins' trivial beneficial effects. If you look at absolute risk, statin drugs benefit just 1 percent of the population. This means that out of 100 people treated with the drugs, one person will have one less heart attack.

Another systematic review23 published that same year concluded that in studies where death was the primary prevention endpoint, statins taken for up to six years postponed death by 5 to 19 days. In secondary prevention trials, death was postponed by 10 to 27 days.

Median postponement of death for primary and secondary prevention was three and four days respectively. When you consider the many health hazards associated with these drugs, this minuscule benefit hardly warrants statin treatment.

2.They deplete your body of CoQ10 — Statins block HMG coenzyme A reductase in your liver, which is how they reduce cholesterol. This enzyme also makes CoQ10, which is an essential mitochondrial nutrient that facilitates ATP production.

As noted in a 2010 study,24 "Coenzyme Q10 is an important factor in mitochondrial respiration," and "Primary and secondary deficiencies of coenzyme Q10 result in a number of neurologic and myopathic syndromes." Since they impair your mitochondrial function, they could potentially affect any number of health problems, as without well-functioning mitochondria, your risk for chronic disease increases significantly.

3.They inhibit the synthesis of vitamin K2, a vitamin that protects your arteries from calcification.

4.They reduce ketone production25 — If you take CoQ10 while on statins you still have not solved the problem, as the same enzyme (HMG coenzyme A reductase) also inhibits your liver's ability to produce ketones, water-soluble fats that are essential to keep your body metabolically flexible. Ketones are also important molecular signaling molecules. So, statins make it virtually impossible to achieve nutritional ketosis.

5.Because of 2, 3 and 4, statins increase your risk for other serious diseases, including:

Heart failure — Primarily due to statin-induced CoQ10 deficiency26,27

Cancer — Research28 has shown that long-term statin use (10 years or longer) more than doubles women's risk of two major types of breast cancer: invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma.

Diabetes — Statins have been shown to increase your risk of diabetes via a number of different mechanisms, two of which include increasing your insulin resistance, and raising your blood sugar.

Neurodegenerative diseases

Musculoskeletal disorders and motor nerve damage — Research29 has shown that statin treatment lasting longer than two years causes "definite damage to peripheral nerves."

Cataracts

Liver problems30,31

Crucial and Recommended Nutritional Supplements if Taking a Statin
If you decide to take a statin, make sure you take CoQ10 or ubiquinol (the reduced form) with it. One study evaluated the benefits of CoQ10 and selenium supplementation for patients with statin-associated myopathy.32

Compared to those given a placebo, the treatment group experienced significantly less pain, decreased muscle weakness and cramps, and less fatigue. A vitamin K2 supplement is also highly recommended. MK-7 is the form you'll want to look for in supplements; it's extracted from the Japanese fermented soy product called natto.

Newer Cholesterol Drugs Are Not Safer
Also, beware of a newer class of cholesterol absorption inhibitors called PCSK9 Inhibitors.33 PCSK9 is a protein that works with LDL receptors that regulate LDL in the liver and release LDL cholesterol into the blood. The inhibitors block that protein, thus lowering the amount of LDL circulating in your blood; in clinical trials, these drugs lowered LDLs by about 60 percent. However, as discussed earlier, LDL has no direct bearing on your CVD risk.

What's more, while these drugs are being touted as the answer for those who cannot tolerate some of the side effects of the other drugs, such as severe muscle pain, trials have already discovered that PCSK9 inhibitors can produce "neurocognitive effects," with some patients experiencing confusion and attention deficits.34 There's evidence suggesting these drugs may actually be even more dangerous than statins.

Assessing Your Heart Disease Risk
As you evaluate your risk of cardiovascular disease, there are specific ratios and blood level values that will tell you much more than your total cholesterol number. For example, an NMR LipoProfile, which measures the size of your LDL particles, is a far better assessment of your risk of heart disease than total cholesterol or total LDL. The following tests will also give you a better assessment of your potential risk for heart attack or CVD:

•Cholesterol ratios — Your HDL/cholesterol ratio and triglyceride/HDL ratio is a strong indicator of your risk. For your HDL/cholesterol ratio divide your HDL by your total cholesterol and multiply by 100. That percentage should ideally be above 24 percent. For your triglyceride/HDL ratio divide your triglyceride total by your HDL and multiply by 100. The ideal percentage is below 2 percent.

•Fasting insulin level — Sugar and carbohydrates increase inflammation. Once eaten, these chemicals trigger a release of insulin, promoting the accumulation of fat and creation of triglycerides, making it more difficult for you to lose weight or maintain your normal weight. Excess fat around your midsection is one of the major contributors to heart disease.35

Your fasting insulin level can be determined by a simple, inexpensive blood test. A normal fasting blood insulin level is below 5 microunits per milliliter (mcU/ml), but ideally, you'll want it below 3 mcU/ml. If your insulin level is higher than 3 to 5, the most effective way to optimize it is to reduce net carbs.

•Fasting blood sugar level — Studies have demonstrated people with higher fasting blood sugar levels have a higher risk of heart disease.36 In fact, when your fasting blood sugar is between 100 and 125 mg/dl, your risk of coronary artery disease increases to 300 percent more than those whose level is below 79 mg/dl.37,38

•High sensitivity C-reactive protein (HS-CRP) — This is one of the best overall measures of inflammation and an excellent screen for your risk of heart disease. Ideally your level should be below 0.7 and the lower the better.

•Iron level — Iron creates an environment for oxidative stress, so excess iron may increase your inflammation and increase your risk of heart disease. An ideal iron level for adult men and non-menstruating women is between 40 and 60 nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml). You do not want to be below 20 ng/ml or above 80 ng/ml.

The simplest and most efficient way to lower your iron level if elevated is to donate blood. If you can't donate, then therapeutic phlebotomy will effectively eliminate the excess iron. Heavy metal detoxification will also naturally reduce high iron.

How to Avoid Heart Disease
In closing, remember that high total cholesterol and even high LDL are insignificant when trying to determine your heart disease risk, and dietary cholesterol and saturated fat are not contributing factors.

Probably the best predictor for CVD is your insulin sensitivity. Considering how insulin resistance drives chronic disease in general, not just heart disease, I strongly recommend measuring your fasting insulin on a regular basis and taking immediate action if you find yourself inching toward insulin resistance.

As for preventing or reversing insulin resistance, the following general guidelines will set you on the right track:

Dramatically reduce your net carbs and eliminate processed fructose, as this is what set this cascade of metabolic dysfunction into motion in the first place. Replace the lost calories with higher amounts of healthy fats, not protein. My optimized nutritional plan can guide you through this process.
Normalize your omega-3-to-omega-6 ratio. Most get far too little omega-3, found in fatty fish such as wild Alaskan salmon, sardines, anchovies, fish oil and krill oil, and too much omega-6, as it is plentiful in processed vegetable oils and hence processed and fried foods.
Optimize your vitamin D level by getting regular, sensible sun exposure. Other nutrients of importance include magnesium and vitamins K2 and C.
Get eight hours of high quality sleep each night to normalize your hormonal system. Research has shown sleep deprivation can have a significant bearing on your insulin sensitivity.
Get regular exercise, as it is a powerful way to help normalize your insulin sensitivity.

(Edited 3 minutes later.)

