high cholesterol

[SWALE]

I wouldn't say that "more and more doctors" are coming to believe that there is no association between elevated CHOL and cardiovascular disease. I have attended lectures by the top minds in the field--real cutting edge leaders--and not one of them has suggested such a thing.

I obviouslyy cannot possiboly convince you of what every other doctor on the face of the earth knows to be true, so I will not waste either of our time.

 

[buck]

In other words, you CAN'T answer the questions raised.

If these questions can't be answered, then you can't go around stating the cholesterol THEORY as fact.

There are many things in science and mathmatics that are consindered to be facts because they have never been proven to be wrong.

 

[SWALE]

Of note, my previous response was deleted by the Administrator for reasons unrelated to this thread.

Frosty, where did this "I can't answer answer the question" stuff come from? There are thousands, literally THOUSANDS of studies, conducted by more researchers from all over the world than we could count, over a multitude of patient populations, which demonstrate the profound association between elevated CHOL and cardiovascular disease.

If you raise your CHOL levels, you increase your RISK of cardiovascular disease. It could not be stated any simpler.

If your position is that this miniscule number of researchers are right, and ALL of those thousands and thousands of epidemiological studies were somehow falsified, then that is flawed thinking.

 

[6foot10]

So I guess smoking isnt bad for the arteris either, just because they cant put the finger on the mechanism behind smoking and accelerated atherosklerosis.
Ive been around these boards for 3-4 years under different names and it never stops to amaze me how much strange information one can find.

 

[buck]

ditto

 

[6foot10]

Horrible comparison.

Cholesterol is the body's repair mechanism.

Cigarette smoke is a drug and contains MANY toxins.

I'm amazed that someone would even try to make that comparison.

Ok, my native language isnt english, but I thought it was obvious that I didnt compare the substances, I compared the fact that both substances causes atherosklerosis, even if they havent been able to put the finger on the excact mechanism behind it, yet.
So , your logic is that if something is necessary for your body, like cholesterol is for maintaining the integrety of the cell membrane (among other things), its ok to walk around your hole life with excessiv levels of the stuff. That is just so stupid. I can easily name 50 compounds that is necessary for your body in limited levels but dangerous if the levels get too high, but to make it simple Ill name two that you probobly heard of, thyroid hormone and cortisol. Theyre both synthezised in the body and crucial to maintain life, but pathologicaly high levels WILL make you sick and probobly kill you in the long run.
It feels strange (almost a little funny) to have this debate 2004, but like I wrote earlier, this is the internet, and one have to take the bs with all the good stuff.
A little tip, take a look at some statistics about whats happening to those how have a homozygot defect in there LDL-receptor gene, with reduced cellular LDL-uptake and excessiv levels of LDL in the circulation as a result. Most of them have a myocardial infarct before age 25. Its called "familial hypercholesterolemia".

 

[6foot10]

Let me ask you something. Why do old people live longer when their cholesterol levels are higher? It protects against infection, heals damage to arterial walls, is used for vital bodily functions, etc.

If cholesterol is the body's repair mechanism and levels are very high, what does that tell you? That the body has something wrong that it is trying to repair, or there is something wrong that is causing excessive levels. So if you have excessive damage to arterial walls due to a poor diet, how on EARTH will lowering high cholesterol be of any benefit whatsoever? That's like shooting the firefighters that show up to a burning building and leaving the fire to burn and thinking you fixed the problem.

So your theory is that very high cholesterol levels is one bodys way to handle vessel wall lesions due to a poor diet? If so, it was a new one to me. First, Ive never even heard before that a poor diet causes vessel wall lessions, if you dont meen secondary trough hypertension or none enzymatic glycosylation due to hyperglycemia, of course.
Second, if ones body can maintain homeostas with cholesterol levels below 5mmol/L, even though theres 3 major places in the body that constantly producing new cells, the bone marrow, the epithelium of the GI-tract and the skin. Why then would the cholesterol koncentration need to be 2-3 times higher to heal some vessel wall damage? That must be some kind of damage.

 

[6foot10]

A poor diet could easily cause damage to arterial walls. A lack of EFAs, lack of antioxidants, eating things like trans fat, hydrogenated oils, excessive omega-6s, too much sugar, lack of nutrients, etc.

As to why the body would need what it needs...I honestly have no idea. I'm not God But I also noted that there could be a problem that results in over-production of cholesterol, as well as the body increasing it in response to a problem. There is just a lot that can go wrong in the body when it is fed a poor diet and is exposed to lots of bad things (smoking, evironmental toxins, etc).

The point is I don't see a purpose to just lower cholesterol. It's like when people get a headache from a lack of water then pop a Tylenol...sure, it gets rid of the symptom, but it does nothing to actually address the real problem (lack of water). This does absolutely nothing for health.

So if you have a problem with lack of nutrients and EFAs in your diet, what good does using a cholesterol lowering drug do? Especially when those drugs have negative side effects. All you do is introduce a drug to the body that gets rid of the symptom, has negative side effects, and leaves the actual cause totally untouched.

Im not God either so I cant say that youre wrong when you claim that elevated cholesterol levels is one of the bodys defence mechanisms. But, I think that for the most part its a primary symptom from factors like bad food, complete lack of excersise, or in a place like this, hormone imbalance.
I agree with the other thing you wrote, even if we probobly see it from a little different angles. If somebody have elevated levels of LDL due to excessive intake of saturated fat, which is thought to down regulate cellular LDL-receptors, it is of course better to change his eating patterns than to start taking medicin.

 

[chrisfam5]

die big die young dianabol