DailyBriefs.info archive 

Cholesterol: Immune Benefits, Heart Health, Statins & Research Malpractice

1. The "Cholesterol Myth" and its Origins

• Challenging the Dogma: The researcher contends that the "cholesterol myth" – the idea that high cholesterol is dangerous – is fundamentally wrong. "High cholesterol is not a bad finding. High cholesterol is beneficial because it participate in the immune system by adhering to all kinds of microorganisms and their toxic products."

• Historical Discrepancies: The researcher’s journey into cholesterol research began in the 1980s with the start of the cholesterol campaign in Sweden. Upon reviewing the original literature, he found a lack of proof for the claims that high cholesterol or saturated fat were harmful. He specifically criticizes Ancel Keys, stating Keys "had lied... in his reviews he has included many studies that showed the opposite."

• Scientific Dishonesty and Bias: A recurring theme is the deliberate misrepresentation and selective citation of research. The researcher describes instances where "review paper[s] written by him or by others they'll include studies and say you know the studies say X Y and Z. But then if you go actually look at the studies they cite, they do not in fact say that." This is described as "the greatest criminal action in medical science to claim that high cholesterol is dangerous."

2. The Beneficial Role of LDL Cholesterol in the Immune System

• LDL as an Immune Component: Contrary to its "bad cholesterol" moniker, LDL (low-density lipoprotein) is presented as an active and crucial participant in the immune system. "LDL is used in the immune system. LDL Well uh well it is attached to all kinds of bacteria and microorganisms."

• Mechanism of Action: When an infection occurs, LDL particles "literally sticks to bacteria," causing them to clump together. These LDL-covered bacteria are then "taken up by the monocytes" (immune cells) which "inactivate all micron microorganisms by oxidation." The presence of "oxidized LDL" in patients with myocardial infarction is not a cause but "the result of the immune system" fighting infection.

• Infection and Atherosclerosis: The researcher posits a direct link between severe infections and atherosclerosis. "People who suffer or die from infectious diseases, they were more atherosclerotic than healthy people." This connection was "demonstrated for about a 100 years ago."

• Evidence from Animal Studies: Animal studies support LDL's immune role: "if they also include or injects human LDL they survive" when infected with lethal microorganisms, whereas animals with low LDL are more susceptible to infection and death.

• Low LDL, Higher Risk of Infection: Consistently, "those with low LDL have a greater risk of coronary art disease" and "a lower risk of infection" if they have high cholesterol.

3. Critiques of Statin Treatment

• Lack of Significant Benefit: A meta-analysis conducted by the researcher and colleagues on "all statin lowering trials" found that "only one or two of these trials have low lowered the risk the mortality risk from cardio from myioardial faction by more than 1%." Furthermore, "several of them have increased the risk of mort of mortality."

• Cherry-Picking and Relative vs. Absolute Risk: The positive perception of statins is heavily influenced by "cherrypicking" studies and the use of "relative risk" rather than "absolute risk" in reporting. The researcher illustrates how a "1% absolute risk reduction" can be exaggerated to a "30 to 40%" or even "50%" relative risk reduction, making "a trivial result look like an an amazing result." This deceptive reporting "greatly exaggerates the effect."

• Serious Side Effects: Statins are associated with "many serious side effects," including "muscular problems," "brain may suffer from many different failures," and an increased risk of infections. These effects are often slow to manifest and thus "most research they think that these side effects are result from age," rather than the drug itself. However, these side effects "disappear" within weeks or months of stopping statin treatment.

• No Justification for Statins: The researcher emphatically states that "statin drugs are not beneficial." When asked if anyone should be on a statin, he unequivocally answers, "No. No. Statin drugs are not beneficial. They uh are able to increase to start many many uh diseases." He advises patients to "stop statin treatments and report about the result because I'm confident that those who stop studing treatments, they will live longer and they will have a much better life."

4. Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) and Misinterpretation

• FH and Coagulation Factors: While a small subset of individuals with FH (genetically high cholesterol) die early from heart disease, the researcher argues this is not due to high cholesterol itself. Instead, these individuals "have also inherited high levels of calculation factors." It is the interaction of these coagulation factors, potentially exacerbated by infection, that leads to early death, not the high cholesterol.

• Longer Lifespan with FH (without coagulation factors): For the majority of FH patients, high cholesterol is not detrimental. "those who have high cholesterol, old elderly people with high cholesterol, they live longer than other people." In fact, studies from the 1980s showed that people with FH "live longer than other people" and their "infection diseases were much lower also."

• Statistical Deception: The apparent higher average death rate for FH patients is a statistical artifact: "if you just average the entire population of FH patients it looks like they die earlier but it's because a subset of them dies earlier not because everyone dies earlier and that has that has misled us."

• Lower Risk of Cancer: High cholesterol also shows a correlation with a "lower risk of cancer," a finding the researcher claims is "well established" but not widely known.

5. Industry Influence and Suppression of Information

• Financial Conflicts of Interest: A major driver of the "cholesterol myth" is the pharmaceutical industry's immense profits from cholesterol-lowering drugs (statins). "This claim is supported or I don't think it it is supported by many drug companies. because they have earned millions of dollar on the cholesterol lowering drugs."

• Academic and Journal Bias: Many "cardiological professors, they are well paid by the drug instit industry," making them unwilling to challenge the narrative. This influence extends to medical journals, which "earn much money from the drug companies," making it "very difficult to publish a critical paper."

• Personal Experience with Pushback: The researcher recounts facing significant resistance in publishing his findings, especially after his critical papers started gaining traction. "It suddenly became very difficult and I think it is because the drug industry realized that my information was very expensive for them. They would lose lots of money. If if I was able to spread this information."

• Geographical and Financial Divide in Research: The researcher notes a pattern where "researchers that you work with in places like Sweden and Japan, they will publish papers that are critical of the lipid hypothesis... usually there's no conflicts of interest reported." In contrast, papers favoring statins, often from the US and Europe, frequently have "very very very long financial entanglements" listed.

6. Other Related Misinterpretations

• Stress and Cholesterol/Blood Pressure: Mental stress can significantly and rapidly raise both LDL cholesterol (10-50% in half an hour) and blood pressure. These are often misinterpreted as causes of heart disease, but the researcher argues they are "an effect of heart disease" or symptoms of an underlying stress response.

• High Blood Pressure in Elderly: In older individuals, higher blood pressure is often a "compensatory change" because "the brain need higher blood pressure to function" due to arteries becoming less flexible and lumen size decreasing. Treating this symptom may be counterproductive.

• Mortality Curves and "Too Low" Cholesterol: Mortality curves often show that the lowest mortality is associated with cholesterol levels that are currently considered "too high" by doctors. Furthermore, "the risk is higher with a low cholesterol," especially in older individuals where "those with high cholesterol" live longest.

This podcast episode challenges the widely accepted view that high cholesterol is detrimental to health, especially in the context of heart disease. The host, with a strong scientific background in neuroscience and genetics, introduces a physician and long-time researcher from Sweden who argues that high cholesterol, particularly LDL, is beneficial and plays a crucial role in the immune system. This expert explains how LDL particles attach to microorganisms to facilitate their removal by the body and that statin drugs, designed to lower cholesterol, can actually increase the risk of infection and have numerous side effects often mistaken for signs of aging. The discussion also highlights how conflicts of interest within the pharmaceutical industry and biased reporting of clinical trial data have perpetuated the "cholesterol myth" and the widespread prescription of statins. 

welcome to the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show.

The Mind and Matter podcast, hosted by an individual with a PhD in neuroscience and a background in molecular, developmental, and evolutionary genetics, focuses on how the mind and body react to what is consumed1. The host utilizes their scientific background to translate information shared by guests and creates additional content, including long-form articles and a weekly newsletter1. Paid subscribers receive ad-free episodes, early access, and directly support the creation of more and higher-quality content1. The podcast also features a sponsor, Lumen, a handheld device that measures CO2 levels in breath to determine fat versus carbohydrate burning for improved metabolic flexibility and health optimization1.

The podcast guest, a Danish physician who moved to Sweden in the 1960s, is a Laker with both an MD and PhD2.... Early in his career, he worked at a renal clinic in Lund, Sweden, but left after exposing a colleague who had falsified research regarding glomerulitis (kidney failure)24. After leaving, he established his own clinic and continued his research, specifically focusing on cholesterol2. He has since published over 200 papers and comments on cholesterol2.

His journey into cholesterol research began in the 1980s when a cholesterol campaign started in Sweden5. He could not recall any evidence proving that high cholesterol was detrimental, prompting him to review older scientific papers on the subject5. He quickly discovered that there were significant misrepresentations in the cholesterol literature, similar to the falsehoods he found in the glomerulitis research5. For instance, he investigated Ancel Keys' claims that saturated fat was dangerous but found no proof in the literature56. He believes that most researchers now agree that saturated fat is not inherently bad6. He documented instances where review papers, even by famous scientists, cited studies that either contradicted the claims made or were exaggerated7. The guest describes the assertion that high cholesterol is dangerous as the "greatest criminal action in medical science"89. He suggests this claim is perpetuated by drug companies that have generated millions in profit from cholesterol-lowering medications, primarily statins8.

According to the guest, LDL cholesterol, often labeled "bad cholesterol," plays a crucial role in the immune system10. It functions by attaching to bacteria and other microorganisms1011. Once covered with LDL, these microorganisms clump together and are then engulfed and inactivated by monocytes through oxidation1011. Therefore, oxidized LDL, often found in patients with myocardial infarction, is a result of this immune process, not a dangerous entity itself10. He explains that if an infection is severe and too many of these LDL-covered bacterial clumps accumulate, they can occlude small arteries, particularly around the heart where interstitial pressure is higher1112. Supporting this, many studies have shown that individuals with low LDL levels have a greater risk of coronary artery disease13. Animal studies have further demonstrated this, showing that animals infected with deadly microorganisms survive if injected with human LDL, a finding documented multiple times1314. Historically, American researchers observed a century ago that patients who died from severe infections were more atherosclerotic than healthy individuals, indicating a link between infections and atherosclerosis1415. However, the guest notes that very few people are aware of LDL's immune system function or its connection to atherosclerosis, attributing this lack of knowledge to cardiology professors who are often financially supported by the drug industry and are reluctant to challenge prevailing beliefs1415.

Statins, widely prescribed to lower LDL cholesterol, are reported to cause various problems16. The guest mentions a study indicating that statins worsen insulin resistance and can interfere with other bodily functions, potentially acting as mitochondrial toxins16. He contends that people on statins are at a higher risk for infection1617. A meta-analysis conducted by the guest and his colleagues, which included about 36 statin trials, revealed that only one or two of these trials lowered the mortality risk from myocardial infarction by more than 1%, while several actually increased mortality risk18. He highlights that many common meta-analyses selectively cite studies, often omitting over 10 relevant trials that do not show positive results18.... Furthermore, he criticizes the common practice of reporting relative risk instead of absolute risk19. For example, a reduction from two deaths to one in a group of 100 people is an absolute risk reduction of 1%, but can be misleadingly reported as a 50% relative risk reduction, making a minor effect appear significant20.... He believes this practice is a deliberate exaggeration driven by financial incentives from the drug industry, which heavily influences cardiology professors and medical journals2425.

Regarding side effects, statin treatment is associated with many serious issues, including muscular problems (weakness, pain, atrophy), brain failures, and increased susceptibility to infections1726. These side effects often manifest slowly, leading to them being mistaken for natural age-related decline26. However, studies have shown that these side effects typically disappear within weeks or months after stopping statin treatment27. The guest emphatically states that no one needs to be on a statin drug, as they are not beneficial and can initiate many diseases28. He advises individuals, including those with familial hypercholesterolemia, to stop statin treatment immediately28.

The guest also discusses familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), a genetic condition where individuals are born with very high cholesterol levels29. He points out that while some young people with FH die early from heart disease, their high cholesterol is not the cause2930. Instead, these individuals have also inherited high levels of coagulation factors that contribute to their early demise29.... He cites a study of nearly 4 million myocardial infarction patients where the prevalence of FH was five to six times lower than in the general population, suggesting that having high cholesterol might actually be beneficial31.... Crucially, there is no difference in cholesterol levels between FH patients who die early and those who live to an old age; the distinguishing factor is only in their coagulation system35. Therefore, the perception that all FH patients die early is skewed because only a small subset, those with additional inherited coagulation issues, experience premature death3236. In fact, people with very high cholesterol (e.g., 600-800) due to FH can live to be elderly37. He also claims that high cholesterol is associated with a lower risk of infection and cancer37.... Historical studies from over 100 years ago even indicated that FH patients lived longer and had lower rates of infectious diseases3639.

Furthermore, the guest explains that mental stress can significantly raise LDL cholesterol (by 10-50% in half an hour, potentially doubling it quickly)4041. This increase is often misinterpreted as proof that high cholesterol causes heart disease, when it is actually an effect of stress41. Stress also elevates blood pressure42. He notes that high blood pressure in older individuals is often a compensatory mechanism because arteries become less flexible and narrower with age, requiring higher pressure to ensure adequate blood flow, particularly to the brain4344. He previously researched this but stopped, fearing he would be seen as an "idiot" for claiming high cholesterol and high blood pressure could be beneficial44. He points out that mortality curves often show that very low cholesterol is associated with a higher risk of death than moderately high cholesterol, especially in older age groups4546. Indeed, elderly people with high cholesterol tend to live longer4647.

The guest has faced significant pushback in publishing his critical research, noting that it became difficult about 20 years ago when the drug industry likely realized the financial implications of his findings38. He founded a group called "THINCS" (The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics), comprising around 20-25 researchers who are skeptical of the cholesterol hypothesis48. He observes that critical papers often come from researchers in countries like Sweden and Japan with no reported conflicts of interest, whereas papers supporting statins often originate from the US and Europe and have extensive lists of financial ties to drug companies49. He received rejections "without reasons" for many papers, and his protests went unanswered2549. He attributes the general public's and many doctors' continued belief in the "cholesterol myth" to the influence of the drug industry on professors and medical journals, making it challenging for alternative views to be published or accepted24....