What the fuck is UP with You? You're the one who posted the Links -

Go on and show ME one research study that proves High LDL Cholesterol is Good for you and Low HDL Cholesterol is good for you.

Why did you pick studies that prove my point and prove you in error/

How about a Paper that discusses the Controversy - The good the bad and the Ugly

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-cholesterol-controversy/

The Cholesterol Controversy

'''Why is cholesterol so much more controversial than the other cardiac risk factors? A
review of cholesterol’s troubled and contentious history might help us understand where
many of the cholesterol controversies originated… and why it’s time to let them pass into
history.'''

Christopher Labos on February 15, 2019


The epidemiology studies

Despite the controversy that surrounded the Cooperative Study of Lipoproteins and Atherosclerosis, there was evidence that cholesterol (regardless how you measured it) was correlated with coronary disease. The work of Carl Muller studying patients with familial hypercholesterolemia was also largely supportive of this link. The work of Brown and his isolation of the LDL receptor would prove the genetic cause of this disease and win the Nobel Prize, but this work was still decades off.

However, it could be argued, with some validity, that individuals with a genetic cause for their high cholesterol were not representative of the general population. Nevertheless, by the mid-1950s there was enough interest in this new potential risk factor that large-scale epidemiologic studies were launched.

Lots to read Lots of Links Lots of of OF enough for you to Eat all the Saturated Fat you want2 and end up buying a heart doctor a new Boat.

I just stole this pic just for YOU - This is U after you let your HDL drop wayyyy low and have your HDL Go high high HIGH

AND So far I cannot find a study that disagrees about Good vs Bad HDL/LDL

@1,068,476 (A)

