Cholesterol Myths Partial Book Review

Well, I'm part way through "The Cholesterol Myths : Exposing the Fallacy
that Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease," a book by Uffe
Ravnskov, MD, PhD:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...336255-1990442

As a former firm believer in low fat and even Pritikin, I've come full
circle and this book really points out the lack of "science" behind the
CHD-diet link. I'll post a complete review once I've read the entire
book. However, just based on the portion of the book I've read so far, I
would highly recommend that if you're on statins or plan on taking
statins, that you read this book before you do.

--
Bob M
remove ".x" to reply

In article ,
"Bob M" wrote:

Well, I'm part way through "The Cholesterol Myths : Exposing the Fallacy
that Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease," a book by Uffe
Ravnskov, MD, PhD:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS.../sr=2-1/ref=pd
_bbs_b_2_1/002-7336255-1990442

As a former firm believer in low fat and even Pritikin, I've come full
circle and this book really points out the lack of "science" behind the
CHD-diet link. I'll post a complete review once I've read the entire
book. However, just based on the portion of the book I've read so far, I
would highly recommend that if you're on statins or plan on taking
statins, that you read this book before you do.


I take Vanachol...

It's working and there are no side effects. ;-)

My Doc' knew better than to offer me statins. lol
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
In article ,
"Bob M" wrote:

Well, I'm part way through "The Cholesterol Myths : Exposing the Fallacy
that Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease," a book by Uffe
Ravnskov, MD, PhD:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS.../sr=2-1/ref=pd
_bbs_b_2_1/002-7336255-1990442

As a former firm believer in low fat and even Pritikin, I've come full
circle and this book really points out the lack of "science" behind the
CHD-diet link. I'll post a complete review once I've read the entire
book. However, just based on the portion of the book I've read so far, I
would highly recommend that if you're on statins or plan on taking
statins, that you read this book before you do.


I take Vanachol...

It's working and there are no side effects. ;-)

My Doc' knew better than to offer me statins. lol
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson


The problem is that cholesterol has no bearing whatsoever to heart
disease. Many people with heart disease never showed any problems with
cholesterol levels and many people with cholesterol "problems" never
show any signs of heart disease. There exists no real science that
shows that cholesterol problems equate to heart disease.

If cholesterol actually had a bearing on heart disease, most every one
with cholesterol "problems" would have heart disease and most everyone
with heart disease would have shown some cholesterol problem. Of
course, that is barring congenital heart defects and other
physiological abnomalities, etc.

You are treating an illusion with an illusion-treating drug. It serves
no purpose other than to make money for the pharmaceutical company. It
is costing you your money and your health. The drug, as with most
pharmaceutical concoctions, has nasty side effects. And it is not doing
any good whatsoever.

TC

In article .com,
wrote:

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
In article ,
"Bob M" wrote:

Well, I'm part way through "The Cholesterol Myths : Exposing the Fallacy
that Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease," a book by Uffe
Ravnskov, MD, PhD:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...5405/sr=2-1/re
f=pd
_bbs_b_2_1/002-7336255-1990442

As a former firm believer in low fat and even Pritikin, I've come full
circle and this book really points out the lack of "science" behind the
CHD-diet link. I'll post a complete review once I've read the entire
book. However, just based on the portion of the book I've read so far, I
would highly recommend that if you're on statins or plan on taking
statins, that you read this book before you do.


I take Vanachol...

It's working and there are no side effects. ;-)

My Doc' knew better than to offer me statins. lol
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack
Nicholson


The problem is that cholesterol has no bearing whatsoever to heart
disease. Many people with heart disease never showed any problems with
cholesterol levels and many people with cholesterol "problems" never
show any signs of heart disease. There exists no real science that
shows that cholesterol problems equate to heart disease.

If cholesterol actually had a bearing on heart disease, most every one
with cholesterol "problems" would have heart disease and most everyone
with heart disease would have shown some cholesterol problem. Of
course, that is barring congenital heart defects and other
physiological abnomalities, etc.

You are treating an illusion with an illusion-treating drug. It serves
no purpose other than to make money for the pharmaceutical company. It
is costing you your money and your health. The drug, as with most
pharmaceutical concoctions, has nasty side effects. And it is not doing
any good whatsoever.

TC


I've never believed that Cholesterol was anywhere near as important as
Triglyceride levels...

The higher the tryglycerides, the cloudier and thicker the serum
specimen is.

You'd have to be a lab tech to understand. ;-)

Oh, and guess what causes higher Trig' levels???????

Not fat! lol
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

Ignoramus28164 wrote:
I own that book. I read it and found it fascinating and very reality
based.

However, it is somewhat outdated. Recently, many trials were conducted
and statins were found to actually reduce mortality, at least among
some subsectionf of population. Ravnskov's point about lack of dose
response may be valid, but statins do have a helpful effect on
mortality, via mechanisms possibly not related to cholesterol.


Mostly bull**** studies funded by the pharmaceutical companies.


I also must disclose that our family friend is a very sophisticated
heart surgeon. His opinion on Ravnskov's ideas is that they are
bull****. Whether he is right or not, time will tell.

If Ravnskov is right, your friend is out of work. Of course he's going
to say it's bs.


My 81 year old grandma refused to take a recommended statin, and I
fully supported her decision. She is a former doctor. My 79 year old
wife's aunt is taking lipitor, and it is making her feel like ****.