His overall message is that the widespread belief in the danger of high cholesterol and the subsequent prescription of statins represents the "greatest scandal in modern medicine"950. He stresses that millions of people are not only taking unnecessary statins but are also being harmed by them9. He encourages researchers to advise their patients to discontinue statin treatments and to document the positive outcomes, as he is confident that those who stop will experience immediate benefits, live longer, and have a significantly improved quality of life9.

The host expressed his intention to share the guest's review paper, "LDL cholesterol does not cause cardiovascular disease," which provides insight into both the biology and the inherent biases in scientific reporting within the field51. The guest reiterated his desire for this information to be widely disseminated52.

thank you for listening to another session of the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show produced and archived at the website notebooklmvideos.com

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Cholesterol Rethink.

welcome to the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show.

The Mind and Matter podcast, hosted by an individual with a PhD in neuroscience and a background in molecular, developmental, and evolutionary genetics, explores how the mind and body react to what is consumed1. The host's scientific background is utilized to translate guest information, and they create additional content like long-form articles and a weekly newsletter. Paid subscribers receive ad-free episodes and early access, directly supporting the creation of more and higher-quality content1. The podcast also features a sponsor, Lumen, a handheld device that measures CO2 levels in breath to determine fat versus carbohydrate burning, aiming to improve metabolic flexibility and health optimization. This device tracks metabolism, helping users understand how their body responds to lifestyle choices for weight loss or athletic performance1.

The guest, a Danish physician with both an MD and PhD who moved to Sweden in the 1960s, initiated his extensive research into cholesterol after noticing a lack of evidence supporting the claim that high cholesterol was detrimental during a cholesterol campaign in the 1980s2.... He had previously left a renal clinic in Lund, Sweden, after exposing a colleague who had falsified research on glomerulitis, which prompted him to continue his own research, ultimately leading to over 200 published papers and comments on cholesterol25. His investigation revealed significant misrepresentations in cholesterol literature, including the finding that Ancel Keys' claims about the dangers of saturated fat were unsupported by scientific proof46. He believes that most researchers now agree that saturated fat is not inherently bad6. He documented instances where review papers, even by prominent scientists, cited studies that either contradicted the claims or were exaggerated7. He characterizes the assertion that high cholesterol is dangerous as the "greatest criminal action in medical science," attributing its perpetuation to drug companies that have profited millions from cholesterol-lowering medications, primarily statins8.

According to the guest, LDL cholesterol plays a crucial and often unappreciated role in the immune system39. It functions by attaching to bacteria and other microorganisms, causing them to clump together910. These LDL-covered clumps are then engulfed and inactivated by monocytes through oxidation910. Therefore, oxidized LDL, frequently found in patients with myocardial infarction, is presented as a result of this immune process, not a dangerous entity itself9. If a severe infection leads to an excessive accumulation of these LDL-covered bacterial clumps, they can occlude small arteries, particularly around the heart where interstitial pressure is higher1011. The guest highlights that many studies have shown individuals with low LDL levels face a greater risk of coronary artery disease12. Animal studies provide further proof, demonstrating that animals infected with lethal microorganisms survive if injected with human LDL1213. Historical American research from a century ago also linked severe infections to increased atherosclerosis1314. However, the guest states that very few people are aware of LDL's immune system function or its connection to atherosclerosis, suggesting that cardiology professors, often financially supported by the drug industry, are reluctant to challenge prevailing beliefs14.

Statins, which are widely prescribed to lower LDL cholesterol, are reported to cause numerous problems. The guest mentions research indicating that statins worsen insulin resistance and can act as mitochondrial toxins15. He contends that people on statins are at a higher risk for infection1516. A meta-analysis conducted by the guest and his colleagues, which included approximately 36 statin trials, showed that only one or two trials lowered the mortality risk from myocardial infarction by more than 1%, while several actually increased mortality risk16. He criticizes common meta-analyses for selectively citing studies, often omitting over 10 relevant trials that do not show positive results17. Furthermore, he argues that the practice of reporting relative risk instead of absolute risk significantly exaggerates the perceived benefits of statins; for example, a 1% absolute risk reduction might be misleadingly reported as a 50% relative risk reduction18.... This deliberate exaggeration is attributed to financial incentives from the drug industry, which heavily influences cardiology professors and medical journals2122. The guest has faced significant pushback in publishing his critical research, with many papers being rejected "without reasons"22. He observes that critical papers often come from researchers in countries like Sweden and Japan with no reported conflicts of interest, whereas pro-statin papers from the US and Europe frequently show extensive financial ties to drug companies23.

Regarding familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), a genetic condition characterized by very high cholesterol levels, the guest explains that while a subset of young FH patients may die early from heart disease, their high cholesterol is not the cause2425. Instead, these individuals have also inherited high levels of coagulation factors that contribute to their premature demise24.... A study of nearly 4 million myocardial infarction patients showed that the prevalence of FH was five to six times lower than in the general population, suggesting that having high cholesterol might actually be beneficial26.... There is no difference in cholesterol levels between FH patients who die early and those who live to an old age; the distinguishing factor lies only in their coagulation system30. Therefore, people with very high cholesterol (e.g., 600-800) due to FH can live to be elderly31. The guest also claims that high cholesterol is associated with a lower risk of infection and cancer31.... Historical studies from over 100 years ago indicated that FH patients lived longer and had lower rates of infectious diseases3334. Mental stress is also noted to significantly raise LDL cholesterol (by 10-50% in half an hour, potentially doubling it quickly)3536. This increase is often misinterpreted as proof that high cholesterol causes heart disease, when it is actually an effect of stress3536. High blood pressure in older individuals is often a compensatory mechanism because arteries become less flexible and narrower with age, requiring higher pressure to ensure adequate blood flow, especially to the brain3738. Mortality curves often indicate that very low cholesterol is associated with a higher risk of death than moderately high cholesterol, particularly in older age groups, where elderly individuals with high cholesterol tend to live longer3940.

Statin treatment is linked to many serious side effects, including muscular problems (weakness, pain, atrophy), brain failures, and increased susceptibility to infections4142. These side effects often manifest slowly, leading them to be mistakenly attributed to natural age-related decline42. However, studies have shown that these side effects typically disappear within weeks or months after stopping statin treatment43. The guest emphatically states that no one needs to be on a statin drug, as they are not beneficial and can initiate many diseases44. He advises individuals, including those with familial hypercholesterolemia, to stop statin treatment immediately44. His overall message is that the widespread belief in the danger of high cholesterol and the subsequent prescription of statins represents the "greatest scandal in modern medicine," harming hundreds of millions of people who are taking unnecessary medications4546. He encourages researchers to advise their patients to discontinue statin treatments and to document the positive outcomes, asserting that those who stop will experience immediate benefits, live longer, and have a significantly improved quality of life46. The host intends to share the guest's review paper, "LDL cholesterol does not cause cardiovascular disease," which provides insights into both the biology and the inherent biases in scientific reporting within the field4748.

thank you for listening to another session of the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show produced and archived at the website notebooklmvideos.com

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Statin Dangers.

welcome to the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show.

The Mind and Matter podcast discusses how the mind and body react to what is consumed, drawing on the host's PhD in neuroscience and background in molecular, developmental, and evolutionary genetics1. The host translates guest information, creates long-form articles, and a weekly newsletter, with paid subscribers receiving ad-free episodes and early access1. The podcast also features a sponsor, Lumen, a device for tracking metabolic flexibility by measuring CO2 levels in breath1.

The podcast guest, a Danish physician who moved to Sweden in the 1960s, holds both an MD and PhD23. Early in his career, he worked at a renal clinic in Lund, Sweden, but left after exposing a colleague for falsifying research on glomerulitis34. Following this, he established his own clinic and continued his research, specifically focusing on cholesterol, publishing over 200 papers and comments on the subject4. His entry into cholesterol research began in the 1980s with the start of a "cholesterol campaign" in Sweden5. He could not recall any evidence proving that high cholesterol was detrimental, leading him to review older scientific papers5. He soon discovered significant misrepresentations in the cholesterol literature, similar to the falsehoods he found in the glomerulitis research5. For example, he found no proof in the literature for Ancel Keys' claims that saturated fat was dangerous, a point he believes most researchers now agree on6. He documented instances where review papers, even by famous scientists, cited studies that either contradicted the claims made or were exaggerated7. The guest describes the assertion that high cholesterol is dangerous as the "greatest criminal action in medical science"8. He attributes this claim to drug companies that have profited millions from cholesterol-lowering medications, primarily statins8.

Regarding statins, the guest highlights numerous dangers. He states that statins cause many serious problems9. A study showed that statins worsen insulin resistance and can interfere with other bodily functions, potentially acting as "mild mitochondrial toxins"9. Furthermore, people on statins are at a higher risk for infection9.... A meta-analysis conducted by the guest and his colleagues, which included about 36 statin trials, revealed that only one or two of these trials lowered the mortality risk from myocardial infarction by more than 1%, while several actually increased mortality risk10. He notes that many common meta-analyses selectively cite studies, often omitting over 10 relevant trials that do not show positive results12. He also criticizes the common practice of reporting relative risk instead of absolute risk, explaining that a 1% absolute risk reduction (e.g., from two deaths to one in 100 people) can be misleadingly reported as a 50% relative risk reduction, making a minor effect appear significant12.... This practice is seen as a deliberate exaggeration driven by financial incentives from the drug industry, which influences cardiology professors and medical journals16.

The guest detailed many serious side effects associated with statin treatment11. The most common are muscular problems, including weakness, pain, and atrophy1117. Statins can also cause "brain failures"11. A significant issue is that these side effects often manifest slowly, leading to them being mistaken for natural age-related decline17. However, studies have shown that these side effects typically disappear within weeks or months after stopping statin treatment18. He adamantly states that no one needs to be on a statin drug, as they are not beneficial and can "initiate many many diseases"19. He advises individuals, including those with familial hypercholesterolemia, to stop statin treatment immediately19. The guest describes the widespread belief in the danger of high cholesterol and the subsequent prescription of statins as the "greatest scandal in modern medicine"2021. He emphasizes that millions of people are not only taking unnecessary statins but are also being harmed by them21. He encourages researchers to advise their patients to discontinue statin treatments and document the positive outcomes, as he is confident that those who stop will experience immediate benefits, live longer, and have a significantly improved quality of life21. The host expressed his intention to share the guest's review paper, "LDL cholesterol does not cause cardiovascular disease," which highlights the biology and inherent biases in scientific reporting in the field2223.

thank you for listening to another session of the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show produced and archived at the website notebooklmvideos.com

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Scientific Bias.

welcome to the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show.

The provided source, "Cholesterol Immune Benefits.mp3," reveals several instances and facets of scientific bias that have influenced research, publication, and public perception, particularly concerning cholesterol and statins.

The podcast guest, a physician with an MD and PhD who moved to Sweden in the 1960s, encountered bias early in his career when he exposed a colleague who had falsified research related to glomerulitis (kidney failure)12. Despite his findings, the professor initially dismissed his concerns, and he was later forced to leave the clinic under threat of demotion if he continued his research1. This early experience highlighted a resistance to challenging established narratives or uncovering scientific misconduct.

His later delve into cholesterol research in the 1980s, prompted by a "cholesterol campaign" in Sweden, further unveiled systemic biases3. He found that claims, such as Ancel Keys' assertion that saturated fat was dangerous, lacked scientific proof in older papers and that most researchers now agree saturated fat is not inherently bad34. The guest documented instances where review papers, even by renowned scientists, would cite studies that either contradicted their claims or exaggerated findings5. He characterizes this phenomenon, which he calls the "greatest criminal action in medical science," as being supported by drug companies due to the vast profits generated from cholesterol-lowering medications like statins6.

Bias is also evident in the selective reporting and analysis of clinical trials. A meta-analysis conducted by the guest and his colleagues on statin-lowering trials found approximately 36 trials, yet more than ten of these were often omitted from common meta-analyses that supported the benefits of statins78. This suggests a tendency to cherry-pick studies that show positive outcomes while disregarding those that do not or that show increased mortality risk79.

Furthermore, the method of reporting results presents a significant bias. Research often highlights relative risk reduction rather than absolute risk reduction, which can greatly exaggerate the perceived benefits of a drug8.... For example, if two deaths occur in a placebo group and one in a treated group of 100 people, the absolute risk reduction is a mere 1%, but this can be misleadingly reported as a 50% relative risk reduction1011. The guest believes that researchers often deliberately employ this method, understanding its deceptive nature, particularly when they receive financial support from the drug industry912.

The influence of the drug industry extends to academic institutions and medical journals, creating an environment where critical papers challenging the cholesterol hypothesis are difficult to publish12.... The guest noted that his own critical papers have been rejected "without reasons" and that protests against these rejections went unanswered1316. He observes a pattern where papers critical of the lipid hypothesis often come from researchers in countries like Sweden and Japan with no reported conflicts of interest, while those supporting statins frequently originate from the US and Europe and have extensive lists of financial ties to drug companies16. This financial entanglement fosters a reluctance among cardiology professors to acknowledge or disseminate facts that could harm drug industry profits, such as LDL's role in the immune system17.

Another form of bias involves the misinterpretation of physiological responses. For instance, mental stress can quickly raise LDL cholesterol levels (by 10-50% in half an hour) and also elevate blood pressure18.... This effect is often mistakenly interpreted as evidence that high cholesterol causes heart disease, when it is actually an effect of stress19. Similarly, high blood pressure in older individuals is frequently a compensatory mechanism for less flexible, narrower arteries, necessary to ensure adequate blood flow to the brain, rather than inherently dangerous2122. The guest even expressed fear of being labeled an "idiot" if he published research suggesting that high cholesterol and high blood pressure could be beneficial, highlighting the strong, biased consensus against such ideas2223.