> Syntax:
>
>
> You can be a fool or NOT, you doddering old gasbag.
> Thhey say- You can't teach an old dog new facts, lol.
>
> Yes, we see you've regurgitated all the nonsense of the befuddled old Doctors about Chloresterol.
>
>
> OF COURSE the HOAX (bad outdated science) had a multitude of propaganda associated to prop it up before the new truths came along...Duuuhh?
>
> All you have done is repeat all the bullshit that the Medical field was WRONG about!!
> How ignorant of you.
> Any person back in history would do the same thing talk until they were blue in the face about so called accepted Sience of the period they were living in...were it challenged as misguided by new ideas which shook the world of medicine and challenged the Old Guard.
> I guess you can't be blamed for shaking your wrinkled old fists at the sky and crying out- 'But they're DOCTORS and they've said this is the way things have been done for years!!"
>
>
> Well stick you head I the San and be stubborn if you want, it makes no difference, you have a right to your opinion even if it's wrong.
>
> NCE-
> Cholesterol is a waxy substance found in nearly every cell of your body and is essential to good health. It plays a role in hormone production, digestion, the manufacture of vitamin D following sun exposure, and helps protect your cell membranes
> The most concerning risk factors for cardiovascular disease are insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes and the chronic inflammation associated with these conditions
> Other factors at play as well, such as how you eat — whether you’re rushing or taking your time — and other stress-related factors, both physical and psychological
> Damage of the interior layers of your arteries precedes heart disease, and this damage can be induced by a number of factors, including smoking, high blood pressure, elevated blood sugar and inflammation
> Once the artery is damaged, cholesterol-rich plaque begins to build up as a protective mechanism. Problems arise when the rate of damage and resultant blood clot formation outpace or outstrip your body’s ability to repair
>
> Cholesterol is a waxy substance found in nearly every cell of your body and is essential to good health. It plays a role in hormone production, digestion and the manufacture of vitamin D following sun exposure, and helps protect your cell membranes.
>
> As noted by Zoe Harcombe, Ph.D.,1 "It is virtually impossible to explain how vital cholesterol is to the human body. If you had no cholesterol in your body you would be dead."
>
> Your liver manufactures most, about 80 percent, of the cholesterol your body requires, which in and of itself suggests your body cannot survive without it. The remaining 20 percent comes from your diet. However, dietary cholesterol is absorbed at a rate of 20 to 60 percent, depending on the individual,2 and if you consume less, your body will compensate by making more and vice versa.
>
> Animals use cholesterol in much the same way, hence beef, pork and chicken have similar levels of cholesterol, averaging 25 milligrams of cholesterol per ounce.3
>
> Cholesterol has long been vilified as a primary cause of cardiovascular disease (CVD), yet numerous studies refute this hypothesis, demonstrating that cholesterol has virtually nothing to do with heart disease — at least not in the way conventional medicine presents it.
>
> As noted by Harcombe, the notion that there is good and bad cholesterol is also wrong. Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) are not actually cholesterol; they're carriers and transporters of cholesterol, triglycerides (fat), phospholipids and proteins.
>
> "LDL would more accurately be called the carrier of fresh cholesterol and HDL would more accurately be called the carrier of recycled cholesterol," she says.4 What's more, dietary cholesterol has no impact on the cholesterol level in your blood, so how could dietary cholesterol pose a health risk?
>
> Does High Cholesterol Cause Cardiovascular Disease?
>
> In an April 16, 2018, podcast (embedded at the top of this article), Christopher Kelly with Nourish Balance Thrive interviewed Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, a British physician and author of "Doctoring Data: How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense," "The Great Cholesterol Con," and "A Statin Nation: Damaging Millions in a Brave New Post-Health World."
>
> An outline5 and transcript6 of the interview can be found on the Nourish Balance Thrive website. In this interview, Kendrick discusses the true cause of cardiovascular disease and "the specific environmental and psychosocial factors that cause the most harm." You can also view the video above, in which Kendrick delivers a half-hour lecture on "Why Cholesterol Does Not and Cannot Cause Heart Disease."
>
> In short, the most concerning risk factors for cardiovascular disease are actually insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes and the chronic inflammation associated with these conditions. However, Kendrick argues there are other factors at play as well, such as how you eat.
>
> Americans are notorious for rushing through their meals, while some other countries, such as France, encourage a slower, more leisurely pace during meals, which may affect how the food is metabolized.
>
> "I still think that probably is partly the case because clearly if you eat in a rushed fashion and you gobble it down and then you rush around immediately afterwards, your body is not in the correct metabolic rate to digest your food," Kendrick says,7 adding:
>
> "I was looking at some studies8 from Japan where they got people to eat a meal whilst being read a boring lecture and asked to eat the same meal whilst a comedian was telling jokes. And when the comedian was telling jokes, the blood sugar level was considerably lower."
>
> Stress Increases Your Cardiovascular Disease Risk
> Kendrick also notes the links between stress and elevations in insulin levels (as insulin is counteracted by stress hormones) and blood clotting factors, and cites data showing that death rates from cardiovascular disease parallel stressful events that affect an entire nation.
>
> For example, in 1989, the heart disease rate skyrocketed in Lithuania, the same year the Soviet Union collapsed. This pattern can also be seen in other European countries. Meanwhile, the LDL hypothesis has failed to hold in a number of studies.
>
> As just one example, Kendrick cites a BMJ study where they looked at LDL levels in people over 60, finding that those with the highest LDL levels actually had the lowest overall mortality, including CVD mortality.9
>
> For Cardiovascular Disease to Occur, There Must be Arterial Wall Damage
> Kendrick has written an extensive series of articles on the cardiovascular disease process. A summary of this voluminous work can be found in "What Causes Heart Disease — Part 59,"10 posted on his blog November 27, 2018. In it, he dissects the fallacies inherent in the conventional LDL/cholesterol hypothesis, and explains the thrombogenic theory of cardiovascular disease as a more reliable counterhypothesis. He writes in part:11
>
> "For the LDL hypothesis to be correct, it requires that LDL can travel past the lining of the artery, the endothelial cells, and into the artery wall behind. This is considered the starting point for atherosclerotic plaques to form.
>
> The problem with this hypothesis is that LDL cannot get into any cell, let alone an endothelial cell, unless that cell wants it to. We know this, for certain, because the only way for LDL to enter any cell, is if the cell manufactures an LDL receptor — which locks onto, and then pulls the LDL molecule inside. There is no other passageway. This is an inarguable fact …
>
> Others have argued that … the LDL simply slips through the gaps between endothelial cells and that is how it gets into the artery wall. Again, this is impossible. There are no gaps between endothelial cells. Endothelial cells are tightly bound to each other by strong protein bridges, known as 'tight junctions.'
>
> These tight junctions can prevent the passage of single ions — charged atoms — which makes it impossible for an LDL molecule to slip through, as it is many thousands of times bigger than an ion. This, too, is an inarguable fact.
>
> Ergo, the initiation of an atherosclerotic plaque (the underlying problem in cardiovascular disease) cannot be triggered by LDL leaking into an undamaged artery wall. Which means that, if you want to get LDL (or anything else) into the artery wall, you first must damage the endothelium/lining of the artery."
>
> The American National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute admits that damage of the interior layers of your arteries precedes heart disease, and that this damage can be induced by a number of factors, including smoking, high blood pressure, elevated blood sugar, inflammation and, as Dr. Zach Bush and Stefanie Seneff, Ph.D., promote: glyphosate. Once the artery is damaged, cholesterol-rich plaque begins to build up as a protective mechanism.
>
> "However, it is what happens next, where we rapidly diverge in our thinking," Kendrick writes.12 "The mainstream believes that, after damage has occurred, it is LDL, and only LDL, leaking into the artery wall that triggers a whole series of downstream reactions that lead to plaques forming.
>
> However, once you have damaged the endothelium there is no longer a barrier to stop anything getting into the artery wall. So, why pick on LDL? You also have proteins, red blood cells, platelets and Lp(a) and VLDL. Indeed, anything in the bloodstream now has free entry."
