2/ A lot of people wanted greater specificity on what I meant by "rich" -- I left this more to the reader's interpretation. IMO, I'd have thought this would be in a highest quantile, such as top 1/3rd or 4th of typical aggregate diet.
3/ @MichaelMindrum mentioned the poll results might skew a bit too much toward expectation of SFA not causing CVD given those likely following my account -- I don't disagree.
Hence my interest in direct study on health conscious populations consuming high SFA (like many #LMHRs)
4/ @theproof made the following comment and I actually agree if all elements prove independently causal (⬆️SFA independently causal of ↗️ApoB + ⬆️ApoB independently causal of ↗️CVD, regardless of context).
1/ The scientist in me is looking forward to this new, real world data emerging on #HealthConscious#Carnivores.
It will help provide data that helps confirm/disconfirm the long standing assumption that "healthy user bias" has been effectively adjusted for by researchers...
2/ If you're not familiar with "healthy user bias" (HUB), it's a known potential confounder where those who are doing what they feel is healthy in one regard (such as avoidance of red meat), can often have other likewise "healthy habits", such as more exercise, less smoking, etc
3/ This is a big problem with epidemiology given the overlap is quite common.
To mitigate this, there are efforts to adjust for these confounders such as through statistical techniques (ie sensitivity analyses)
2/ Let's definitely grant for a moment that ApoB containing lipoproteins (which we'll call ApoB-Lp) are participants in the process of ASCVD.
Can we likewise consider there are disease states (whether genetic or acquired) that result in both changes in serum ApoB-Lp *and* ASCVD?
3/ Monogenetic FH is certainly one I'd Put on the table.
In particular, a likewise constituent participant in the process of ASCVD are macrophages. Macrophages are nucleated immune cells and can thus suffer the same dysfunctional lipid metabolism we see with hepatocytes of MoFH.
3/ @BrianNosek:
“The big challenge as we see it is that the values that we have for how we think science should operate are not aligned with the culture, the incentives, and the policy landscape for driving how science does operate.”
2/ All your interjections in the debate should come as no surprise to anyone -- especially the participants.
In other words, clearly define the rules in advance on what you'll be enforcing, and ideally, you should announce these to the audience at the beginning as well.
3/ Thus, if someone steps out of line for these agreed upon rules and you promptly enforce them, there should be no controversy as this was expected.
A "bad call" is always a problem in any sport, the losing side feels robbed, and even the winning side feels the victory tainted.