The guest emphasizes that the pervasive belief in the danger of high cholesterol and the widespread prescription of statins represent the "greatest scandal in modern medicine," profoundly affecting millions of people who are not only taking unnecessary medications but are also being harmed by them15.... He attributes this enduring "cholesterol myth" to the drug industry's deep financial influence on professors and medical journals, which hinders the dissemination of alternative scientific information1526.

thank you for listening to another session of the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show produced and archived at the website notebooklmvideos.com

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Immune System.

welcome to the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show.

The provided source, an excerpt from the "Cholesterol Immune Benefits.mp3" podcast, features a discussion with a Danish physician holding both an MD and PhD who has extensively researched cholesterol for decades. He challenges conventional beliefs about high cholesterol, particularly highlighting its crucial role in the immune system.

According to the guest, LDL cholesterol, commonly referred to as "bad cholesterol," is an integral part of the immune system1.... Its primary function involves attaching to various bacteria and other microorganisms13. Once these microorganisms are covered with LDL, they clump together, a process that facilitates their identification and removal3.... These LDL-covered clumps are then engulfed and inactivated by monocytes through oxidation3. This means that oxidized LDL, often detected in patients with myocardial infarction, is not a dangerous entity itself but rather the result of this essential immune system activity3. If an infection is severe and a large number of these LDL-covered bacterial clumps accumulate, they can potentially occlude small arteries, particularly around the heart where interstitial pressure is higher7.

The guest emphasizes that very few people are aware of LDL's function in the immune system or its connection to atherosclerosis5. Supporting this overlooked role, he points out that many studies have shown individuals with low LDL levels to have a greater risk of coronary artery disease8. Furthermore, animal studies have repeatedly demonstrated that animals infected with deadly microorganisms can survive if injected with human LDL8. Historical research from about a century ago by American researchers also indicated a link between infections and atherosclerosis, observing that patients who died from severe infections were more atherosclerotic than healthy individuals59.

A significant concern raised is that statins, which are widely prescribed to lower LDL cholesterol, can increase the risk of infection10.... Since LDL plays a vital role in fighting microorganisms, reducing its levels through statin treatment compromises the body's immune defense10.... Conversely, the guest states that high cholesterol is associated with a lower risk of infection and cancer1314. He cites historical findings from over 100 years ago suggesting that patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), a condition characterized by very high cholesterol, actually lived longer and had lower rates of infectious diseases14. He concludes that this robust finding indicates that higher cholesterol leads to lower infection risk, while low cholesterol makes one more prone to infection14. He also notes that mental stress can significantly elevate LDL cholesterol1516. While this increase is often misinterpreted as a cause of heart disease, it is actually an effect of stress, possibly indicating a physiological response, though the precise mechanism for this stress-induced rise is not fully known1617.

thank you for listening to another session of the lenny and Maria sanchez PODCAST AND VIDEO show produced and archived at the website notebooklmvideos.com

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Metabolic Health.

Based on the provided source, metabolic health is primarily discussed in the context of metabolic flexibility and how it can be tracked and improved1.

Key points regarding metabolic health from the source:

• Metabolic Flexibility Defined: Metabolic flexibility refers to your body's efficiency in shifting between using fats and carbohydrates for energy1.

• Tracking Metabolic Health: A device called Lumen is mentioned, which is a handheld, pocket-sized device that measures CO2 levels in your breath1. This measurement allows its technology to determine the extent to which your body is burning fats versus carbohydrates1.

• Benefits of Tracking: The podcast host uses Lumen to track metabolism and learned about which foods cause the body to burn mostly fat, mostly carbs, or both1. It also helped understand how long to fast and how hard to exercise to promote fat burning1.

• Optimization: The Lumen device and tracking metabolic flexibility are presented as beneficial for optimizing health for purposes such as weight loss or athletic performance1. The associated app allows users to track results alongside their eating and exercise habits1.

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

A. The "Cholesterol Myth" and its Rebuttal

• The Conventional View: High cholesterol, particularly LDL (often called "bad" cholesterol), is dangerous and a primary cause of heart disease (the "lipid hypothesis"). This view supports the widespread prescription of cholesterol-lowering drugs like statins.

• The Alternative View (Dr. Ravnskov's Argument): High cholesterol is not inherently bad; in fact, it can be beneficial. Dr. Ravnskov argues that the idea that high cholesterol is dangerous is a "criminal action in medical science" driven by the pharmaceutical industry.

B. LDL Cholesterol and the Immune System

• LDL's Immune Function: LDL cholesterol plays a crucial role in the immune system. It adheres to various microorganisms (bacteria, viruses, etc.) and their toxic products.

• Mechanism of Action: Once LDL particles attach to microorganisms, they cause these pathogens to clump together. These LDL-covered clumps are then taken up and inactivated by monocytes (a type of immune cell) through oxidation.

• Oxidized LDL: Oxidized LDL is often seen as dangerous, but Dr. Ravnskov argues it is a result of the immune system actively fighting infection, not a cause of disease itself.

• Infection and Atherosclerosis: Severe infections, particularly those leading to the clumping of LDL-bound microorganisms, can lead to blockages in arteries, especially around the heart where interstitial pressure is higher. This suggests a link between infection, immune response, and atherosclerosis.

• Low LDL and Infection Risk: Studies have shown that individuals with low LDL levels are more susceptible to infection and have a greater risk of coronary artery disease. Animal studies confirm that injecting human LDL into animals infected with lethal microorganisms improves their survival.

C. Critique of Statin Treatment

• Lack of Significant Benefit: A meta-analysis of statin trials revealed that only a very small percentage (1-2%) showed a reduction in mortality risk from myocardial infarction, and some trials even showed an increased mortality risk.

• Misleading Statistical Reporting: The benefits of statins are often exaggerated by reporting relative risk reduction instead of absolute risk reduction. Relative risk can make a trivial absolute improvement (e.g., 1 death vs. 2 deaths in a group of 100) appear as a large percentage reduction (e.g., 50%).

• Side Effects of Statins: Statins have numerous serious side effects, including muscular problems (weakness, pain, atrophy), brain dysfunction, and increased risk of infections. These side effects often appear slowly, leading them to be mistaken for age-related decline. However, stopping statin treatment often resolves these issues.

• No Recommended Use: Dr. Ravnskov asserts that statin drugs are not beneficial for anyone and should not be prescribed, even for conditions like familial hypercholesterolemia.

D. Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH)

• FH Misconception: FH is a genetic condition causing very high LDL cholesterol levels, often cited as proof that high cholesterol is dangerous.

• Ravnskov's Reinterpretation: While a small subset of FH patients dies early from heart disease, this is not due to high cholesterol itself. Instead, this subgroup co-inherits high levels of coagulation factors, which, in combination with an infection, can lead to arterial blockage.

• Longer Lifespan and Benefits: The majority of individuals with FH, even with extremely high cholesterol levels (e.g., 600-800), live to old age and often have a lower risk of infection and cancer. Studies from decades ago even showed FH patients living longer than the general population.

• Statistical Deception: The apparent higher early mortality rate for FH patients as a whole is an artifact of averaging across the entire FH population, when only a small, specific subset experiences early death due to co-inherited factors.

E. Biases in Medical Research and Publication

• Financial Influence: The pharmaceutical industry (drug companies) heavily funds cardiology research and pays professors and medical journals, creating a significant conflict of interest. This financial incentive drives the promotion of cholesterol-lowering drugs and the suppression of dissenting research.

• Cherry-Picking Data: Researchers who support the "cholesterol myth" often cherry-pick studies that show positive results for statins while ignoring others that show no benefit or increased risk.

• Difficulty in Publishing Dissenting Views: Dr. Ravnskov describes significant pushback and difficulty in publishing papers critical of the lipid hypothesis in major medical journals. This is attributed to the journals' financial ties to the drug industry.

• Geographical and Financial Divide: Researchers in certain regions (e.g., Sweden, Japan) are more likely to publish critical papers without reported conflicts of interest, while those supporting statins (often in the US and Europe) frequently have extensive financial ties to drug companies.

F. Other Related Observations

• Stress and Cholesterol/Blood Pressure: Mental stress can rapidly increase both LDL cholesterol (10-50% in 30 minutes) and blood pressure. These are often misinterpreted as causes of heart disease when they may be effects or compensatory responses.

• Blood Pressure: High blood pressure, especially in older individuals, can be a compensatory mechanism to ensure adequate blood flow to the brain as arteries stiffen and narrow. Treating it without addressing the underlying cause may be counterproductive.

• Mortality Curves: For older age groups, studies show that lower cholesterol levels are associated with higher mortality, and the lowest mortality is often seen at cholesterol levels considered "too high" by conventional standards.

II. Quiz

Instructions: Answer the following questions in 2-3 sentences each.

• According to Dr. Ravnskov, what is the primary role of LDL cholesterol in the immune system?

• How does Dr. Ravnskov differentiate between oxidized LDL as a cause of disease versus a result of the immune system?

• Explain how low LDL levels might impact an individual's susceptibility to infection.

• What is the main criticism Dr. Ravnskov has regarding the way statin trial results are often reported?

• What are some of the common side effects of statins mentioned, and why are they often misattributed?

• How does the source material challenge the conventional understanding of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH)?

• What financial incentive does Dr. Ravnskov suggest drives the perpetuation of the "cholesterol myth"?

• Why does Dr. Ravnskov believe it is difficult for dissenting research on cholesterol to be published in major medical journals?

• Explain the correlation versus causation fallacy as it applies to mental stress, high cholesterol, and heart disease.

• What advice does Dr. Ravnskov offer regarding statin treatment based on his research?

Answer Key (Quiz)

• According to Dr. Ravnskov, LDL cholesterol's primary role in the immune system is to adhere to various microorganisms and their toxic products. This action helps to clump pathogens together, making them easier for immune cells like monocytes to identify and inactivate.

• Dr. Ravnskov argues that oxidized LDL is not dangerous in itself but rather a result of the immune system's activity. It signifies that LDL has successfully bound to and is involved in the inactivation of microorganisms during an immune response.

• Individuals with low LDL levels are more susceptible to infection because LDL is crucial for the immune system's ability to combat microorganisms. Animal studies show that a lack of LDL can lead to increased illness and mortality from infections.

• Dr. Ravnskov criticizes the common practice of reporting relative risk reduction instead of absolute risk reduction in statin trials. This method exaggerates the drug's benefits, making a statistically insignificant absolute improvement appear as a substantial percentage reduction.

• Common statin side effects include muscular problems, brain dysfunction, and increased risk of infections. These are often misattributed to natural aging processes because they tend to develop slowly over time, making it hard to link them directly to the drug.

• The source challenges the conventional understanding of FH by stating that early deaths in a subset of FH patients are due to co-inherited coagulation factors, not high cholesterol itself. Most FH patients with very high cholesterol live long lives and show benefits like lower infection and cancer risk.

• Dr. Ravnskov suggests that the perpetuation of the "cholesterol myth" is driven by the pharmaceutical industry's immense financial gains from cholesterol-lowering drugs. Drug companies heavily fund research, pay professors, and influence medical journals, creating a powerful incentive to maintain the narrative that high cholesterol is dangerous.

• Dr. Ravnskov believes it is difficult to publish dissenting research because medical journals receive significant financial support from drug companies. This financial entanglement creates a bias, making journals reluctant to publish papers that could undermine the sales of profitable medications.

• The fallacy applies because mental stress can rapidly increase both cholesterol and blood pressure, which are then often correlated with heart disease. However, Dr. Ravnskov argues these are effects or compensatory responses, not the primary causes, meaning treating these symptoms might not address the root problem.

• Dr. Ravnskov unequivocally advises against statin treatment for anyone, stating that statins are not beneficial and can initiate many diseases. He suggests that patients who stop statin treatment will experience immediate benefits, live longer, and have a better quality of life.

III. Essay Questions

• Analyze the role of financial interests in shaping medical research and public health recommendations, using the "cholesterol myth" as a central case study. Discuss specific examples of how the pharmaceutical industry influences studies, publications, and the overall narrative surrounding cholesterol and heart disease.

• Critically evaluate the evidence presented by Dr. Ravnskov regarding LDL cholesterol's function in the immune system. How does this reframe the understanding of "oxidized LDL" and its connection to atherosclerosis? Discuss the implications of this perspective for current approaches to cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment.

• Discuss the concept of "relative risk" versus "absolute risk" in medical reporting. Explain how the selective use of these metrics can distort public perception and clinical decision-making, using examples from statin trials as detailed in the source material. What ethical considerations arise from such reporting practices?

• Explore the unique insights gained from studying familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) according to Dr. Ravnskov. How does his reinterpretation of FH challenge the direct causal link between high cholesterol and heart disease? What further research or diagnostic approaches might be suggested by this alternative understanding?

• Consider the broader implications of Dr. Ravnskov's claims for medical practice and patient autonomy. If his views are correct, how might the healthcare system need to be reformed? Discuss the challenges of implementing such changes given the deeply entrenched beliefs and financial structures within modern medicine.

IV. Glossary of Key Terms

• Absolute Risk: The actual risk of an event occurring. In a study, it refers to the percentage of people in a group who experience an event over a specific period.

• Atherosclerosis: A disease in which plaque builds up inside your arteries, potentially narrowing them and hindering blood flow.

• Coagulation Factors: Proteins in the blood plasma that initiate the process of blood clotting.

• Cholesterol Myth: Dr. Ravnskov's term for the widely accepted belief that high cholesterol, particularly LDL, is inherently dangerous and a primary cause of heart disease.

• Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH): A genetic disorder characterized by very high levels of LDL cholesterol, often leading to early-onset heart disease in a subset of affected individuals.

• Interstitial Pressure: The pressure exerted by fluid in the interstitial space, the space between cells and outside of blood vessels.

• Lipid Hypothesis: The theory that elevated levels of lipids (fats) in the blood, especially cholesterol, are a primary cause of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease.

• LDL Cholesterol (Low-Density Lipoprotein): Often referred to as "bad" cholesterol, it transports cholesterol from the liver to cells throughout the body. In the context of this source, it's highlighted for its immune functions.

• Meta-analysis: A statistical analysis that combines the results of multiple scientific studies to provide a more comprehensive and statistically robust conclusion.