>
> The Thrombogenic Theory
> Kendrick presents the thrombogenic theory — initially suggested by Karl von Rokitansky in 185213 — as a counter-theory to the flawed LDL/cholesterol hypothesis. In summary, the thrombogenic theory goes as follows:
>
> Endothelial damage occurs, resulting in the formation of a blood clot
> The resulting blood clot is minimized in size by plasmin, an enzyme that breaks up blood clots
> A new endothelial layer grows over top of the remnants of the blood clot, thereby incorporating it into the artery wall
> Macrophages (white blood cells specializing in repair) break down and digest any remnants of the blood clot. The macrophages are in turn broken down along with their contents, and eliminated from your body through your lymph glands.
> While this process leads to inflammation, it is a healthy response and not a disease state per se. Problems only arise "when the rate of damage, and resultant blood clot formation, outstrips the ability of the repair systems to clear up the mess," Kendrick explains.
>
> So, while endothelial damage and resulting blood clotting is at the heart of cardiovascular disease, the only time this natural repair process will cause problems is when damage outstrips repair.
>
> Factors That Raise Your Cardiovascular Disease Risk
> As noted by Kendrick, "For good health, you want to maintain a balance between the blood being too ready to clot, and the blood not clotting when you need it to."14 So, what factors might lead to a situation in which the arterial damage is greater than your body's ability to repair it? Kendrick's "short list" includes over 30 factors, and there are many others. On this list are:
>
> Use of certain drugs, including oral steroids, omeprazole, Avastin and thalidomide
> Diseases such as Cushing's disease, Kawasaki's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, chronic kidney disease and acute renal failure, sickle cell disease, malaria and Type 2 diabetes, as well as bacterial and viral infections
> Acute physical and mental stress, and chronic mental stress
> Heavy metal exposure, including lead and mercury
> Certain nutritional deficiencies, including vitamins B and C deficiencies
> Next there are factors that promote blood clot formation and/or inhibit the dissolution of blood clots, all of which also raise your CVD risk. Again, there are many factors that can do this, including but not limited to:
>
> Raised levels of lipoprotein (a), blood sugar, very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) and fibrinogen (fibrinogen binds tightly to the blood clot, creating a tough plug; with excess fibrinogen in your blood, you may end up with larger, more tough to dissolve blood clots)
> Dehydration
> Stress hormones such as cortisol
> Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
> Acute mental and/or physical stress
> Lastly, there are factors that impair your body's repair system, i.e., the formation of a new endothelial layer over the blood clot, and the clearing of debris from the blood clot, and these also raise your risk for CVD. Factors that prevent new endothelial cells from being formed include but are not limited to:
>
> Certain drugs such as Avastin, thalidomide, omeprazole and any drug that lowers synthesis of nitric oxide (conversely, anything that increases nitric oxide in our body will reduce your risk of heart disease15)
> Old age
> Chronic kidney disease
> Type 2 diabetes
> Inactivity (lack of exercise)
> Factors that impair clearance of debris from within the arterial wall include:
>
> Use of oral steroids, immunosuppressant drugs, certain anti-inflammatory drugs and many anticancer drugs
> Age
> Chronic negative psychological stress
> The Role of Inflammation in Cardiovascular Disease
> According to Kendrick, while chronic inflammation is recognized as a contributing factor for cardiovascular disease, not all inflammation is bad. In fact, the use of anti-inflammatory drugs (which can impair useful acute inflammation) has been linked to an increase in cardiovascular disease risk, "Which suggests that if you interfere with the healing response to arterial injury, you are going to make thing worse — not better," he says, adding:16
>
> "[T]he real reason why [chronic] inflammation is being seen as a possible cause of CVD is because inflammatory markers can be raised in CVD. To my mind this just demonstrates that in people with CVD, lots of damage is occurring, therefore there is more repair going on, so the inflammatory markers are raised.
>
> However, the mainstream has decided to look at this from the opposite side. They see a lot inflammation going on and have decreed that the inflammation is causing the CVD — rather than the other way around. Frankly, I think this is bonkers. But there you go.
>
> Anyway, where has all this got us to? I shall try to achieve a quick summary. The LDL hypothesis is nonsense, it is wrong, and it does not remotely fit with any other factors known to cause CVD.
>
> The thrombogenic theory, on the other hand, fits with almost everything known about CVD. It states that there are three, interrelated, processes that increase the risk of CVD:
>
> Increased rate of damage to the endothelial layer
> Formation of a bigger or more difficult to remove blood clot at that point
> Impaired repair/removal of remnant blood clot.
> Any factor that does one of these three things can increase the risk of CVD … You need to have three or four, maybe more, and then things really get going … All of which means that — in most cases — CVD has no single, specific, cause. It should, instead, be seen as a process whereby damage exceeds repair, causing plaques to start developing, and grow — with a final, fatal, blood clot causing the terminal event."
>
> More Evidence Cholesterol Is Not the Enemy
> The Minnesota Coronary Experiment was a study performed between 1968 and 1973 that examined the relationship between diet and heart health.17 The researchers used a double-blind randomized trial to evaluate the effect of vegetable oil (high in omega-6 linoleic acid) versus saturated fats in coronary heart disease and death.
>
> The results were left unpublished until 2016, when they appeared in the BMJ. An analysis of the collected data revealed lowering your cholesterol levels through dietary intervention did not reduce your risk of death from coronary heart disease. According to the researchers:18
>
> "Available evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that replacement of saturated fat in the diet with linoleic acid effectively lowers serum cholesterol but does not support the hypothesis that this translates to a lower risk of death from coronary heart disease or all causes.
>
> Findings from the Minnesota Coronary Experiment add to growing evidence that incomplete publication has contributed to overestimation of the benefits of replacing saturated fat with vegetable oils rich in linoleic acid."
>
> The researchers found that for every 30-point drop in total cholesterol, there was a 22 percent increase in the risk of death from cardiac disease. Upon autopsy, the group eating vegetable oil and the group eating saturated fat had the same amount of atherosclerotic plaques in their arteries, but the group eating saturated fat experienced nearly half the number of heart attacks as the group eating vegetable oil.
>
> Similarly, a scientific analysis19 of three large reviews published by statin advocates (which attempted to validate the current belief that statin treatment helps prevent cardiovascular disease) concluded the three studies in question failed to satisfy criteria for causality and drew faulty conclusions. Specifically, the authors found:20
>
> There was no association between total cholesterol and the degree of atherosclerosis severity
> Total cholesterol levels are generally not predictive of the risk of heart disease and may be absent or inverse in many studies
> In many studies LDL was not associated with atherosclerosis and in a large U.S. based study of nearly 140,000 patients who suffered an acute myocardial infarction, LDL levels at the time of admission were lower than normal
> Adults over the age of 60 with higher LDL levels generally live longer
> Few adults who experience familial hypercholesterolemia die prematurely
> The researchers concluded that high cholesterol levels cannot be the main cause of heart disease as those with low levels have nearly the same degree of sclerosis as those with high levels, and the risk of having a heart attack is the same or higher when cholesterol levels are low.
>
> They believe the hypothesis has been kept alive by reviewers using misleading statistics and excluding results from unsuccessful trials while ignoring numerous contradictory observations.21 For a description of other studies debunking the saturated fat myth, often linked closely to increasing cholesterol levels, see my previous article, "The Cholesterol Myth Has Been Busted — Yet Again."
>
> Why Statin Drugs Are Ill Advised for Most
> While the dietary guidelines for Americans no longer focus on reducing dietary cholesterol to protect your heart, and U.S. cholesterol treatment guidelines have stopped using total cholesterol as a measure of heart disease risk, honing in on elevated LDL cholesterol instead, we're still far off the mark when it comes down to how to best prevent heart disease.
>