Life is very complex.

i

No, it is very simple. Statins are crap. Your grandma is smarter than
you and your wife's aunt is misguided.

TC

On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:08:17 GMT, Ignoramus28164
wrote:

I own that book. I read it and found it fascinating and very reality
based.

However, it is somewhat outdated. Recently, many trials were conducted
and statins were found to actually reduce mortality, at least among
some subsectionf of population. Ravnskov's point about lack of dose
response may be valid, but statins do have a helpful effect on
mortality, via mechanisms possibly not related to cholesterol.

I would look at http://www.thincs.org/. They (including Ravnskov) discuss
these trials. While these trials do seem to reduce mortality from CHD,
the all cause mortality (from non-violent sources) does not change. In
other words, more cancer is caused by these drugs than is solved by CHD.
Also, the side effects of these drugs can be brutal. Plus, if high
cholesterol isn't bad for you, why take these drugs?

I also must disclose that our family friend is a very sophisticated
heart surgeon. His opinion on Ravnskov's ideas is that they are
bull****. Whether he is right or not, time will tell.

Time will tell, and I'm betting that your surgeon friend is wrong.

My 81 year old grandma refused to take a recommended statin, and I
fully supported her decision. She is a former doctor. My 79 year old
wife's aunt is taking lipitor, and it is making her feel like ****.

Life is very complex.

i


I agree with you.

I think that CHD is complex and probably caused by a variety of factors,
including stress, exercise, insulin and blood sugar, inflammation, and
possibly more. But the drugs have shown no real, overall benefit. My
mother is also taking them, and they turned her into a freaking zombie. I
would hazard a guess that inflammation is more important than anything
else.

--
Bob M
remove ".x" to reply

In article ,
Ignoramus28164 wrote:

I own that book. I read it and found it fascinating and very reality
based.

However, it is somewhat outdated. Recently, many trials were conducted
and statins were found to actually reduce mortality, at least among
some subsectionf of population. Ravnskov's point about lack of dose
response may be valid, but statins do have a helpful effect on
mortality, via mechanisms possibly not related to cholesterol.

I also must disclose that our family friend is a very sophisticated
heart surgeon. His opinion on Ravnskov's ideas is that they are
bull****. Whether he is right or not, time will tell.

My 81 year old grandma refused to take a recommended statin, and I
fully supported her decision. She is a former doctor. My 79 year old
wife's aunt is taking lipitor, and it is making her feel like ****.

Life is very complex.

i

Google "Vanachol".

It's not a statin. It's more of a nutritional supplement, but it's by
prescription only.

It's working for me over time, (takes about 90 days for accumulated
effects) and it's raising my HDL which Statins do not do. :-)

No side effects.......
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

Ignoramus28164 wrote:
On 7 Jul 2005 14:18:16 -0700, wrote:


Ignoramus28164 wrote:
I own that book. I read it and found it fascinating and very reality
based.

However, it is somewhat outdated. Recently, many trials were conducted
and statins were found to actually reduce mortality, at least among
some subsectionf of population. Ravnskov's point about lack of dose
response may be valid, but statins do have a helpful effect on
mortality, via mechanisms possibly not related to cholesterol.


Mostly bull**** studies funded by the pharmaceutical companies.

Well, are you suggesting that they faked their data?

They routinely bury studies that come up negative. They pick and choose
the data they submit to the FDA and they have their own statisticians
spin the data as much as possible.


I also must disclose that our family friend is a very sophisticated
heart surgeon. His opinion on Ravnskov's ideas is that they are
bull****. Whether he is right or not, time will tell.

If Ravnskov is right, your friend is out of work. Of course he's
going to say it's bs.

Why, he performs surgeries, I doubt that anything related to
acceptance of what Ravnskov says would impact his business much.

If Ravnskov is right, your friend will lose all the heart by-pass work
that comes his way. He will be stuck dealing with congenital defects
only.


My 81 year old grandma refused to take a recommended statin, and I
fully supported her decision. She is a former doctor. My 79 year old
wife's aunt is taking lipitor, and it is making her feel like ****.

Life is very complex.

i

No, it is very simple. Statins are crap. Your grandma is smarter than
you and your wife's aunt is misguided.

My wife's aunt is definitely misguided.

--
223/174.3/180

But your grandma is a genius. Listen to her.

TC

Ignoramus28164 wrote:

I own that book. I read it and found it fascinating and very reality
based.

However, it is somewhat outdated. Recently, many trials were conducted
and statins were found to actually reduce mortality, at least among
some subsectionf of population. Ravnskov's point about lack of dose
response may be valid, but statins do have a helpful effect on
mortality, via mechanisms possibly not related to cholesterol.

I also must disclose that our family friend is a very sophisticated
heart surgeon. His opinion on Ravnskov's ideas is that they are
bull****. Whether he is right or not, time will tell.

My 81 year old grandma refused to take a recommended statin, and I
fully supported her decision. She is a former doctor. My 79 year old
wife's aunt is taking lipitor, and it is making her feel like ****.

A lot of the cardiologists at our hospital are now
prescribing Vytorin, a combination statin and
non-statin, supposedly with less side effects.
They seem to be enthusiastic about it's long-term
success.

Marsha/Ohio