• Monocytes: A type of white blood cell that can differentiate into macrophages and dendritic cells; crucial components of the innate immune system involved in identifying and engulfing pathogens.

• Myocardial Infarction: Also known as a heart attack, it occurs when blood flow to a part of the heart is blocked, causing heart muscle cells to die.

• Neuroendocrinology: The study of the interaction between the nervous system and the endocrine system (hormones).

• Neurobiology of Behavior: The study of the neural and biological basis of behavior.

• Oxidized LDL: LDL cholesterol that has been damaged by free radicals (oxidation). Conventionally seen as harmful, but in the source, described as a result of the immune response.

• Relative Risk: The ratio of the probability of an event occurring in an exposed group versus the probability of the event occurring in a non-exposed group. It can exaggerate the perceived effect of a treatment or exposure.

• Statins: A class of drugs used to lower cholesterol levels by inhibiting an enzyme involved in cholesterol pr

Here are 20 key takeaway points from the provided source:

I. LDL cholesterol does not cause cardiovascular disease, Guest Professor High cholesterol is beneficial because it participate in the immune system by adhering to all kinds of microorganisms and their toxic products.

H So cholesterol has a function in the immune system which most people don't. don't appreciate.

II. LDL's Direct Role in the Immune System LDL is used in the immune system.

LDL Well uh well it is attached to all kinds of bacteria and microorganisms.

III. Oxidized LDL as a Result, Not a Cause of Danger Oxidized LDL is a common finding in uh in patients with with myioardial function.

And today many most researchers think that it is oxidized which is dangerous but it is not. Oxidized LDL is the result of the immune system.

IV. Low LDL Cholesterol Levels Increase Risk of Disease and Infection Oh, yes. Many studies have also shown that those with low LDL have a greater risk of coronary art disease.

No, the the fact is that the risk is higher with a low cholesterol.

V. Animal Studies Validate LDL's Protective Immune Function I would add that the proof that LDL participated in immune system, it has been documented in many many studies in particular in animal is they some reachers have infected the animals with microorganisms which which kill them but if they also include or injects human LDL they survive.

No. No. Very few know anything about that.

VI. Historical Link Between Severe Infections and Atherosclerosis They found that uh patients who had suffered from a severe infection. They were more atherosclerotic than other people.

People who suffer or die from infectious diseases, they were more atheroscllerotic than healthy people.

VII. Pharmaceutical Industry's Influence on Cardiologists and Research I think the reason is that many or almost all uh cardiological professors, they are well paid. by the drug instit industry.

They do not dare to uh mention this fact.

VIII. Statins Increase the Risk of Infections Oh, yes. And what has been shown.

The infections are more often seen among patients treated with statin.

IX. Selective Reporting and Omission in Statin Meta-Analyses We found I think about 36 trials and the result was that only one or two of these trials have low lowered the risk the mortality risk from cardio from myioardial faction by more than 1%.

Yes, we found that more than 10 trials were not mentioned in the usual meta analysis.

X. Misleading Use of Relative Risk to Exaggerate Statin Benefits Their arguments are are also falsified because they use to demonstrate the relative risk of the highest. The relative risk is not the same as absolute risk.

But the the drug uh the drug paid researchers they claim that the reduction is about 30 to 40%. And if this is the relative risk, the relative risk is in the experiment I I tried to explain whether was one in the treatment group and two in the control group. The relative risk is 50.

XI. Drug Industry's Control Over Medical Journal Publications Yeah. And they also know if they go against the drug companies, they will be unable to publish anything because the drug industry has paid many many uh medical journals also.

The medical journals earn much money from the drug companies. So it's very difficult to publish a critical paper.

XII. Existence of a Skeptical International Research Group I have also organized a a group called thinks the international um well people who who are skeptical against the the cholesterol hypothesis.

What I tend to notice is the researchers that you work with in places like Sweden and Japan, they will publish papers that are critical of the lipid hypothesis that you know cholesterol is bad for heart disease and usually there's no conflicts of interest reported they don't report any financial entanglements with drug companies.

XIII. High Cholesterol Linked to Longer Lifespan in Elderly Individuals And what what what we what I have shown together with some of them is also that those who have high cholesterol, old elderly people with high cholesterol, they live longer than other people.

measuring their cholesterol and who live the longest though. with high cholesterol.

XIV. Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) Deaths are Due to Co-inherited Coagulation Factors But the reason is not their high cholesterol. The reason is they have also inherited high levels of calculation factors.

And those those who die, their cholesterol is not higher than the other who survive.

XV. FH Patients Often Experience Better Health Outcomes They should be happy. Yeah. Because it's beneficial to have high cholesterol.

They have lower risk of infection. They have also a lower risk of cancer.

XVI. Mental Stress Can Rapidly Elevate LDL Cholesterol Well, this is a difficult question. One of the reason is one of the facts is that me mental stress is able to raise LDL cholesterol very much.

It may in short time it's double as a norm as the patient's normal or the individual's normal cholesterol.

XVII. High Blood Pressure as a Compensatory Mechanism, Not Inherently Dangerous So the brain need higher blood pressure to function.

Yeah. But I I have published about that for many decades ago, but I stopped because I realized that if I claim that both high cholesterol and high blood pressure is beneficial. Nobody will believe what I am writing.

XVIII. Low Cholesterol Levels Pose a Greater Mortality Risk No, the the fact is that the risk is higher with a low cholesterol.

We have we have an analyzed many many studies where the researchers have followed old people for several years measuring their cholesterol and who live the longest though. with high cholesterol.

XIX. Statins Cause Serious Side Effects Often Mistaken for Aging The most common is muscular problems. Muscles became weaker and painful.

Uh the brain may suffer from many different uh failures and um the infections are more often seen among patients treated with statin.

XX. Statins Are Not Beneficial for Anyone and Should Be Stopped No. No. Statin drugs are not beneficial. They uh are able to increase to start many many uh diseases.

I'm confident that those who stop studing treatments, they will live longer and they will have a much better life.

1. What is the traditional view of cholesterol, and how does the interviewee's research challenge it?

The traditional view, widely promoted since the 1980s and influenced by figures like Ancel Keys, posits that high cholesterol, particularly LDL ("bad cholesterol"), is dangerous and a primary cause of heart disease. The interviewee's decades of research, however, challenge this "cholesterol myth." They argue that high cholesterol is not inherently bad; rather, it is beneficial because it plays a crucial role in the immune system by adhering to microorganisms and their toxic products. This research suggests that the widely accepted lipid hypothesis is flawed and potentially a "criminal action in medical science" due to its influence on drug companies and their profits.

2. How does LDL cholesterol function in the immune system?

LDL cholesterol is actively involved in the immune system. When the body encounters bacteria or other microorganisms, LDL particles literally stick to them, causing them to clump together. These clumped, oxidized LDL-covered bacteria are then recognized and taken up by monocytes, a type of immune cell, which inactivate the microorganisms through oxidation. This process is a vital part of the body's defense mechanism against infections.

3. What is the connection between infections, LDL, and atherosclerosis?

The interviewee suggests that the link between high LDL and conditions like myocardial infarction (heart attack) is often misinterpreted. While oxidized LDL is frequently found in patients with myocardial infarction, it is not the cause but rather the result of the immune system's activity. If there are too many bacteria and the LDL particles clump them together excessively, these large masses can occlude arteries, particularly those around the heart where interstitial pressure is higher. This perspective is supported by older research, dating back a century, which found that people who suffered from or died of severe infections were more atherosclerotic. Furthermore, studies have shown that animals with low LDL levels are more susceptible to infections and more likely to die when exposed to microorganisms, a risk that is mitigated if human LDL is injected.

4. What are the concerns regarding statin drugs and their efficacy?

Statin drugs, which are widely prescribed to lower LDL cholesterol, are a major point of contention. The interviewee argues that statins are not beneficial and can even be harmful. A meta-analysis of statin lowering trials conducted by the interviewee and colleagues found that only a small fraction (1-2 out of 36 trials) showed a more than 1% reduction in mortality risk from myocardial infarction, and some trials even increased mortality risk. They also highlight that the perceived efficacy of statins is often exaggerated by reporting "relative risk" instead of "absolute risk," making small, insignificant benefits appear substantial. Beyond questionable efficacy, statins are associated with numerous serious side effects, including muscle problems (weakness and pain), brain issues, and an increased risk of infections due to their LDL-lowering effect, which compromises immune function.

5. Why does the mainstream medical community continue to promote the "cholesterol myth" and statin use?

The interviewee attributes the persistence of the "cholesterol myth" and widespread statin prescription to significant financial entanglements between drug companies and the medical establishment, particularly cardiological professors and medical journals. These financial incentives, including substantial payments to supportive researchers, create a system where dissenting views are suppressed. Researchers who challenge the mainstream narrative face difficulties publishing their work in major journals, and their findings are often dismissed without proper response. This systemic bias makes it challenging to disseminate information that could undermine the profitability of cholesterol-lowering drugs.

6. What is Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH), and how is its understanding often flawed?

Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a genetic condition characterized by very high LDL cholesterol levels. The common belief is that FH directly causes early heart disease due to high cholesterol. However, the interviewee argues this is a misleading interpretation. While a subset of FH patients does die early from heart disease, it's not due to their high cholesterol per se. Instead, these individuals also inherit high levels of coagulation factors, which, when combined with the immune system's response to infection (as discussed in question 3), can lead to artery occlusion. Critically, studies show that many people with FH who do not inherit these additional coagulation factors live long lives, often into old age, despite having extremely high cholesterol levels (e.g., 600-800 or more). In fact, the prevalence of FH in patients with acute myocardial infarction is significantly lower than in the general population, suggesting a protective effect for the majority of FH patients.

7. Are there benefits to having naturally higher cholesterol, especially in older age?

Yes, the interviewee's research suggests that higher cholesterol can be beneficial. They found that elderly people with high cholesterol tend to live longer than those with lower levels. This observation is contrary to the common medical advice given to older adults to lower their cholesterol. Additionally, people with genetically high cholesterol, including many FH patients, have been observed to have a lower risk of infection and even a lower risk of cancer. This implies that the body's natural tendency to maintain higher cholesterol levels in certain contexts, or due to genetic predisposition, may be a protective mechanism rather than a health risk.

8. What is the interviewee's final message regarding cholesterol and statins?

The interviewee unequivocally states that the widespread belief in the danger of high cholesterol and the massive prescription of statins constitute "the greatest scandal in modern medicine." They emphasize that statins are not beneficial and can initiate many diseases, urging patients to immediately stop statin treatment. Their confidence stems from observations that individuals who cease statin use often experience a rapid improvement in their health, with side effects disappearing within weeks or months. The core message is that rather than being a threat, high cholesterol, particularly LDL, serves a vital, protective role in the immune system and can contribute to longevity, especially in older age.

convert_to_textConvert to source

Re-evaluating the Cholesterol Paradigm: A Critical Analysis of the "Cholesterol Myth" and Statin Efficacy

A Report on the Mind and Matter Podcast Interview with a Leading Expert

Executive Summary

This report synthesizes insights from a recent interview on the "Mind and Matter" podcast with a distinguished researcher who has dedicated decades to studying cholesterol and its role in human health. The report challenges the long-held "cholesterol myth" – the belief that high cholesterol, particularly low-density lipoprotein (LDL), is inherently dangerous and a primary cause of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Instead, the expert posits that high cholesterol is beneficial, playing a crucial role in the immune system by adhering to and inactivating microorganisms and their toxic products.

The prevailing narrative, supported by an entrenched drug industry, is critically examined, revealing significant methodological flaws in statin clinical trials, including selective citation of studies and misleading reporting of relative versus absolute risk to exaggerate benefits. Furthermore, statin drugs, widely prescribed to lower cholesterol, are highlighted for their numerous serious side effects, such as muscular problems, cognitive impairment, and increased risk of infection, which are often misattributed to natural aging due to their slow onset.

A re-evaluation of Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) suggests that early deaths in a subset of FH patients are due to co-inherited high levels of coagulation factors, not high cholesterol itself. Paradoxically, many FH patients with extremely high cholesterol levels live long, healthy lives, potentially benefiting from lower risks of infection and cancer. The report concludes that the widespread promotion of statins constitutes "the greatest scandal in modern medicine," with the recommendation that statin treatments should be ceased, as they are not beneficial and actively cause harm.

1. Introduction: Challenging the Medical Orthodoxy

The "Mind and Matter" podcast frequently explores the intricate relationship between the mind and body, drawing insights from leading scientists and thinkers. In a particularly enlightening episode, the host, a neuroscientist with a PhD in neuroscience and a background in molecular, developmental, and evolutionary genetics, engaged in a conversation that profoundly questions one of modern medicine's most deeply ingrained beliefs: the danger of high cholesterol.

The guest, a researcher who holds both an MD and PhD and has published over 200 papers and comments on cholesterol, spent decades challenging the conventional understanding of cholesterol. His career, spanning from the 1960s in Sweden, has been marked by a commitment to scientific integrity, even when it led to professional repercussions. He recounts an early experience where he exposed scientific misconduct concerning exaggerated research findings on glomeritis, which ultimately led to his forced departure from a renal clinic and the establishment of his own research. This early encounter with scientific dishonesty foreshadowed his later discoveries regarding the "cholesterol myth".

This report aims to comprehensively detail the expert's arguments, shedding light on the often-overlooked aspects of cholesterol's biological function, the integrity of pharmacological research, and the profound implications for public health.

2. The Challenged Paradigm: Deconstructing the "Cholesterol Myth"

For decades, the medical community, and by extension the public, has been led to believe that high cholesterol, especially LDL, is a significant health risk factor, particularly for cardiovascular disease. The expert unequivocally states that "the cholesterol myth is wrong. High cholesterol is not a bad finding. High cholesterol is beneficial," directly contradicting this widely accepted view.

2.1. Historical Context and Origins of the Myth

The expert traces the genesis of the cholesterol campaign to the 1980s in Sweden, at which point he began to investigate the scientific basis for the claims that high cholesterol was detrimental. His deep dive into the historical literature quickly revealed that the foundations of this belief were tenuous at best. He found "just as many lies about that than than the PhD had found about glomeritis," referring to his earlier experience exposing scientific fraud.