> Refined sugar and processed fructose are in fact the primary drivers of heart disease, so that's where the focus needs to be — not on driving down your cholesterol with the aid of a statin drug (and/or avoiding healthy saturated fats in your diet).
>
> The only subgroup that might benefit from a statin are those born with a genetic defect called familial hypercholesterolemia, as this makes them resistant to traditional measures of normalizing cholesterol.
>
> There are many important reasons why you should not take a statin drug unless you have this genetic defect, including but not limited to the following. For more information about each of these, see "5 Great Reasons Why You Should Not Take Statins."
>
> 1.They don't work as advertised — A 2015 report22 published in the Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology concluded that statin advocates used a statistical tool called relative risk reduction to amplify statins' trivial beneficial effects. If you look at absolute risk, statin drugs benefit just 1 percent of the population. This means that out of 100 people treated with the drugs, one person will have one less heart attack.
>
> Another systematic review23 published that same year concluded that in studies where death was the primary prevention endpoint, statins taken for up to six years postponed death by 5 to 19 days. In secondary prevention trials, death was postponed by 10 to 27 days.
>
> Median postponement of death for primary and secondary prevention was three and four days respectively. When you consider the many health hazards associated with these drugs, this minuscule benefit hardly warrants statin treatment.
>
> 2.They deplete your body of CoQ10 — Statins block HMG coenzyme A reductase in your liver, which is how they reduce cholesterol. This enzyme also makes CoQ10, which is an essential mitochondrial nutrient that facilitates ATP production.
>
> As noted in a 2010 study,24 "Coenzyme Q10 is an important factor in mitochondrial respiration," and "Primary and secondary deficiencies of coenzyme Q10 result in a number of neurologic and myopathic syndromes." Since they impair your mitochondrial function, they could potentially affect any number of health problems, as without well-functioning mitochondria, your risk for chronic disease increases significantly.
>
> 3.They inhibit the synthesis of vitamin K2, a vitamin that protects your arteries from calcification.
>
> 4.They reduce ketone production25 — If you take CoQ10 while on statins you still have not solved the problem, as the same enzyme (HMG coenzyme A reductase) also inhibits your liver's ability to produce ketones, water-soluble fats that are essential to keep your body metabolically flexible. Ketones are also important molecular signaling molecules. So, statins make it virtually impossible to achieve nutritional ketosis.
>
> 5.Because of 2, 3 and 4, statins increase your risk for other serious diseases, including:
>
> Heart failure — Primarily due to statin-induced CoQ10 deficiency26,27
>
> Cancer — Research28 has shown that long-term statin use (10 years or longer) more than doubles women's risk of two major types of breast cancer: invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma.
>
> Diabetes — Statins have been shown to increase your risk of diabetes via a number of different mechanisms, two of which include increasing your insulin resistance, and raising your blood sugar.
>
> Neurodegenerative diseases
>
> Musculoskeletal disorders and motor nerve damage — Research29 has shown that statin treatment lasting longer than two years causes "definite damage to peripheral nerves."
>
> Cataracts
>
> Liver problems30,31
>
> Crucial and Recommended Nutritional Supplements if Taking a Statin
> If you decide to take a statin, make sure you take CoQ10 or ubiquinol (the reduced form) with it. One study evaluated the benefits of CoQ10 and selenium supplementation for patients with statin-associated myopathy.32
>
> Compared to those given a placebo, the treatment group experienced significantly less pain, decreased muscle weakness and cramps, and less fatigue. A vitamin K2 supplement is also highly recommended. MK-7 is the form you'll want to look for in supplements; it's extracted from the Japanese fermented soy product called natto.
>
> Newer Cholesterol Drugs Are Not Safer
> Also, beware of a newer class of cholesterol absorption inhibitors called PCSK9 Inhibitors.33 PCSK9 is a protein that works with LDL receptors that regulate LDL in the liver and release LDL cholesterol into the blood. The inhibitors block that protein, thus lowering the amount of LDL circulating in your blood; in clinical trials, these drugs lowered LDLs by about 60 percent. However, as discussed earlier, LDL has no direct bearing on your CVD risk.
>
> What's more, while these drugs are being touted as the answer for those who cannot tolerate some of the side effects of the other drugs, such as severe muscle pain, trials have already discovered that PCSK9 inhibitors can produce "neurocognitive effects," with some patients experiencing confusion and attention deficits.34 There's evidence suggesting these drugs may actually be even more dangerous than statins.
>
> Assessing Your Heart Disease Risk
> As you evaluate your risk of cardiovascular disease, there are specific ratios and blood level values that will tell you much more than your total cholesterol number. For example, an NMR LipoProfile, which measures the size of your LDL particles, is a far better assessment of your risk of heart disease than total cholesterol or total LDL. The following tests will also give you a better assessment of your potential risk for heart attack or CVD:
>
> •Cholesterol ratios — Your HDL/cholesterol ratio and triglyceride/HDL ratio is a strong indicator of your risk. For your HDL/cholesterol ratio divide your HDL by your total cholesterol and multiply by 100. That percentage should ideally be above 24 percent. For your triglyceride/HDL ratio divide your triglyceride total by your HDL and multiply by 100. The ideal percentage is below 2 percent.
>
> •Fasting insulin level — Sugar and carbohydrates increase inflammation. Once eaten, these chemicals trigger a release of insulin, promoting the accumulation of fat and creation of triglycerides, making it more difficult for you to lose weight or maintain your normal weight. Excess fat around your midsection is one of the major contributors to heart disease.35
>
> Your fasting insulin level can be determined by a simple, inexpensive blood test. A normal fasting blood insulin level is below 5 microunits per milliliter (mcU/ml), but ideally, you'll want it below 3 mcU/ml. If your insulin level is higher than 3 to 5, the most effective way to optimize it is to reduce net carbs.
>
> •Fasting blood sugar level — Studies have demonstrated people with higher fasting blood sugar levels have a higher risk of heart disease.36 In fact, when your fasting blood sugar is between 100 and 125 mg/dl, your risk of coronary artery disease increases to 300 percent more than those whose level is below 79 mg/dl.37,38
>
> •High sensitivity C-reactive protein (HS-CRP) — This is one of the best overall measures of inflammation and an excellent screen for your risk of heart disease. Ideally your level should be below 0.7 and the lower the better.
>
> •Iron level — Iron creates an environment for oxidative stress, so excess iron may increase your inflammation and increase your risk of heart disease. An ideal iron level for adult men and non-menstruating women is between 40 and 60 nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml). You do not want to be below 20 ng/ml or above 80 ng/ml.
>
> The simplest and most efficient way to lower your iron level if elevated is to donate blood. If you can't donate, then therapeutic phlebotomy will effectively eliminate the excess iron. Heavy metal detoxification will also naturally reduce high iron.
>
> How to Avoid Heart Disease
> In closing, remember that high total cholesterol and even high LDL are insignificant when trying to determine your heart disease risk, and dietary cholesterol and saturated fat are not contributing factors.
>
> Probably the best predictor for CVD is your insulin sensitivity. Considering how insulin resistance drives chronic disease in general, not just heart disease, I strongly recommend measuring your fasting insulin on a regular basis and taking immediate action if you find yourself inching toward insulin resistance.
>
> As for preventing or reversing insulin resistance, the following general guidelines will set you on the right track:
>
> Dramatically reduce your net carbs and eliminate processed fructose, as this is what set this cascade of metabolic dysfunction into motion in the first place. Replace the lost calories with higher amounts of healthy fats, not protein. My optimized nutritional plan can guide you through this process.
> Normalize your omega-3-to-omega-6 ratio. Most get far too little omega-3, found in fatty fish such as wild Alaskan salmon, sardines, anchovies, fish oil and krill oil, and too much omega-6, as it is plentiful in processed vegetable oils and hence processed and fried foods.
> Optimize your vitamin D level by getting regular, sensible sun exposure. Other nutrients of importance include magnesium and vitamins K2 and C.
> Get eight hours of high quality sleep each night to normalize your hormonal system. Research has shown sleep deprivation can have a significant bearing on your insulin sensitivity.
> Get regular exercise, as it is a powerful way to help normalize your insulin sensitivity.

