2/ I love that Alan Flanagan kicked off with distinction question re bio markers.
“System Biomarkers in the causal pathway. Systemic biomarkers that can report on the overall picture”
vs
“Biomarkers of disease progression”
...
3/ “... It seems to be in the wider conversation a lot of these are often conflated to a degree. Or there is misplaced emphasis placed on a particular marker...”
I couldn’t possibly agree with this more!
4/ further props to Alan, he asks about some “niche” circles who propose high LDL is not a concern where inflammation is low or endothelial health is optimal...
5/ Prof Chris Packard “The answers lie in looking at the data. And some of the natural experiments that we have support the idea that LDL is causal. And prime among those is familial hyper cholesterolemia.”
6/ he then goes on to describe how heterozygous FH (2-3 fold) results in elevated CVD), homozygous FH (>3 fold, often 5-fold and higher) resulting in corresponding increase in atherosclerosis. HoFH children exhibit signs very early (heartbreaking).
7/ “These individuals don’t have raised CRP, they have raised LDL...”
“ if you are unfortunate enough to [be born with homozygous FH], then that youngster will develop severe atherosclerosis early in life, by age 8, if not 10 and 11.:.”
8/ “...and often they used to die of coronary artery disease purely on the basis of a raised LDL in their teen years.”
“So that is prima facie evidence that LDL is it causal agent.”
9/ So I'm going to pause here to really discuss this crucial point, as I bring it up very frequently when discussing #LMHRs and why this study is so important.
It's understandable why FH is crucial to looking at LDL in the context of other CVD risk markers being normal/optimal..
10/ If it is true that the atherogenicity of familial hypercholesterolemia is entirely in LDL/ApoB concentration, this would be very substantial evidence toward the lipid hypothesis and would definitely be demonstrated in progression observed with #LMHRs
11/ Again, I hope this is not the case, but it's all the more reason we should be capturing this data as soon as possible.
I credit both @NutritionDanny and Alan Flanagan for their consistency in predicting the #LMHRstudy will show rapid progression of atherosclerosis...
12/ ... And again -- with emphasis -- while I'm cautiously optimistic, I genuinely don't know what the data will bring us until it is coming in from the study.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's very visual and IMO fairly true to the more specific position of mainstream lipidology...
2/ Love his opening: "why is this topic so confusing? well, for starters scientists are horrible at coming up with names...there's LDL...and LDL cholesterol and they're different things....but a lot of people call them both LDL....and then there's HDL, VLDL..." (trails off)
3/ He's 100% right. It's why it's so hard to convert this for the lay audience. Lipidology could use a terminology upgrade.
For example, how did "Chylomicrons" manage to get a special exception to the "-DL" acronym party? (Only fellow lipophiles will get that joke... 😐)
1/ Okay, I've been getting lots of pings regarding @DBelardoMD appearing on @RealDoctorMike, particularly given discussion earlier in the video with regard to LDL-C and CVD.
I'll do a reaction thread for now, but I'd like to keep it respectful, ofc...
2/ *First, whether ur a @DBelardoMD fan or not, I have to emphasize I respect anyone willing to move against the grain of their community for where they feel the evidence takes them. While unrelated to lipids, she's endured a lot of unpleasantness for a principled re CVD reversal
3/ 2:08 @DBelardoMD: "Nowadays you want to get your LDL cholesterol as low as possible for cardiovascular risk prevention. So, primary prevention versus also secondary prevention."
->Of course, neither this or statements like these are controversial by conventional med standards
- I used to read a lot of comics when I was a teenager, then nothing since. Reliving these superhero stories through movies have been hot or miss... until the MCU, that is. Thanks, #Marvel, you’re truly setting a new bar.
2/ if there’s one thing I definitely got wrong, it’s that I thought governments would be regulating or outright banning crypto by now, particularly with the rise of ransomware. Now it’s substantially mainstream and would be much harder to tackle given it isn’t held only by geeks.
3/ Kindness begets kindness... mostly.
I know some examples come to mind of those I’ve dialogued with where things went south, but they are far more the exception than the rule.
I’ve met so many people on social media with differences of opinion, but shared mutual respect.
Overall pros - definitely better than theatrical release, better character dev, cooler teaser moments
Overall cons - Some exposition material that didn't add much value in the first half, some meh music moments
But honestly, I'm more intrigued by the story around how this happened than the movie itself. This is the first situation I'm aware of that had a fan campaign for a rerelease actually result in a big budget do-over. This petitions are always started and typically go nowhere.
I don't know that Snyder and WB will rekindle the marriage, or for that matter, that they want to. But the teasers within the movie (you who've watched it know what I mean) are much more interesting to me than anything DC has been trying to tantalize me with so far...
2/ If you've followed me a while, you know I believe it isn't the actual ingestion of cholesterol on #LowCarb that has a big impact on serum levels -- it's predominantly the trafficking of fat. (See CholesterolCode.com/model)
But this is actually a very testable distinction...
3/ All we need is an experiment where I consume a lot of (1) low fat food that still (2) has ample amounts of cholesterol.
Thus, the "processed meat" side of the experiment is key if it has a decent amount of cholesterol -- and it does.