A key figure identified in initiating this campaign was Ancel Keys, who claimed that saturated fat was dangerous. However, the expert's review of all available papers on saturated fat found "no proof for that," and he notes that most researchers have since agreed that saturated fat is not inherently bad. He criticizes Keys and others for selectively including studies that supported their hypothesis while ignoring or misrepresenting those that showed opposing results, a practice he describes as "exaggerated" or "completely contradictory".

2.2. A "Criminal Action" Driven by Financial Interests

The expert labels the claim that high cholesterol is dangerous as "the greatest criminal action in medical science". He asserts that this claim is not based on robust scientific evidence but is "supported by many drug companies" who have reaped billions from cholesterol-lowering drugs, primarily statins. This financial incentive, he argues, has corrupted scientific discourse and medical practice, creating a powerful barrier to the dissemination of contradictory findings.

3. LDL Cholesterol: A Re-evaluation of its Essential Role

Far from being a harmful substance, the expert presents LDL cholesterol as an integral and beneficial component of the human body, particularly within the immune system.

3.1. The Immunological Function of LDL

The primary function of LDL, often dubbed "bad cholesterol," is its active involvement in the immune system. Specifically, "LDL is used in the immune system... it is attached to all kinds of bacteria and microorganisms," as well as their toxic products.

The process unfolds as follows:

• Adherence to Pathogens: LDL particles directly stick to bacteria and other microorganisms, effectively coating them.

• Clumping and Oxidation: Once covered with LDL, these bacteria and microorganisms "attend to each other and [are] taken up by the monocytes". This clumping mechanism is critical for their neutralization. In this process, the LDL associated with the pathogens becomes oxidized.

• Monocyte Inactivation: Monocytes, a type of immune cell, then inactivate these "micron microorganisms by oxidation". The common finding of oxidized LDL in patients with myocardial infarction is not, as widely believed, an indicator of danger, but rather "the result of the immune system" at work, signifying an ongoing immune response.

• Risk of Occlusion: If an infection is severe, leading to an excessive amount of clumped, oxidized LDL and bacteria, these masses can potentially "occlude the arterials," especially those around the heart, where interstitial pressure is higher. This suggests that arterial blockages may be a consequence of an overwhelmed immune response to infection, rather than a direct result of high cholesterol levels themselves.

3.2. Evidence Supporting LDL's Immune Role

The expert highlights compelling evidence for LDL's immune function:

• Increased Infection Risk with Low LDL: Many studies demonstrate that individuals with low LDL levels face a "greater risk of coronary art disease". Furthermore, they are more susceptible to infection.

• Animal Studies: The critical role of LDL in immunity has been "documented in many many studies, in particular in animal[s]". Researchers have shown that if animals are infected with deadly microorganisms, they often succumb. However, if these infected animals are also injected with human LDL, "they survive". This robust finding underscores LDL's protective role against pathogens.

• Historical Link to Atherosclerosis: The connection between infection and atherosclerosis is not new. American researchers "for a century ago" observed that patients who had suffered from severe infections were "more atherosclerotic than other people". Similarly, those who died from infectious diseases exhibited greater atherosclerosis than healthy individuals. This historical data strongly suggests that atherosclerosis is intricately linked to infectious processes, not merely high cholesterol.

Despite this substantial body of evidence, the expert laments that "very few are aware of that". He attributes this lack of awareness to the strong financial influence of the drug industry, which discourages the discussion of facts that might undermine the market for cholesterol-lowering drugs.

4. The Statin Paradox: Questioning Efficacy and Unveiling Harms

Statins are among the most widely prescribed drugs globally, designed to lower LDL cholesterol, the "so-called bad cholesterol". However, the expert presents a scathing critique of their efficacy and safety, arguing that their widespread use is not only unnecessary but also actively harmful.

4.1. Methodological Flaws and Data Manipulation in Clinical Trials

The perceived benefits of statins, the expert contends, are largely a result of flawed research methodologies and biased reporting in clinical trials and meta-analyses:

• Cherry-picking of Studies: A comprehensive meta-analysis conducted by the expert and his team, encompassing all statin-lowering trials, found a stark contrast to commonly cited reviews. While "believers" in statins often cited a smaller number of trials, his team identified "about 36 trials." Crucially, "more than 10 trials were not mentioned in the usual meta-analyses" that typically support statin benefits. This selective inclusion of data paints a misleadingly positive picture.

• Misrepresentation of Risk: Relative vs. Absolute: The core argument for statin efficacy often hinges on a statistical deception: the reporting of relative risk reduction instead of absolute risk reduction.

  • Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR): If, in an experiment with 100 people on statins and 100 on placebo, two die in the placebo group and one in the statin group, the absolute risk reduction is 1%. This is a "tiny and... not significant" outcome.

  • Relative Risk Reduction (RRR): However, drug-funded researchers claim reductions of "30 to 40%," by stating the relative risk. In the same example, since one death is half of two deaths, the relative risk reduction is 50%.

  • Exaggeration of Effect: This practice "makes a trivial result look like an amazing result" and is "basically a way of reporting results that greatly exaggerates the effect". The expert notes this tactic was also widely used during the COVID-19 pandemic for vaccine efficacy reporting, where "100% efficacy" often meant a "tiny improvement in absolute risk".

The expert asserts that those who report results in this manner are likely fully aware of the deceptive nature of their methods, as "it's very easy to understand". Their motivations are often tied to financial incentives from the drug industry.

4.2. Pervasive Influence of the Drug Industry

The financial entanglements between the drug industry and the medical establishment are presented as a central reason for the perpetuation of the "cholesterol myth" and the widespread prescription of statins:

• Funding of Key Opinion Leaders: Many "cardiological professors, they are well paid by the drug industry," leading them to support the industry's claims.

• Control over Medical Journals: The drug industry also exerts influence over "many medical journals," making it "very difficult to publish a critical paper". The expert himself has faced significant pushback, with many of his critical papers being rejected "without reasons". This creates a system where dissenting views are suppressed, preventing a balanced scientific discourse.

• Geographical Bias in Research: A noticeable pattern observed by the podcast host and confirmed by the expert is that researchers critical of the lipid hypothesis (e.g., from Sweden, Japan) often report "no conflicts of interest," while papers favoring statins, often from the US and Europe, tend to have "very very very long financial entanglements" sections. This further highlights the pervasive financial bias in the field.

4.3. Serious Side Effects and Risks of Statin Treatment

Beyond their questionable efficacy, statins are associated with a range of serious and often under-recognized side effects:

• Increased Risk of Infection: The expert states that statin use leads to a "higher risk for infection". This is a logical consequence of lowering LDL, given its critical role in immune function.

• Muscular Problems: "The most common is muscular problems," including weaker and painful muscles. This is effectively muscle atrophy.

• Neurological Impairment: Statins can cause the "brain may suffer from many different failures".

• Insulin Resistance: New studies are emerging that link statins to worsened insulin resistance and interference with other biological processes.

• Mitochondrial Toxicity: Statins are also "known to be at least mild mitochondrial toxins in different ways".

• Delayed Onset and Misattribution: A major problem is that "most of these side effects they do not occur immediately," but rather manifest slowly over time. This delayed onset leads many researchers and clinicians to mistake these side effects for age-related decline, as older individuals naturally experience muscle weakness and cognitive changes. However, studies have shown that "those with these side effects, they became healthy when they stop the statin treatment," with side effects disappearing over weeks or months.

The expert emphatically states that "statin drugs are not beneficial" and "are able to increase to start many many diseases". He goes so far as to say that no one needs to be on a statin, including individuals with Familial Hypercholesterolemia. Instead, he suggests that patients should "stop statin treatment immediately" as they will "feel benefit" and "live longer".

5. Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH): A Case Study in Misinterpretation

Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a genetic condition characterized by very high LDL cholesterol levels. It is often cited as definitive proof that high cholesterol causes heart disease, given that a subset of FH patients experience early cardiovascular events. However, the expert presents a nuanced reinterpretation of this condition, arguing that the early deaths are not directly caused by high cholesterol.

5.1. Co-inherited Coagulation Factors as the True Culprit

The key to understanding FH, according to the expert, lies in recognizing a crucial co-factor: "The reason is not their high cholesterol. The reason is they have also inherited high levels of calculation factors".

• Genetic Linkage: A subset of individuals with FH co-inherit "high levels of coagulation factors". These factors increase the propensity for blood to clot and clump, a mechanism that can be exacerbated by infections as discussed earlier.

• Mechanism of Death: It is this inherited predisposition to elevated coagulation, rather than the high cholesterol itself, that leads to early deaths in this specific subset of FH patients.

• Lack of Cholesterol Difference: Crucially, if one compares FH patients who die early to those who live to old age, "their cholesterol is not higher than the other who survive". The only discernible difference is in their "coagulation system". This directly refutes the idea that high cholesterol levels are the primary cause of early mortality in FH.

5.2. Longevity and Benefits for Most FH Patients

Contrary to the prevailing narrative, the expert emphasizes that the vast majority of FH patients with very high cholesterol levels do not die early.

• Extended Lifespan: Many individuals with FH, some with cholesterol levels as high as "600, 700, 800 or more," live to be elderly. They "should be happy" to have high cholesterol.

• Lower Risk of Infection and Cancer: Based on the beneficial role of cholesterol in the immune system, people with genetically high cholesterol levels, including those with FH, exhibit a "lower risk of infection" and even a "lower risk of cancer". This "robust finding" further underscores the protective nature of high cholesterol.

• Statistical Misleading: The perception that "the average death rate of everyone with FH is a younger age" is a statistical artifact. It arises because a "small subset" with the co-inherited coagulation factors dies earlier, pulling down the average, while the majority of FH patients live long lives.

• Historical Data: A study from around 1980 even found that people with familial hypercholesterolemia "live longer than other people" and their mortality from infectious diseases was "much lower".

• Prevalence Data Discrepancy: A study of almost 4 million patients with acute myocardial infarction found that only 0.06% had FH, despite FH having a general population prevalence of about 0.3%. This means the number of FH patients in the general population is "five to six times higher" than their representation among myocardial infarction patients. This discrepancy strongly suggests a "benefit to high to have [familial] hypercholesterolemia," as if high cholesterol were truly the cause of death, "you would have expected to see more" FH patients among those suffering heart attacks.

This re-evaluation of FH fundamentally challenges the premise that high cholesterol is universally dangerous, instead highlighting the importance of genetic co-factors and the protective role of cholesterol in immunity.

6. Stress, Cholesterol, and Blood Pressure: Symptoms, Not Causes

The expert also addresses other common risk factors for cardiovascular disease, such as high cholesterol and high blood pressure, arguing that these are often misinterpreted as primary causes when they may, in fact, be symptoms or compensatory mechanisms.

6.1. Mental Stress and Elevated Cholesterol

It is a well-documented phenomenon that "mental stress is able to raise LDL cholesterol very much". In fact, stress can cause cholesterol levels to "double... in short time" or increase by "10 to 50% in just a half hour".

• Correlation vs. Causation: This rapid increase is often seen as "proof that LDL is the cause" of heart disease. However, the expert clarifies that it is "not the cause. It's an effect of heart disease," or rather, an effect of the underlying stress and physiological response. This is a classic example of the "correlation versus causation fallacy".

• Physiological Response: While the exact biological mechanism by which stress elevates cholesterol is not explicitly detailed, the fact that it does so quickly and significantly suggests a dynamic role for cholesterol beyond simple dietary intake or genetic predisposition.

6.2. High Blood Pressure as a Compensatory Mechanism

Similarly, high blood pressure, another widely targeted risk factor, is re-evaluated by the expert:

• Age-Related Arterial Changes: As people age, "the arteries become more... the lumen becomes much smaller". This stiffening and narrowing of arteries, particularly those leading to the brain, necessitate higher pressure to ensure adequate blood flow.

• Brain Function: The brain, in particular, "need[s] higher blood pressure to function" as arteries become less pliable. Therefore, high blood pressure in older individuals is often a "compensatory change" – the body's natural response to maintain vital organ perfusion.

• Misinterpretation and Treatment: Just like high cholesterol, high blood pressure is often viewed as "dangerous" and targeted with medications. However, if it's a compensatory mechanism, then "suppressing those symptoms might not work at all or even be dangerous". The expert previously conducted research on this but stopped because he realized that arguing both high cholesterol and high blood pressure are beneficial would make him seem like an "idiot" to a public convinced otherwise.

6.3. The Danger of Low Cholesterol and Low Blood Pressure

A critical insight shared by the expert concerns the risks associated with low cholesterol and low blood pressure, particularly in older populations:

• Increased Mortality with Low Cholesterol: Mortality curves often show increased risk when cholesterol is too low, and this risk can be "even steeper on the low side" than on the high side.

• Longevity with High Cholesterol in Elderly: For older age groups, specifically "people above roughly the age of 60," those with higher cholesterol levels actually "live longer than other people". Many studies have demonstrated this, showing that among old people followed for several years, those with high cholesterol "live the longest".

• Misguided Prescriptions for Elderly: Despite this evidence, elderly individuals are frequently prescribed statins by doctors who deem their cholesterol "too high," even when those levels are demonstrably associated with lower mortality.

• Personal Example: The expert, at 90 years old, confirms his own cholesterol levels are "above the normal" for the general population and he has "never taken a statin".

This highlights a fundamental disconnect between empirical data on mortality risk and prevailing clinical guidelines, often driven by the symptomatic treatment paradigm rather than understanding underlying physiological needs.

7. Key Findings and Recommendations

Based on the expert's extensive research and insights, the following key findings challenge the current medical consensus and demand urgent re-evaluation:

7.1. Key Findings

• LDL Cholesterol is Beneficial for Immune System: LDL plays an essential role in immunity by binding to and aiding in the elimination of microorganisms and their toxins. Oxidized LDL is a sign of an active immune response, not inherently dangerous.