Dayyyyyyyum I C OP failed to reply about how their links proved my point and failed to prove OP's on thesis on Cholesterol

Perhaps OP had that Heart Attack

@previous (jodi !ariasXXmaE)
ninjj
Real men Lick Slurp Taste Raw Juicy Vagina.

We see what you are eating for lunch. Perhaps some mustard to get past the smegma will help you.

@previous (F)

> ninjj
> Real men Lick Slurp Taste Raw Juicy Vagina.
>
> We see what you are eating for lunch. Perhaps some mustard to get past the smegma will help you.

jfc

@1,071,902 (F)
77 almost 80

@1,068,506 (B)

> > Syntax:
> >
> >
> > You can be a fool or NOT, you doddering old gasbag.
> > Thhey say- You can't teach an old dog new facts, lol.
> >
> > Yes, we see you've regurgitated all the nonsense of the befuddled old Doctors about Chloresterol.
> >
> >
> > OF COURSE the HOAX (bad outdated science) had a multitude of propaganda associated to prop it up before the new truths came along...Duuuhh?
> >
> > All you have done is repeat all the bullshit that the Medical field was WRONG about!!
> > How ignorant of you.
> > Any person back in history would do the same thing talk until they were blue in the face about so called accepted Sience of the period they were living in...were it challenged as misguided by new ideas which shook the world of medicine and challenged the Old Guard.
> > I guess you can't be blamed for shaking your wrinkled old fists at the sky and crying out- 'But they're DOCTORS and they've said this is the way things have been done for years!!"
> >
> >
> > Well stick you head I the San and be stubborn if you want, it makes no difference, you have a right to your opinion even if it's wrong.
> >
> > NCE-
> > Cholesterol is a waxy substance found in nearly every cell of your body and is essential to good health. It plays a role in hormone production, digestion, the manufacture of vitamin D following sun exposure, and helps protect your cell membranes
> > The most concerning risk factors for cardiovascular disease are insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes and the chronic inflammation associated with these conditions
> > Other factors at play as well, such as how you eat — whether you’re rushing or taking your time — and other stress-related factors, both physical and psychological
> > Damage of the interior layers of your arteries precedes heart disease, and this damage can be induced by a number of factors, including smoking, high blood pressure, elevated blood sugar and inflammation
> > Once the artery is damaged, cholesterol-rich plaque begins to build up as a protective mechanism. Problems arise when the rate of damage and resultant blood clot formation outpace or outstrip your body’s ability to repair
> >
> > Cholesterol is a waxy substance found in nearly every cell of your body and is essential to good health. It plays a role in hormone production, digestion and the manufacture of vitamin D following sun exposure, and helps protect your cell membranes.
> >
> > As noted by Zoe Harcombe, Ph.D.,1 "It is virtually impossible to explain how vital cholesterol is to the human body. If you had no cholesterol in your body you would be dead."
> >
> > Your liver manufactures most, about 80 percent, of the cholesterol your body requires, which in and of itself suggests your body cannot survive without it. The remaining 20 percent comes from your diet. However, dietary cholesterol is absorbed at a rate of 20 to 60 percent, depending on the individual,2 and if you consume less, your body will compensate by making more and vice versa.
> >
> > Animals use cholesterol in much the same way, hence beef, pork and chicken have similar levels of cholesterol, averaging 25 milligrams of cholesterol per ounce.3
> >
> > Cholesterol has long been vilified as a primary cause of cardiovascular disease (CVD), yet numerous studies refute this hypothesis, demonstrating that cholesterol has virtually nothing to do with heart disease — at least not in the way conventional medicine presents it.
> >
> > As noted by Harcombe, the notion that there is good and bad cholesterol is also wrong. Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) are not actually cholesterol; they're carriers and transporters of cholesterol, triglycerides (fat), phospholipids and proteins.
> >
> > "LDL would more accurately be called the carrier of fresh cholesterol and HDL would more accurately be called the carrier of recycled cholesterol," she says.4 What's more, dietary cholesterol has no impact on the cholesterol level in your blood, so how could dietary cholesterol pose a health risk?
> >
> > Does High Cholesterol Cause Cardiovascular Disease?
> >
> > In an April 16, 2018, podcast (embedded at the top of this article), Christopher Kelly with Nourish Balance Thrive interviewed Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, a British physician and author of "Doctoring Data: How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense," "The Great Cholesterol Con," and "A Statin Nation: Damaging Millions in a Brave New Post-Health World."
> >
> > An outline5 and transcript6 of the interview can be found on the Nourish Balance Thrive website. In this interview, Kendrick discusses the true cause of cardiovascular disease and "the specific environmental and psychosocial factors that cause the most harm." You can also view the video above, in which Kendrick delivers a half-hour lecture on "Why Cholesterol Does Not and Cannot Cause Heart Disease."
> >
> > In short, the most concerning risk factors for cardiovascular disease are actually insulin resistance, Type 2 diabetes and the chronic inflammation associated with these conditions. However, Kendrick argues there are other factors at play as well, such as how you eat.
> >
> > Americans are notorious for rushing through their meals, while some other countries, such as France, encourage a slower, more leisurely pace during meals, which may affect how the food is metabolized.
> >
> > "I still think that probably is partly the case because clearly if you eat in a rushed fashion and you gobble it down and then you rush around immediately afterwards, your body is not in the correct metabolic rate to digest your food," Kendrick says,7 adding:
> >
> > "I was looking at some studies8 from Japan where they got people to eat a meal whilst being read a boring lecture and asked to eat the same meal whilst a comedian was telling jokes. And when the comedian was telling jokes, the blood sugar level was considerably lower."
> >
> > Stress Increases Your Cardiovascular Disease Risk
> > Kendrick also notes the links between stress and elevations in insulin levels (as insulin is counteracted by stress hormones) and blood clotting factors, and cites data showing that death rates from cardiovascular disease parallel stressful events that affect an entire nation.
> >
> > For example, in 1989, the heart disease rate skyrocketed in Lithuania, the same year the Soviet Union collapsed. This pattern can also be seen in other European countries. Meanwhile, the LDL hypothesis has failed to hold in a number of studies.
> >
> > As just one example, Kendrick cites a BMJ study where they looked at LDL levels in people over 60, finding that those with the highest LDL levels actually had the lowest overall mortality, including CVD mortality.9
> >
> > For Cardiovascular Disease to Occur, There Must be Arterial Wall Damage
> > Kendrick has written an extensive series of articles on the cardiovascular disease process. A summary of this voluminous work can be found in "What Causes Heart Disease — Part 59,"10 posted on his blog November 27, 2018. In it, he dissects the fallacies inherent in the conventional LDL/cholesterol hypothesis, and explains the thrombogenic theory of cardiovascular disease as a more reliable counterhypothesis. He writes in part:11
> >
> > "For the LDL hypothesis to be correct, it requires that LDL can travel past the lining of the artery, the endothelial cells, and into the artery wall behind. This is considered the starting point for atherosclerotic plaques to form.
> >
> > The problem with this hypothesis is that LDL cannot get into any cell, let alone an endothelial cell, unless that cell wants it to. We know this, for certain, because the only way for LDL to enter any cell, is if the cell manufactures an LDL receptor — which locks onto, and then pulls the LDL molecule inside. There is no other passageway. This is an inarguable fact …
> >
> > Others have argued that … the LDL simply slips through the gaps between endothelial cells and that is how it gets into the artery wall. Again, this is impossible. There are no gaps between endothelial cells. Endothelial cells are tightly bound to each other by strong protein bridges, known as 'tight junctions.'
> >
> > These tight junctions can prevent the passage of single ions — charged atoms — which makes it impossible for an LDL molecule to slip through, as it is many thousands of times bigger than an ion. This, too, is an inarguable fact.
> >
> > Ergo, the initiation of an atherosclerotic plaque (the underlying problem in cardiovascular disease) cannot be triggered by LDL leaking into an undamaged artery wall. Which means that, if you want to get LDL (or anything else) into the artery wall, you first must damage the endothelium/lining of the artery."
> >
> > The American National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute admits that damage of the interior layers of your arteries precedes heart disease, and that this damage can be induced by a number of factors, including smoking, high blood pressure, elevated blood sugar, inflammation and, as Dr. Zach Bush and Stefanie Seneff, Ph.D., promote: glyphosate. Once the artery is damaged, cholesterol-rich plaque begins to build up as a protective mechanism.
> >
