For decades, Americans have been told that high blood cholesterol as a result of heavy saturated fat intake causes cardiovascular disease.
As such, Statin drugs are often prescribed to curb
risk by lowering cholesterol. That convention was challenged by a recent paper.
So now what?
Epidemiology is not science the way many assume it is. Epidemiology can show that organic food causes autism so while studies may show a correlation between high cholesterol and cardiovascular disease, that is not a “cause-and-effect” relationship and never was - good luck explaining that to Dr. Oz and numerous media experts before that. “In fact,” according to a new commentary, “if analyzed carefully, there are more studies that disprove the ‘cause and effect’ hypothesis than even come close to proving it.”
The trend of vilifying saturated fats based on flawed research is traced back through the second half of the 20th century, eventually meeting overdue criticism in a 2010 meta-analysis and a 2012 paper contrasting scientific literature with U.S. and European advisory committee guidelines. While saturated fats have been blamed for causing CVD, more recent scientific literature points instead to processed sugars, trans-fats, and starchy/processed high-glycemic carbs as the more likely culprits. “Our nutritional courts,” the authors of a new
Journal of the American College of Nutrition
editorial write, “tried and convicted the wrong man.”
Statin drugs designed to treat high levels of LDL cholesterol began to be widely prescribed in 2001. The commentary authors suggest that “We must treat the patient thoughtfully and choose statin drugs carefully with extreme diligence to avoid unnecessary side effects.”
While these drugs have been linked to lower risk of CVD, numerous studies and clinical trials over the past decade have forced the medical community to re-examine the role of LDL cholesterol in statin use benefits. Some even began to demonstrate that reducing LDL alone was counterproductive in reducing some measures of CVD risk. As such, the authors advocate a more creative and thorough approach to addressing CVD risk, free of the “dogmatic polices” built around saturated fat and cholesterol centric thinking.
The commentary authors invoke legendary physician Francis W. Peabody in support of their convictions, quoted as saying, “The most important aspect in the care of the patient, is the care of the patient.”
Stephen T. Sinatra MD, FACN, Beverly B. Teter PhD, MACN, Jonny Bowden CNS, Mark C. Houston MD, FACN, and Miguel A. Martinez-Gonzalez MD, PhD, MPH, 'The Saturated Fat, Cholesterol, and Statin Controversy: A Commentary', Journal of the American College of Nutrition DOI: 10.1080/07315724.2014.878633
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- Sexual Fantasies: Threesomes Are Normal, Golden Showers Not So Much
- Ghost Light From Dead Galaxies - A Hubble Halloween
- Mediterranean Diet Linked To Better Kidney Health
- Greenpeace Says Its GMOs Are Better Than Science's GMOs, Still Hates Golden Rice
- Cyclone Nilofar Looks More Like A Comet
- Game Theory: When Are Groups Social? Or Insufferable?
- US Wildlife Bans On GMOs And Neonics Lack Transparency And Scientific Rationale
- "Twelve years in a major urban public school system, and I couldn't once bring myself to eat a school..."
- "Hardly a day goes by without some creative new take on the eternal Evil White Man meme. Without..."
- "There would be no controversy if it were all balloons and ponies stories like that. But I hope..."
- "Let's talk about this disaster: I lost a course at the university where I work and became ineligible..."
- "Partisan nastiness doesn't advance dialogue. We are all in this together. You asked for solutions..."
- Battle of Britain: NGOs and scientists clash over proposal to loosen EU GMO restrictions
- Genetically modified clean energy from bacteria
- Designer babies: You can screen for cystic fibrosis but intelligence is a ways off
- Science as profane: What superstition of 1752 and 2014 share in common
- What’s so “natural” about “natural crop breeding”?
- Worried you have cancer? Take a Google pill!
- Report examines health care challenges for pregnant women enrolled in covered California
- NYU research: Majority of high school seniors favor more liberal marijuana policies
- ESA Frontiers November preview
- Sexual fantasies: Are you normal?
- Synthetic lethality offers a new approach to kill tumor cells, explains Moffitt researcher