• Atherosclerosis is Linked to Infection: Historical and contemporary evidence suggests a strong connection between severe infections and atherosclerosis, implying a role for immune system overload rather than direct cholesterol harm.

• "Cholesterol Myth" is Scientifically Unfounded: The campaign against high cholesterol, initiated by figures like Ancel Keys, lacked robust scientific proof and was based on selective data presentation.

• Statin Trials are Flawed and Biased: Meta-analyses supporting statins often cherry-pick studies and use misleading "relative risk" reporting to exaggerate minor benefits, concealing the true, often negligible, "absolute risk" reduction.

• Statins Have Serious, Under-recognized Side Effects: These include muscle pain and weakness, cognitive issues, increased infection risk, and worsened insulin resistance. Their slow onset often leads to misattribution as age-related decline.

• Drug Industry Drives the Narrative: Powerful financial incentives from pharmaceutical companies influence cardiological professors, suppress critical research, and bias medical journal publications, perpetuating the "cholesterol myth" for profit.

• Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) Misinterpretation: Early deaths in a subset of FH patients are caused by co-inherited coagulation factors, not high cholesterol itself. Most FH patients with very high cholesterol live long, healthy lives and exhibit lower risks of infection and cancer.

• High Cholesterol and Blood Pressure Can Be Protective: Mental stress can acutely raise cholesterol and blood pressure as physiological responses. In elderly individuals, higher cholesterol is associated with greater longevity, and elevated blood pressure can be a compensatory mechanism to maintain vital organ perfusion. Low cholesterol is associated with higher mortality.

7.2. Recommendations

Given the comprehensive critique and evidence presented, the expert's recommendations are clear and direct:

• Cease Statin Prescription: "No one needs to be on a statin." Statin drugs are not beneficial and actively cause harm by increasing the risk of many diseases.

• Discontinue Existing Statin Treatments: Patients currently on statins should "stop statin treatment immediately," as their side effects are reversible upon cessation, and they will experience improved health and longevity. This applies even to individuals with Familial Hypercholesterolemia.

• Promote Open Scientific Discourse: Researchers and medical professionals must actively challenge the prevailing "cholesterol myth" and financial influences that suppress critical findings.

• Re-evaluate Clinical Guidelines: Current cholesterol and blood pressure guidelines, particularly for older adults, must be urgently revised to align with evidence showing the benefits of higher levels and the dangers of lower levels in certain populations.

• Investigate Underlying Causes of Disease: Focus should shift from symptom suppression (e.g., lowering cholesterol or blood pressure) to understanding and addressing the fundamental underlying causes of cardiovascular disease, such as infections and chronic stress.

8. Conclusion: A Call for Scientific Integrity and Public Health

The expert concludes by stating that the "cholesterol myth" and the widespread use of statins represent "the greatest scandal in modern medicine". This strong statement underscores the profound moral and public health implications of perpetuating a paradigm that he argues is scientifically unfounded and driven by financial interests.

His decades of persistent research, often met with resistance and difficulty in publishing, highlight a systemic problem within medical science where established dogma and commercial pressures can override objective evidence. The expert's unwavering commitment as a physician to inform millions suffering from side effects serves as a powerful call to action for the medical community and the public.

The information presented in this report challenges individuals to question widely accepted medical advice, particularly concerning cholesterol and statin use. By understanding the beneficial roles of LDL cholesterol and the potential harms of unnecessary medication, patients can make more informed decisions about their health, and medical professionals can strive for a more evidence-based and patient-centric approach to cardiovascular health. The ultimate goal, as echoed by the expert, is to ensure that healthcare decisions are made based on scientific truth, not on financially motivated narratives, ultimately improving the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

9. About the Expert

The insights in this report are primarily drawn from an interview with a distinguished researcher whose background includes:

• A PhD in neuroscience, with a focus on neuroendocrinology and the neurobiology of behavior.

• Specialization in molecular, developmental, and evolutionary genetics.

• An MD and PhD, signifying a deep understanding of both clinical medicine and scientific research.

• A career spanning many years, starting in the 1960s in Sweden.

• Authorship of over 200 published papers and comments on cholesterol, challenging the conventional wisdom.

• Founder of a group called "THINKS" (The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics), comprising 20-25 members.

His rigorous scientific background and long-standing dedication to challenging the "cholesterol myth" provide a critical perspective on this important health topic.

audio

This podcast episode fundamentally challenges the conventional understanding of cholesterol, particularly LDL, often dubbed "bad cholesterol." The hosts explain an expert's view that high cholesterol isn't inherently harmful; instead, LDL plays a vital, protective role in the immune system, acting as "patrol boats" that bind to pathogens and toxins for removal, with "oxidized LDL" being evidence of this defensive battle. The discussion critiques the basis of the "cholesterol campaign," alleging selective reporting in early research and questioning the efficacy of statins by highlighting how absolute risk reduction is often exaggerated by drug companies using relative risk, and by pointing out potential financial conflicts of interest within the medical community. Furthermore, the episode re-evaluates familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), suggesting that early deaths in some FH patients are linked to coagulation factors rather than cholesterol itself, and that higher cholesterol may even offer benefits like reduced infection risk. Finally, the source details significant statin side effects often mistaken for aging, asserting that widespread statin use could be causing more harm than good, thus calling for a critical re-evaluation of this widely prescribed medication. 

Discuss Cholesterol Rethink.

The "Cholesterol Rethink" presented in the sources fundamentally challenges the long-standing belief that high cholesterol is inherently harmful, suggesting that this narrative might be missing crucial pieces or even be flawed12. Instead, it proposes that high cholesterol, particularly LDL ("bad cholesterol"), plays a vital and beneficial role in the immune system34.

Here are the key aspects of this rethinking:

• LDL as an Immune System Component

    ◦ Functional Role: LDL particles are described as "tiny patrol boats" that actively participate in the body's defense mechanisms3.... They attach themselves to bacteria, microorganisms, and their toxic byproducts, causing them to clump together5....

    ◦ Oxidized LDL Re-evaluated: Once invaders are coated with LDL and clumped, specific immune cells called monocytes recognize and take them up, inactivating them through oxidation56. Therefore, oxidized LDL, often given a "bad rap," is actually "battle debris"—evidence of the immune system actively fighting an infection, not the dangerous culprit itself68.

    ◦ Blockages as a Consequence: In severe infections, an overwhelming number of these LDL-coated clumps can occasionally block small arteries, especially around the heart, due to higher interstitial pressure7.... This is seen as a consequence of an intense immune response, not cholesterol being inherently bad9.

    ◦ Evidence of Protective Role:

        ▪ Animal studies have shown that injecting human LDL into animals infected with otherwise lethal microorganisms often helps them survive, highlighting LDL's protective role9....

        ▪ Historical American research from over a century ago indicated that patients who died from infectious diseases were often more atherosclerotic, suggesting a long-overlooked connection between infection and arterial health1113.

        ▪ People with higher cholesterol, including those with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), may have a lower risk of infection and potentially a lower risk of cancer1415. Elderly individuals with higher cholesterol often live longer and exhibit better overall health14....

• Challenging the "Cholesterol Campaign" and Ancel Keys

    ◦ Expert's Motivation: The expert began questioning the mainstream cholesterol campaign in the 1980s in Sweden because he could not recall solid scientific proof that high cholesterol was inherently bad18....

    ◦ Discovery of Falsified Data: His re-examination of old scientific papers revealed "just as many lies" in cholesterol research as he had previously found in falsified kidney research1920.

    ◦ Criticism of Ancel Keys: Ancel Keys, central to linking saturated fat, cholesterol, and heart disease, was found to have included studies in his reviews that often showed the opposite of his claims, downplaying contradictory findings2122.

    ◦ "Greatest Criminal Action": The expert considers claiming high cholesterol is dangerous to be "the greatest criminal action in medical science," linking it directly to the billions of dollars in profits made by drug companies from cholesterol-lowering drugs, primarily statins21....

• Re-evaluation of Statin Efficacy and Data Reporting

    ◦ Limited Mortality Reduction: A comprehensive meta-analysis by the expert's group of about 36 statin-lowering trials found that only one or two trials lowered the mortality risk from a heart attack by more than 1%2627.

    ◦ Increased Mortality Risk: Crucially, several trials actually showed an increase in the risk of mortality for those taking statins2728.

    ◦ Omitted Data: Over 10 of these trials were often omitted from typical meta-analyses used to support widespread statin use2829.

    ◦ Relative vs. Absolute Risk: A key issue highlighted is the deceptive use of relative risk reduction (e.g., 50%) instead of absolute risk reduction (e.g., 1%) to exaggerate a drug's perceived effect, misleading doctors and patients29....

• Conflicts of Interest

    ◦ Financial Ties: The expert observed a pattern where researchers critical of the lipid hypothesis (e.g., from Sweden or Japan) often reported no financial conflicts, while strong advocates for statins (e.g., from the US or Europe) frequently had "very, very long conflict of interest sections" detailing extensive financial ties to the drug industry3637.

    ◦ Medical Journals' Role: Medical journals themselves earn significant money from drug company advertising and reprints, making it incredibly difficult to publish critical papers that challenge the profitable status quo38....

• Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) Misconception

    ◦ Misconception: FH, a genetic condition with extremely high cholesterol levels, is commonly cited as proof that high cholesterol causes early heart disease42.

    ◦ Actual Cause of Early Death: The expert argues that early death in some FH patients is not due to their high cholesterol, but to the co-inheritance of high levels of coagulation (blood clotting) factors43....

    ◦ Compelling Evidence:

        ▪ A study of nearly 4 million heart attack patients showed that only 0.06% had FH, while FH prevalence in the general population is around 0.3%4748. This means FH patients are five to six times underrepresented among heart attack patients, strongly suggesting high cholesterol itself is not the primary driver4749.

        ▪ Among FH patients, those who die early do not generally have higher cholesterol levels than those who live long lives; the main difference lies in their coagulation systems4650.

        ▪ Many individuals with FH, despite cholesterol levels of 600-800 or higher, live to be quite elderly14....

        ▪ A 1980s study even suggested that people with FH, on average, lived longer than others and had lower rates of infectious diseases1451.

• Other Factors Affecting Cholesterol Levels

    ◦ Mental Stress: Mental stress can cause LDL cholesterol to shoot up by 10-50% (sometimes doubling) in as little as half an hour52.... This rapid increase is often mistaken as the cause of heart disease when it might merely be an effect of the underlying stress5355.

    ◦ High Blood Pressure in Elderly: High blood pressure in older people might be a compensatory mechanism to ensure sufficient blood flow to vital organs, particularly the brain, as arteries naturally narrow with age56.... Aggressively lowering it might not always be beneficial5759.

• Documented Dangers of Statins

    ◦ Serious Side Effects: Statins are associated with several serious and common side effects, including:

        ▪ Muscular problems: weakness, pain, and muscle wasting (atrophy)6061.

        ▪ Cognitive problems: memory loss and confusion, sometimes described as "brain failures"6061.

        ▪ Increased frequency of infections: potentially due to the suppression of cholesterol's immune role60....

    ◦ Mistaken for Aging: These side effects often appear slowly over years, leading people to attribute them to natural aging rather than the medication6264.

    ◦ Reversibility: Many studies show that these side effects often disappear within weeks or months when people stop taking statins, strongly indicating the medication as the cause6566.

    ◦ Expert's Stance: The expert views statin treatment as unnecessary for anyone, stating they are "not beneficial" and can "increase to start many many diseases"67. He would even recommend immediate cessation for FH patients, citing the potential benefits of high cholesterol67.

This cholesterol rethink highlights a nuanced and often counterintuitive picture, prompting a critical re-evaluation of medical guidelines and personal health choices25....

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Statin Efficacy.

The efficacy of statins, widely prescribed cholesterol-lowering drugs, is profoundly questioned and critiqued by an expert highlighted in the sources, who describes the claim that high cholesterol is dangerous as "the greatest criminal action in medical science"1.... This strong accusation is linked to the massive profits made by drug companies from these medications1....

Here's a breakdown of the expert's perspective on statin efficacy:

• Limited Mortality Reduction:

    ◦ A comprehensive meta-analysis conducted by the expert's group, which examined about 36 statin-lowering trials (more than typically included by statin proponents), found stark results56.

    ◦ Only one or two of these trials showed a reduction in the mortality risk from a heart attack (myocardial infarction) by more than 1%5....

    ◦ Crucially, several trials actually demonstrated an increase in the risk of mortality for those taking statins67.

    ◦ The expert also noted that over 10 of these trials were not mentioned in the typical meta-analyses used to support widespread statin use, suggesting a potential skewing of results due to data exclusion7....

• Misleading Reporting: Relative vs. Absolute Risk:

    ◦ A significant point of concern is the way statin trial results are reported, particularly the use of relative risk reduction over absolute risk reduction810.

    ◦ Absolute risk reduction represents the actual difference in the number of events (e.g., deaths) between a treated group and a control group. For instance, if two people in a placebo group die and one in a statin group dies, the absolute risk reduction is 1% (one person out of 100)10.... This figure is often statistically insignificant1012.

    ◦ However, drug company-funded researchers frequently report this as a relative risk reduction of 50% (because one death is half of two deaths), making a "trivial, possibly random difference look incredibly impactful"11.... This method "greatly exaggerates the drug's perceived effect" and can be "incredibly misleading for doctors and patients alike"1113.

• Pervasive Side Effects Mistaken for Aging:

    ◦ Beyond the questionable benefits, the expert highlights several serious and common side effects associated with statin treatment1415:

        ▪ Muscular problems: Including weakness, pain, and even muscle wasting or atrophy14....

        ▪ Cognitive problems: Described as "brain failures," memory loss, and confusion1415.

        ▪ Increased frequency of infections: This is particularly noteworthy given the expert's theory that LDL cholesterol plays a vital role in the immune system by attaching to and inactivating microorganisms14.... Lowering cholesterol might therefore suppress this protective immune function1921.

    ◦ A critical issue is that these side effects often develop slowly over years and are frequently misattributed to the natural process of aging1619. Since statins are typically started in middle age and taken for decades, people may mistakenly believe their muscle weakness or memory lapses are simply due to getting older1619.