> > "However, it is what happens next, where we rapidly diverge in our thinking," Kendrick writes.12 "The mainstream believes that, after damage has occurred, it is LDL, and only LDL, leaking into the artery wall that triggers a whole series of downstream reactions that lead to plaques forming.
> >
> > However, once you have damaged the endothelium there is no longer a barrier to stop anything getting into the artery wall. So, why pick on LDL? You also have proteins, red blood cells, platelets and Lp(a) and VLDL. Indeed, anything in the bloodstream now has free entry."
> >
> > The Thrombogenic Theory
> > Kendrick presents the thrombogenic theory — initially suggested by Karl von Rokitansky in 185213 — as a counter-theory to the flawed LDL/cholesterol hypothesis. In summary, the thrombogenic theory goes as follows:
> >
> > Endothelial damage occurs, resulting in the formation of a blood clot
> > The resulting blood clot is minimized in size by plasmin, an enzyme that breaks up blood clots
> > A new endothelial layer grows over top of the remnants of the blood clot, thereby incorporating it into the artery wall
> > Macrophages (white blood cells specializing in repair) break down and digest any remnants of the blood clot. The macrophages are in turn broken down along with their contents, and eliminated from your body through your lymph glands.
> > While this process leads to inflammation, it is a healthy response and not a disease state per se. Problems only arise "when the rate of damage, and resultant blood clot formation, outstrips the ability of the repair systems to clear up the mess," Kendrick explains.
> >
> > So, while endothelial damage and resulting blood clotting is at the heart of cardiovascular disease, the only time this natural repair process will cause problems is when damage outstrips repair.
> >
> > Factors That Raise Your Cardiovascular Disease Risk
> > As noted by Kendrick, "For good health, you want to maintain a balance between the blood being too ready to clot, and the blood not clotting when you need it to."14 So, what factors might lead to a situation in which the arterial damage is greater than your body's ability to repair it? Kendrick's "short list" includes over 30 factors, and there are many others. On this list are:
> >
> > Use of certain drugs, including oral steroids, omeprazole, Avastin and thalidomide
> > Diseases such as Cushing's disease, Kawasaki's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, chronic kidney disease and acute renal failure, sickle cell disease, malaria and Type 2 diabetes, as well as bacterial and viral infections
> > Acute physical and mental stress, and chronic mental stress
> > Heavy metal exposure, including lead and mercury
> > Certain nutritional deficiencies, including vitamins B and C deficiencies
> > Next there are factors that promote blood clot formation and/or inhibit the dissolution of blood clots, all of which also raise your CVD risk. Again, there are many factors that can do this, including but not limited to:
> >
> > Raised levels of lipoprotein (a), blood sugar, very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) and fibrinogen (fibrinogen binds tightly to the blood clot, creating a tough plug; with excess fibrinogen in your blood, you may end up with larger, more tough to dissolve blood clots)
> > Dehydration
> > Stress hormones such as cortisol
> > Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
> > Acute mental and/or physical stress
> > Lastly, there are factors that impair your body's repair system, i.e., the formation of a new endothelial layer over the blood clot, and the clearing of debris from the blood clot, and these also raise your risk for CVD. Factors that prevent new endothelial cells from being formed include but are not limited to:
> >
> > Certain drugs such as Avastin, thalidomide, omeprazole and any drug that lowers synthesis of nitric oxide (conversely, anything that increases nitric oxide in our body will reduce your risk of heart disease15)
> > Old age
> > Chronic kidney disease
> > Type 2 diabetes
> > Inactivity (lack of exercise)
> > Factors that impair clearance of debris from within the arterial wall include:
> >
> > Use of oral steroids, immunosuppressant drugs, certain anti-inflammatory drugs and many anticancer drugs
> > Age
> > Chronic negative psychological stress
> > The Role of Inflammation in Cardiovascular Disease
> > According to Kendrick, while chronic inflammation is recognized as a contributing factor for cardiovascular disease, not all inflammation is bad. In fact, the use of anti-inflammatory drugs (which can impair useful acute inflammation) has been linked to an increase in cardiovascular disease risk, "Which suggests that if you interfere with the healing response to arterial injury, you are going to make thing worse — not better," he says, adding:16
> >
> > "[T]he real reason why [chronic] inflammation is being seen as a possible cause of CVD is because inflammatory markers can be raised in CVD. To my mind this just demonstrates that in people with CVD, lots of damage is occurring, therefore there is more repair going on, so the inflammatory markers are raised.
> >
> > However, the mainstream has decided to look at this from the opposite side. They see a lot inflammation going on and have decreed that the inflammation is causing the CVD — rather than the other way around. Frankly, I think this is bonkers. But there you go.
> >
> > Anyway, where has all this got us to? I shall try to achieve a quick summary. The LDL hypothesis is nonsense, it is wrong, and it does not remotely fit with any other factors known to cause CVD.
> >
> > The thrombogenic theory, on the other hand, fits with almost everything known about CVD. It states that there are three, interrelated, processes that increase the risk of CVD:
> >
> > Increased rate of damage to the endothelial layer
> > Formation of a bigger or more difficult to remove blood clot at that point
> > Impaired repair/removal of remnant blood clot.
> > Any factor that does one of these three things can increase the risk of CVD … You need to have three or four, maybe more, and then things really get going … All of which means that — in most cases — CVD has no single, specific, cause. It should, instead, be seen as a process whereby damage exceeds repair, causing plaques to start developing, and grow — with a final, fatal, blood clot causing the terminal event."
> >
> > More Evidence Cholesterol Is Not the Enemy
> > The Minnesota Coronary Experiment was a study performed between 1968 and 1973 that examined the relationship between diet and heart health.17 The researchers used a double-blind randomized trial to evaluate the effect of vegetable oil (high in omega-6 linoleic acid) versus saturated fats in coronary heart disease and death.
> >
> > The results were left unpublished until 2016, when they appeared in the BMJ. An analysis of the collected data revealed lowering your cholesterol levels through dietary intervention did not reduce your risk of death from coronary heart disease. According to the researchers:18
> >
> > "Available evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that replacement of saturated fat in the diet with linoleic acid effectively lowers serum cholesterol but does not support the hypothesis that this translates to a lower risk of death from coronary heart disease or all causes.
> >
> > Findings from the Minnesota Coronary Experiment add to growing evidence that incomplete publication has contributed to overestimation of the benefits of replacing saturated fat with vegetable oils rich in linoleic acid."
> >
> > The researchers found that for every 30-point drop in total cholesterol, there was a 22 percent increase in the risk of death from cardiac disease. Upon autopsy, the group eating vegetable oil and the group eating saturated fat had the same amount of atherosclerotic plaques in their arteries, but the group eating saturated fat experienced nearly half the number of heart attacks as the group eating vegetable oil.
> >
> > Similarly, a scientific analysis19 of three large reviews published by statin advocates (which attempted to validate the current belief that statin treatment helps prevent cardiovascular disease) concluded the three studies in question failed to satisfy criteria for causality and drew faulty conclusions. Specifically, the authors found:20
> >
> > There was no association between total cholesterol and the degree of atherosclerosis severity
> > Total cholesterol levels are generally not predictive of the risk of heart disease and may be absent or inverse in many studies
> > In many studies LDL was not associated with atherosclerosis and in a large U.S. based study of nearly 140,000 patients who suffered an acute myocardial infarction, LDL levels at the time of admission were lower than normal
> > Adults over the age of 60 with higher LDL levels generally live longer
> > Few adults who experience familial hypercholesterolemia die prematurely
> > The researchers concluded that high cholesterol levels cannot be the main cause of heart disease as those with low levels have nearly the same degree of sclerosis as those with high levels, and the risk of having a heart attack is the same or higher when cholesterol levels are low.
> >
> > They believe the hypothesis has been kept alive by reviewers using misleading statistics and excluding results from unsuccessful trials while ignoring numerous contradictory observations.21 For a description of other studies debunking the saturated fat myth, often linked closely to increasing cholesterol levels, see my previous article, "The Cholesterol Myth Has Been Busted — Yet Again."
> >
> > Why Statin Drugs Are Ill Advised for Most
> > While the dietary guidelines for Americans no longer focus on reducing dietary cholesterol to protect your heart, and U.S. cholesterol treatment guidelines have stopped using total cholesterol as a measure of heart disease risk, honing in on elevated LDL cholesterol instead, we're still far off the mark when it comes down to how to best prevent heart disease.