    ◦ Importantly, many studies have shown that these side effects often disappear within weeks or months when people stop taking statins, which is a strong indicator that the medication, not aging, was the cause2223.

    ◦ The expert firmly states that statin drugs are not beneficial and can "increase to start many many diseases"24. He recommends that patients, even those with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), stop statin treatment immediately, asserting that they would live longer and experience a much better quality of life2425.

• Conflicts of Interest Influencing Research:

    ◦ The expert observed a pattern where researchers critical of the lipid hypothesis (cholesterol-heart disease theory), often from countries like Sweden or Japan, tend to report no financial conflicts of interest2627.

    ◦ In contrast, those who strongly advocate for statins, frequently based in the US or Europe, often have "very, very long conflict of interest sections" in their papers, detailing extensive financial ties to the drug industry4....

    ◦ Medical journals themselves also derive significant income from drug companies through advertising and reprints, which can make it "incredibly difficult to get critical papers published" that challenge the profitable status quo4....

In summary, the sources present a strong challenge to the widely accepted narrative of statin efficacy, suggesting that their benefits are minimal in absolute terms, their side effects are common and often misdiagnosed, and the research supporting their widespread use may be influenced by financial conflicts4....

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Immune System Role.

The provided sources introduce a profoundly different perspective on cholesterol, particularly its role in the immune system, challenging the long-standing narrative that high cholesterol is inherently harmful1....

Here's a breakdown of the proposed immune system role of cholesterol:

• LDL as Immune Defenders: The core insight is that LDL cholesterol, often labeled as "bad cholesterol," plays a vital, active role in the body's defense mechanisms34. Instead of just passively transporting fat, LDL particles function like "tiny patrol boats"5.

• Targeting Microorganisms: These LDL particles actively attach themselves to various bacteria, other microorganisms, and their toxic byproducts56. This action is described as literally "sticking to the bad stuff"56.

• Clumping and Inactivation: Once these invaders are coated with LDL, they begin to clump together5.... Specific immune cells, known as monocytes (a type of white blood cell), then recognize these LDL-covered clumps56. These monocytes take up the clumps and inactivate the microorganisms through a process called oxidation56.

• Oxidized LDL as "Battle Debris": This perspective fundamentally redefines oxidized LDL, which often receives a negative reputation8. Instead of being a dangerous culprit, oxidized LDL is presented as a result of the immune system actively fighting off an infection68. It is described as "evidence of battle" or "battle debris," rather than the weapon itself8.

• Blockages as a Consequence of Intense Immune Response: In cases of severe infections, where there's an overwhelming number of these LDL-coated clumps, they can occasionally block small arteries7.... This might be particularly true around the heart where higher interstitial pressure makes tiny vessels more vulnerable79. However, this blockage is seen as a consequence of an intense immune response, not cholesterol being inherently bad9.

• Evidence Supporting LDL's Protective Role:

    ◦ Animal Studies: Animal studies have shown that if animals are infected with microorganisms that would normally be lethal, but are then injected with human LDL, they often survive9.... This powerfully highlights LDL's protective role11.

    ◦ Historical American Research: Over a century ago, American research indicated that patients who died from infectious diseases were actually more atherosclerotic1113. This suggests a long-overlooked connection between infection and arterial health1113.

    ◦ Low LDL and Risk: Many studies have also indicated that individuals with low LDL levels have a greater risk of coronary artery disease12.

    ◦ Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) Re-evaluation: This condition, characterized by extremely high cholesterol levels, is often cited as proof that high cholesterol causes early heart disease14. However, the expert argues this is a misconception14.

        ▪ A large study of nearly 4 million heart attack patients found that only 0.06% had FH, which is five to six times underrepresented compared to the general population prevalence of FH (around 0.3%)15.... This finding strongly suggests that high cholesterol itself is not the primary driver of these events1517.

        ▪ Among FH patients, those who die early do not generally have higher cholesterol levels than FH patients who live long lives1920. The main difference identified is co-inherited high levels of coagulation (blood clotting) factors, suggesting that it's the clotting tendency, not cholesterol, that's the real killer in those specific cases19....

        ▪ Many individuals with FH, despite having cholesterol levels of 600, 700, 800, or even higher, live to be quite elderly19....

        ▪ A study from the 1980s even suggested that people with FH, on average, lived longer than others and had lower rates of infectious diseases, reinforcing the immune benefit idea2426.

        ▪ It is argued that people with higher cholesterol, including those with FH, might actually have a lower risk of infection and potentially a lower risk of cancer2425.

    ◦ Elderly and High Cholesterol: Elderly individuals with higher cholesterol are often observed to live longer and appear to have better overall health24....

• Impact of Statins on the Immune System: The expert highlights that if cholesterol helps fight infection, then lowering it through statin medication might make individuals more susceptible to infections29.... An increased frequency of infections is listed as one of the serious side effects associated with statin treatment2932.

This "surprising science" offers an "eye-opening perspective" that profoundly challenges the conventional view of cholesterol, reframing it from a dangerous culprit to a vital defense mechanism1.... The expert views the claim that high cholesterol is dangerous as "the greatest criminal action in medical science" due to the widespread use of cholesterol-lowering drugs like statins, which he believes cause harm by suppressing this beneficial immune function34....

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Medical Misconceptions.

The sources present a strong challenge to several deeply ingrained medical misconceptions, primarily revolving around cholesterol, its role in the human body, and the widespread use of statins1. The podcast hosts and an expert who has spent decades researching cholesterol articulate a narrative that suggests many commonly held beliefs are "fundamentally flawed" or "missing some really crucial pieces"1.

Here are the key medical misconceptions discussed:

• High Cholesterol (especially LDL) as Inherently Harmful:

    ◦ The Misconception: For decades, high cholesterol, particularly LDL ("bad cholesterol"), has been portrayed as a villain directly causing heart disease2....

    ◦ The Rebuttal: The expert argues that high cholesterol is not inherently harmful but actually beneficial because it plays a vital, functional role in our immune system35. LDL particles act like "tiny patrol boats" that attach to bacteria, microorganisms, and their toxic byproducts67. Once coated with LDL, these invaders clump together and are then taken up and inactivated by specific immune cells (monocytes) through oxidation67.

    ◦ Oxidized LDL is a result of the immune response: Oxidized LDL, often given a bad rap, is actually "evidence of battle," or "battle debris," rather than the dangerous culprit itself78. It indicates the immune system is actively fighting an infection8.

    ◦ Evidence for LDL's Protective Role: Animal studies have shown that injecting human LDL can help animals survive otherwise lethal microorganism infections910. Historically, American research from over a century ago observed that patients who died from infectious diseases were often more atherosclerotic, suggesting a long-standing link between infection and arterial health1112. Furthermore, people with higher cholesterol, including those with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), may have a lower risk of infection and potentially cancer, and elderly individuals with higher cholesterol often live longer and appear to have better overall health13....

• Ancel Keys' Research and the Origin of the Cholesterol Campaign:

    ◦ The Misconception: Ancel Keys is widely credited with establishing the link between saturated fat, cholesterol, and heart disease through studies like the Seven Countries Study1718.

    ◦ The Rebuttal: The expert's re-examination of old scientific papers revealed what he described as "just as many lies" in cholesterol research as he had found in falsified kidney research419. He found that Keys' reviews often included studies that showed the opposite of his claims, with contradictory findings either not highlighted or downplayed1720. This selective reporting distorted the overall picture1720. The expert considers claiming high cholesterol is dangerous to be "the greatest criminal action in medical science"17....

• Statin Efficacy and the Reporting of Clinical Trial Data:

    ◦ The Misconception: Statins are highly effective at preventing heart attacks and reducing mortality, as suggested by widely cited meta-analyses23.

    ◦ The Rebuttal: A comprehensive meta-analysis of about 36 statin-lowering trials by the expert's group found that:

        ▪ Only one or two trials lowered the mortality risk from a heart attack by more than 1%2324.

        ▪ Several trials actually showed an increase in the risk of mortality for those taking statins2425.

        ▪ More than 10 of these trials were omitted from typical meta-analyses used to support widespread statin use, potentially skewing the results2526.

    ◦ Exaggeration via Relative vs. Absolute Risk: Drug company-funded researchers frequently exaggerate drug effects by reporting relative risk reduction instead of absolute risk reduction26.... For example, if two people die in a placebo group and one in a statin group (out of 100 each), the absolute risk reduction is 1%. However, this can be reported as a 50% relative risk reduction (one death is half of two), making a "trivial, possibly random difference look incredibly impactful" and "incredibly misleading"2829.

• Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) as Definitive Proof of Cholesterol's Harm:

    ◦ The Misconception: FH, a genetic condition causing extremely high cholesterol, is considered textbook proof that high cholesterol is dangerous and leads to early heart disease30. People with FH are perceived to die young from heart attacks because of their high cholesterol30.

    ◦ The Rebuttal: The expert calls this a "profound misconception"30. He argues that the real reason for early death in some FH patients (a key distinction) is not their high cholesterol but the co-inheritance of high levels of coagulation (blood clotting) factors31....

    ◦ Evidence Challenging the FH Misconception:

        ▪ A massive study of nearly 4 million acute heart attack patients found that only 0.06% had FH, even though the general population prevalence of FH is around 0.3%. This means FH patients are five to six times underrepresented among heart attack patients, strongly suggesting high cholesterol itself is not the primary driver of these events35....

        ▪ Among FH patients, those who die early do not generally have higher cholesterol levels than those who live long lives; the main difference lies in their coagulation systems3338.

        ▪ Many individuals with FH live to be quite elderly, despite having cholesterol levels of 600-800 or even higher13....

        ▪ An older study from the 1980s even suggested that people with FH, on average, lived longer and had lower rates of infectious diseases1316.

• Stress-Induced High Cholesterol as a Cause of Heart Disease:

    ◦ The Misconception: High cholesterol often found in stressed individuals is considered a cause of their heart problems39.

    ◦ The Rebuttal: Mental stress can cause LDL cholesterol to shoot up by 10-50% in as little as half an hour, sometimes even doubling39.... However, the high cholesterol in this context is likely an effect of the underlying stress or condition, rather than the root cause of the heart problem itself—a classic correlation versus causation fallacy3941.

• High Blood Pressure in the Elderly as Inherently Dangerous:

    ◦ The Misconception: High blood pressure in older individuals is always dangerous and must be aggressively lowered42.

    ◦ The Rebuttal: The expert suggests that high blood pressure in the elderly might sometimes be a compensatory mechanism4243. As arteries naturally narrow with age, higher pressure may be needed to ensure sufficient blood flow to vital organs, especially the brain42.... He stopped publishing on this controversial topic due to fear of being dismissed4445.

• Statin Side Effects as Inevitable Aging:

    ◦ The Misconception: Common problems experienced by long-term statin users, such as muscle weakness, pain, memory loss, and confusion, are often attributed to the natural aging process4647.

    ◦ The Rebuttal: Statins are associated with several serious side effects, including muscular problems (weakness, pain, atrophy), cognitive problems ("brain failures," memory loss, confusion), and an increased frequency of infections (tying back to cholesterol's immune role)4849. The insidious nature of these side effects means they often creep up slowly over years, leading people to mistake them for age-related decline4647. Crucially, many studies show that when people stop taking statins, these side effects often disappear within weeks or months, strongly indicating the medication was the cause5051. The expert believes millions are suffering harm from an unnecessary drug, mistaking its effects for aging50.

The sources conclude that these insights "really do change how you might view statin efficacy and they certainly highlight these powerful financial forces potentially shaping medical research and guidelines"52. The expert firmly believes that "potentially hundreds of millions of people worldwide" could benefit from re-evaluating, questioning, and potentially stopping this "greatest scandal in modern medicine"22....

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Discuss Financial Conflicts.

Financial conflicts of interest are presented in the sources as a pervasive and fundamental issue that significantly influences the narrative around cholesterol, statins, and heart disease. An expert in the field directly links these financial ties to what he calls "the greatest criminal action in medical science"1....

Here's a breakdown of the key aspects of financial conflicts discussed:

• Drug Company Profits and the "Cholesterol Myth":

    ◦ The expert explicitly states that the claim that high cholesterol is dangerous is supported by drug companies who have earned "millions of dollar" (and billions, as clarified by the podcast host) from cholesterol-lowering drugs, primarily statins12.

    ◦ This narrative is seen as being driven more by profit than by pure science, potentially shaping medical research and guidelines45.

    ◦ The expert believes that his critical information on cholesterol became "very expensive" for drug companies, as they would lose "lots of money" if he was able to spread it widely6.

• Researchers' Financial Entanglements:

    ◦ A noticeable pattern observed by the expert is that researchers who are critical of the "lipid hypothesis" (the theory that cholesterol causes heart disease), often from places like Sweden or Japan, typically report no financial conflicts of interest78.

    ◦ In contrast, those who strongly advocate for statins, often based in the US or Europe, frequently have "very, very long conflict of interest sections in their papers listing extensive financial ties to the drug industry"78.

    ◦ This suggests a potential bias, where proponents of statins are often financially connected to the very industry that benefits from their advocacy59. The expert implies that these researchers know what they are doing when they report results in a certain way, as it is "very easy to understand"9.

• Medical Journals' Role:

    ◦ Medical journals themselves "make significant money from drug companies, advertising, reprints, things like that"510.

    ◦ This financial relationship can make it "incredibly difficult to get critical papers published," especially those that challenge the profitable status quo5.... The expert himself has experienced significant pushback, with many of his critical papers being rejected "without reasons"10.

• Impact on Research and Reporting:

    ◦ The financial interests are seen to influence how research findings are presented, particularly regarding the exaggeration of statin efficacy through the use of relative risk reduction instead of absolute risk reduction11....

    ◦ There is also an accusation of selective reporting, where "more than 10 trials" supporting statin use were "not mentioned in the usual meta-analyses" that often support widespread statin use1317. This cherry-picking of data can skew results and create a misleading picture1618.

    ◦ The expert explicitly states that "people are being paid to report results a certain way" and that those who go against drug companies "will be unable to publish anything"9.

These insights profoundly change how one might view statin efficacy and highlight the powerful financial forces that potentially shape medical research and guidelines, leading to what the expert considers "the greatest scandal in modern medicine"3....

keep_pinSave to note

copy_all

thumb_up

thumb_down

Rethinking Cholesterol and Statins: A Critical Re-evaluation of the Prevailing Medical Paradigm

Executive Summary

For decades, the medical community has presented a narrative of cholesterol, particularly LDL cholesterol, as a primary villain in cardiovascular disease, advocating widespread use of statins to lower it. However, a seasoned expert, whose career has focused on challenging this status quo, argues that this conventional understanding is fundamentally flawed and potentially misleading. This report synthesizes insights from extensive research and critical analysis, proposing that high cholesterol is not inherently harmful but often beneficial, playing a vital role in the immune system.

Key findings and arguments presented include:

• LDL cholesterol actively participates in the body's defense mechanisms, binding to microorganisms and toxins, leading to oxidized LDL as "battle debris" of an immune response, not a dangerous culprit.

• Statin efficacy is significantly exaggerated by selective reporting, the omission of negative trials, and the misleading use of relative risk reduction over absolute risk reduction.

• Pervasive financial conflicts of interest within the drug industry, medical journals, and prominent researchers appear to heavily influence research outcomes and publication bias, suppressing critical perspectives.

• Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH), often cited as proof of cholesterol's danger, is largely misunderstood; early deaths in some FH patients are linked to co-inherited high coagulation factors, not high cholesterol itself. Many FH patients live long, healthy lives, potentially benefiting from higher cholesterol for immune protection.

• Mental stress can rapidly increase cholesterol levels, which is often misidentified as a cause of heart disease rather than a correlated effect or a compensatory immune response.

• Statins carry significant and often underestimated side effects, including muscular problems, cognitive issues, and increased infections, which are frequently mistaken for normal aging but are reversible upon discontinuing the drug.

This re-evaluation suggests that the widespread prescription of statins, affecting hundreds of millions globally, may be an "unnecessary drug" actively causing harm and represents "the greatest criminal action in medical science". A profound shift in perspective is encouraged, urging critical thinking and personal exploration of these challenging insights.

1. Introduction: Challenging the Cholesterol Dogma

The narrative surrounding cholesterol, particularly "bad" LDL cholesterol, has been a cornerstone of public health messaging for decades, deeply influencing medical practice and drug development. However, a growing body of evidence, championed by a seasoned expert, rigorously challenges these long-held assumptions. This expert, a Danish-born researcher who moved to Sweden in the 1960s and holds both an MD and PhD, has dedicated his career to questioning the scientific status quo, particularly regarding cholesterol.

His personal journey into cholesterol research began in the 1980s when the "big cholesterol campaign" gained momentum in Sweden. Unable to recall solid scientific proof that high cholesterol was inherently bad, he embarked on a re-examination of historical scientific papers. What he discovered was "deeply troubling," leading him to conclude that the claim of high cholesterol being dangerous is "the greatest criminal action in medical science". This strong accusation is directly linked to the massive profits generated by pharmaceutical companies from cholesterol-lowering drugs, primarily statins. This report will unpack the critical insights that underscore this provocative claim.

2. LDL Cholesterol: A Re-evaluated Role in the Immune System

The expert's work fundamentally "flips things on their head" by proposing that high cholesterol is not inherently harmful, but rather beneficial due to its vital role in our immune system. This challenges the conventional view of LDL cholesterol, often labeled "bad cholesterol," as a mere fat carrier. Instead, LDL particles are active participants in the body's defense mechanisms.

2.1 Mechanism of Action: LDL as an Immune Patrol System

• "Tiny patrol boats": LDL particles act like tiny patrol boats, attaching themselves to various bacteria, microorganisms, and their toxic byproducts. This function has been documented in many studies, including animal experiments.

• Clumping and Inactivation: Once these invaders are coated with LDL, they begin to clump together. Specific immune cells, called monocytes (a type of white blood cell), recognize these LDL-covered clumps, take them up, and inactivate the microorganisms through a process called oxidation.

• Oxidized LDL as "Battle Debris": The commonly maligned "oxidized LDL" is therefore not a dangerous culprit but a result of the immune system actively fighting off an infection. It is "evidence of battle," or "battle debris," rather than the weapon itself.

• Blockage as a Consequence of Intense Immune Response: In severe infections, an overwhelming number of these LDL-coated clumps can occasionally block small arteries, particularly around the heart where higher interstitial pressure makes tiny vessels more vulnerable. This blockage is a consequence of an intense immune response, not cholesterol being inherently bad.

2.2 Evidence for LDL's Protective Role

• Animal Studies: Compelling evidence comes from animal studies where infecting animals with normally lethal microorganisms, followed by injecting human LDL, often results in their survival. This powerfully highlights LDL's protective role.

• Historical Research: American research from over a century ago showed that patients who died from infectious diseases were actually more atherosclerotic. This suggests a long-standing, but perhaps overlooked, connection between infection and arterial health.

• Lower Risk of Infection and Cancer: The expert posits that people with higher cholesterol, including those with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), might actually have a lower risk of infection and potentially a lower risk of cancer. Elderly individuals with higher cholesterol are also observed to live longer and exhibit better overall health. Conversely, those with low LDL have been shown in many studies to have a greater risk of coronary artery disease.

3. Scrutiny of Statin Efficacy and Reporting Practices

The expert's critical analysis extends to the efficacy of statin drugs, arguing that their benefits are greatly exaggerated due to biased reporting and conflicts of interest.

3.1 Meta-Analysis Findings and Missing Data

• Minimal Mortality Reduction: A comprehensive meta-analysis conducted by the expert's group, which examined approximately 36 statin-lowering trials (significantly more than usually considered by statin proponents), found stark results. Only one or two of these trials showed a reduction in mortality risk from a heart attack (myocardial infarction) by more than 1%.

• Increased Mortality Risk: Crucially, several trials actually demonstrated an increase in the risk of mortality for those taking statins.

• Omission of Trials: More than 10 of these trials were "not mentioned in the usual meta-analyses" often used to support widespread statin use, indicating a selective use of data that skews results.

3.2 Relative vs. Absolute Risk: A Deceptive Reporting Method

One of the most critical issues highlighted is the deceptive practice of reporting relative risk reduction instead of absolute risk reduction, which dramatically exaggerates a drug's perceived effect.

• Absolute Risk: If, for example, in a study of 100 people on statins and 100 on placebo, two people in the placebo group die and one in the statin group dies, the absolute risk reduction is 1% (one person out of 100). This is often not even statistically significant.

• Relative Risk: However, drug company-funded researchers frequently report this as a relative risk reduction of 50%, because one death is half of two deaths.

• Exaggerated Impact: This makes a "trivial, possibly random difference look incredibly impactful," profoundly misleading doctors and patients. The expert asserts that this is "basically a way of reporting results that greatly exaggerates the effect".

3.3 Pervasive Conflicts of Interest and Publication Bias

The expert observed a troubling pattern of financial conflicts of interest that appear to shape medical research and guidelines.

• Independent Critics vs. Industry Proponents: Researchers critical of the lipid hypothesis (cholesterol-heart disease theory), often from countries like Sweden or Japan, frequently report no financial conflicts. In contrast, strong advocates for statins, often based in the US or Europe, commonly have "very, very long conflict of interest sections in their papers listing extensive financial ties to the drug industry". This suggests that "people are being paid to report results a certain way".

• Influence on Medical Journals: Medical journals themselves derive significant revenue from drug companies through advertising and reprints. This financial entanglement makes it "incredibly difficult to get critical papers published"—papers that challenge the profitable status quo. The expert has personally experienced significant pushback and difficulty in publishing his critical papers in major journals, attributing this to the drug industry realizing his information was "very expensive for them".

4. Re-evaluating Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH)

Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH), a genetic condition characterized by extremely high cholesterol levels, is frequently cited as textbook proof that high cholesterol is inherently dangerous and causes early heart disease. However, the expert argues that this understanding is "largely a misconception" and a "profound one".

4.1 The Coagulation Factor Hypothesis

• Not Cholesterol, but Clotting Factors: The expert contends that the real reason for early death in some FH patients is not their high cholesterol, but rather their co-inheritance of high levels of coagulation (blood clotting) factors. Too much clotting activity can lead to dangerous blockages, irrespective of cholesterol levels.

• A Small Subset Affected: This means that only a "small subset" of FH patients dies early due to this additional inherited factor, misleading the general perception of FH.

4.2 Compelling Evidence Challenging the Conventional FH Narrative

• Underrepresentation in Heart Attacks: A massive study of nearly 4 million patients with acute heart attacks (MI) found that only 0.06% had FH. Given that the prevalence of FH in the general population is estimated at around 0.3%, this means FH patients are five to six times underrepresented among people having heart attacks. If high cholesterol were the primary driver of these events, FH patients should be overrepresented.

• No Cholesterol Difference in FH Mortality: Among FH patients themselves, those who die early do not generally have significantly higher cholesterol levels than FH patients who live long lives. The main difference identified lies in their coagulation systems.

• Long-Lived FH Patients: Many individuals with FH live to be quite elderly, despite having cholesterol levels of 600, 700, 800, or even higher.

• Historical Data: Longer Lives and Fewer Infections: A study from the 1980s even suggested that people with FH, on average, actually lived longer than other people and had lower rates of infectious diseases. This finding reinforces the immune benefit idea: higher cholesterol, as seen in FH, may lead to a lower risk of infection and potentially a lower risk of cancer.

These findings strongly suggest that the simplified "cholesterol bad" narrative surrounding FH is incorrect and that high cholesterol itself is not the primary driver of early death, particularly when other factors like coagulation are considered.

5. Factors Influencing Cholesterol Levels Beyond Genetics and Diet

Beyond genetics and diet, other factors can significantly and rapidly impact cholesterol levels, which are often misinterpreted in the context of heart disease.

5.1 Mental Stress and Its Misinterpretation

• Rapid Increase in LDL: Mental stress can cause LDL cholesterol to shoot up by 10 to 50% in as little as half an hour, sometimes even doubling.

• Correlation vs. Causation: While stress is linked to heart disease, the high cholesterol that accompanies it is frequently mistaken as the cause. The expert clarifies that high cholesterol in this context "is not the cause. It's an effect of heart disease" or of the underlying stress or condition causing the stress, rather than the root cause of the heart problem itself.

• Impact on Blood Pressure: High stress also often elevates blood pressure, complicating the analysis of patients in acute medical situations, where both high cholesterol and high blood pressure might be interpreted as dangerous causes rather than symptoms.

5.2 Blood Pressure in the Elderly: A Compensatory Mechanism

The expert also touched on high blood pressure in older people, controversially suggesting that it might sometimes be a compensatory mechanism.

• Arterial Narrowing: As arteries naturally narrow with age, higher pressure may be needed to ensure sufficient blood flow to vital organs, especially the brain.

• Aggressive Lowering May Be Harmful: Aggressively trying to lower this compensatory high blood pressure might not always be beneficial. The expert even stopped publishing on this specific topic due to fear of being "dismissed, called an idiot" for challenging established views. This highlights the significant pressure to conform in science and the challenges of questioning established paradigms.

The body's natural responses to stress or aging are often targeted as if they are the disease itself, leading to interventions that may be unnecessary or even harmful.

6. The Documented Harms and Side Effects of Statins

Given the arguments against their necessity for many, the actual documented downsides and side effects of statins become critically important.

• Serious and Common Side Effects: The expert lists several serious and common side effects associated with statin treatment:

  • Muscular Problems: Weakness, pain, muscle wasting (atrophy).

  • Cognitive Problems: "Brain failures," memory loss, confusion.

  • Increased Infections: An increased frequency of infections, which ties back to the potential suppression of cholesterol's immune role.

• Insidious Onset and Misattribution to Aging: The "really insidious part" of these side effects is that they often "creep up slowly over years". Since statins are typically started in middle age and taken for decades, people frequently attribute muscle weakness, memory lapses, and other issues to normal aging, rather than their medication.

• Reversibility Upon Cessation: Crucially, many studies demonstrate that these side effects often disappear within weeks or months when people stop taking statins. This provides a strong indicator that the medication, not inevitable aging, was indeed the cause.

• Millions Potentially Suffering Unnecessarily: This is a "profound point," suggesting that potentially millions of people are not only taking an unnecessary drug but one that might be actively causing them harm. The expert firmly states that statin drugs are "not beneficial" and can "increase to start many many diseases". He would not recommend statins for anyone, including those with familial hypercholesterolemia, advising immediate cessation of treatment. His confidence is that those who stop statin treatments "will live longer and they will have a much better life".

This situation underscores the gravity of the expert's strong statement that this is "the greatest scandal in modern medicine," as hundreds of millions are potentially suffering from reversible side effects while thinking it is merely age-related decline.

7. Conclusion: A Call for Critical Thinking and Re-evaluation

The information presented profoundly challenges the entrenched medical consensus on cholesterol and statins. From the re-evaluation of LDL's crucial immune role and the reinterpretation of conditions like Familial Hypercholesterolemia, to the critical scrutiny of statin trial data, reporting practices, and pervasive financial conflicts of interest, a much more nuanced and often counterintuitive picture emerges.

The potential for statin-induced harms, often mistaken for aging, affecting potentially hundreds of millions of people worldwide, underscores the expert's powerful assertion that this is "the greatest scandal in modern medicine". This perspective demands deep critical thinking and a re-evaluation of long-held beliefs, both by the medical community and individuals.

The core question that emerges is: "What if the simple act of re-evaluating, questioning, and maybe even stopping a widely prescribed medication could lead to a longer, healthier, and frankly just a better quality of life for potentially hundreds of millions of people worldwide?". The expert encourages researchers to test this hypothesis by asking patients to stop statin treatments and report the results, confident in the benefits of cessation.

This report serves as an invitation for further personal exploration and a critical re-examination of information that has shaped global health guidelines for decades.