> >
> > Refined sugar and processed fructose are in fact the primary drivers of heart disease, so that's where the focus needs to be — not on driving down your cholesterol with the aid of a statin drug (and/or avoiding healthy saturated fats in your diet).
> >
> > The only subgroup that might benefit from a statin are those born with a genetic defect called familial hypercholesterolemia, as this makes them resistant to traditional measures of normalizing cholesterol.
> >
> > There are many important reasons why you should not take a statin drug unless you have this genetic defect, including but not limited to the following. For more information about each of these, see "5 Great Reasons Why You Should Not Take Statins."
> >
> > 1.They don't work as advertised — A 2015 report22 published in the Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology concluded that statin advocates used a statistical tool called relative risk reduction to amplify statins' trivial beneficial effects. If you look at absolute risk, statin drugs benefit just 1 percent of the population. This means that out of 100 people treated with the drugs, one person will have one less heart attack.
> >
> > Another systematic review23 published that same year concluded that in studies where death was the primary prevention endpoint, statins taken for up to six years postponed death by 5 to 19 days. In secondary prevention trials, death was postponed by 10 to 27 days.
> >
> > Median postponement of death for primary and secondary prevention was three and four days respectively. When you consider the many health hazards associated with these drugs, this minuscule benefit hardly warrants statin treatment.
> >
> > 2.They deplete your body of CoQ10 — Statins block HMG coenzyme A reductase in your liver, which is how they reduce cholesterol. This enzyme also makes CoQ10, which is an essential mitochondrial nutrient that facilitates ATP production.
> >
> > As noted in a 2010 study,24 "Coenzyme Q10 is an important factor in mitochondrial respiration," and "Primary and secondary deficiencies of coenzyme Q10 result in a number of neurologic and myopathic syndromes." Since they impair your mitochondrial function, they could potentially affect any number of health problems, as without well-functioning mitochondria, your risk for chronic disease increases significantly.
> >
> > 3.They inhibit the synthesis of vitamin K2, a vitamin that protects your arteries from calcification.
> >
> > 4.They reduce ketone production25 — If you take CoQ10 while on statins you still have not solved the problem, as the same enzyme (HMG coenzyme A reductase) also inhibits your liver's ability to produce ketones, water-soluble fats that are essential to keep your body metabolically flexible. Ketones are also important molecular signaling molecules. So, statins make it virtually impossible to achieve nutritional ketosis.
> >
> > 5.Because of 2, 3 and 4, statins increase your risk for other serious diseases, including:
> >
> > Heart failure — Primarily due to statin-induced CoQ10 deficiency26,27
> >
> > Cancer — Research28 has shown that long-term statin use (10 years or longer) more than doubles women's risk of two major types of breast cancer: invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma.
> >
> > Diabetes — Statins have been shown to increase your risk of diabetes via a number of different mechanisms, two of which include increasing your insulin resistance, and raising your blood sugar.
> >
> > Neurodegenerative diseases
> >
> > Musculoskeletal disorders and motor nerve damage — Research29 has shown that statin treatment lasting longer than two years causes "definite damage to peripheral nerves."
> >
> > Cataracts
> >
> > Liver problems30,31
> >
> > Crucial and Recommended Nutritional Supplements if Taking a Statin
> > If you decide to take a statin, make sure you take CoQ10 or ubiquinol (the reduced form) with it. One study evaluated the benefits of CoQ10 and selenium supplementation for patients with statin-associated myopathy.32
> >
> > Compared to those given a placebo, the treatment group experienced significantly less pain, decreased muscle weakness and cramps, and less fatigue. A vitamin K2 supplement is also highly recommended. MK-7 is the form you'll want to look for in supplements; it's extracted from the Japanese fermented soy product called natto.
> >
> > Newer Cholesterol Drugs Are Not Safer
> > Also, beware of a newer class of cholesterol absorption inhibitors called PCSK9 Inhibitors.33 PCSK9 is a protein that works with LDL receptors that regulate LDL in the liver and release LDL cholesterol into the blood. The inhibitors block that protein, thus lowering the amount of LDL circulating in your blood; in clinical trials, these drugs lowered LDLs by about 60 percent. However, as discussed earlier, LDL has no direct bearing on your CVD risk.
> >
> > What's more, while these drugs are being touted as the answer for those who cannot tolerate some of the side effects of the other drugs, such as severe muscle pain, trials have already discovered that PCSK9 inhibitors can produce "neurocognitive effects," with some patients experiencing confusion and attention deficits.34 There's evidence suggesting these drugs may actually be even more dangerous than statins.
> >
> > Assessing Your Heart Disease Risk
> > As you evaluate your risk of cardiovascular disease, there are specific ratios and blood level values that will tell you much more than your total cholesterol number. For example, an NMR LipoProfile, which measures the size of your LDL particles, is a far better assessment of your risk of heart disease than total cholesterol or total LDL. The following tests will also give you a better assessment of your potential risk for heart attack or CVD:
> >
> > •Cholesterol ratios — Your HDL/cholesterol ratio and triglyceride/HDL ratio is a strong indicator of your risk. For your HDL/cholesterol ratio divide your HDL by your total cholesterol and multiply by 100. That percentage should ideally be above 24 percent. For your triglyceride/HDL ratio divide your triglyceride total by your HDL and multiply by 100. The ideal percentage is below 2 percent.
> >
> > •Fasting insulin level — Sugar and carbohydrates increase inflammation. Once eaten, these chemicals trigger a release of insulin, promoting the accumulation of fat and creation of triglycerides, making it more difficult for you to lose weight or maintain your normal weight. Excess fat around your midsection is one of the major contributors to heart disease.35
> >
> > Your fasting insulin level can be determined by a simple, inexpensive blood test. A normal fasting blood insulin level is below 5 microunits per milliliter (mcU/ml), but ideally, you'll want it below 3 mcU/ml. If your insulin level is higher than 3 to 5, the most effective way to optimize it is to reduce net carbs.
> >
> > •Fasting blood sugar level — Studies have demonstrated people with higher fasting blood sugar levels have a higher risk of heart disease.36 In fact, when your fasting blood sugar is between 100 and 125 mg/dl, your risk of coronary artery disease increases to 300 percent more than those whose level is below 79 mg/dl.37,38
> >
> > •High sensitivity C-reactive protein (HS-CRP) — This is one of the best overall measures of inflammation and an excellent screen for your risk of heart disease. Ideally your level should be below 0.7 and the lower the better.
> >
> > •Iron level — Iron creates an environment for oxidative stress, so excess iron may increase your inflammation and increase your risk of heart disease. An ideal iron level for adult men and non-menstruating women is between 40 and 60 nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml). You do not want to be below 20 ng/ml or above 80 ng/ml.
> >
> > The simplest and most efficient way to lower your iron level if elevated is to donate blood. If you can't donate, then therapeutic phlebotomy will effectively eliminate the excess iron. Heavy metal detoxification will also naturally reduce high iron.
> >
> > How to Avoid Heart Disease
> > In closing, remember that high total cholesterol and even high LDL are insignificant when trying to determine your heart disease risk, and dietary cholesterol and saturated fat are not contributing factors.
> >
> > Probably the best predictor for CVD is your insulin sensitivity. Considering how insulin resistance drives chronic disease in general, not just heart disease, I strongly recommend measuring your fasting insulin on a regular basis and taking immediate action if you find yourself inching toward insulin resistance.
> >
> > As for preventing or reversing insulin resistance, the following general guidelines will set you on the right track:
> >
> > Dramatically reduce your net carbs and eliminate processed fructose, as this is what set this cascade of metabolic dysfunction into motion in the first place. Replace the lost calories with higher amounts of healthy fats, not protein. My optimized nutritional plan can guide you through this process.
> > Normalize your omega-3-to-omega-6 ratio. Most get far too little omega-3, found in fatty fish such as wild Alaskan salmon, sardines, anchovies, fish oil and krill oil, and too much omega-6, as it is plentiful in processed vegetable oils and hence processed and fried foods.
> > Optimize your vitamin D level by getting regular, sensible sun exposure. Other nutrients of importance include magnesium and vitamins K2 and C.
> > Get eight hours of high quality sleep each night to normalize your hormonal system. Research has shown sleep deprivation can have a significant bearing on your insulin sensitivity.
> > Get regular exercise, as it is a powerful way to help normalize your insulin sensitivity.