General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

The Cholesterol Paradox

Started by Diarmid Logan · · Last activity · 21 posts · 996 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
3 December 2003
Last activity
12 December 2003
Original author
Diarmid Logan
Posts
21
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
996
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 21
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. healthcentral.comNewsFullText.cfm

    The Cholesterol Paradox

    A study finds higher levels may actually benefit people with heart failure.

    By Andrew Conaway

    HealthDay Reporter

    TUESDAY, Dec. 2 (HealthDayNews) -- A new study turns common sense on its head by suggesting high
    cholesterol levels may actually help people with heart failure.

    Despite the fact that high blood cholesterol has been linked to increased risk for ailments such as
    coronary vascular disease and blocked arteries, especially in combination with other risk factors,
    the finding that higher levels may help this group have researchers scratching their heads.

    "On the face of it, the result seems quite surprising, given the strong association between
    cholesterol and vascular disease. However, we have been developing for some time the notion that
    heart failure is a metabolically stressful illness," says Dr. Andrew L. Clark of Castle Hill
    Hospital and the University of Hull in England. Clark is co-author of the study, which appears in
    the Dec. 3 issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

    "A high cholesterol level can be seen as good in that it indicates a greater reserve to deal with
    metabolic stresses. And this is supported by some of the other studies. . . showing a greater
    survival with increasing body weight in heart failure and following heart surgery," Clark adds.

    Researchers from Castle Hill Hospital, along with colleagues in London and Berlin, studied 417
    patients with chronic heart failure and found the chance of survival increased 25 percent for each
    39-milligram-per-deciliter (mg/dl) increment in total cholesterol.

    On average, patients with a total cholesterol level of 232 mg/dl had a 25 percent higher survival
    rate than heart failure patients with a total cholesterol level of 193 mg/dl. Experts say a total
    cholesterol figure under 200 mg/dl is desirable.

    Although the results of this study go against the usual "lower cholesterol is better" advice, they
    reinforce findings in several previous studies that linked lower cholesterol with poorer prognosis
    in heart failure patients, the study says.

    Clark says two hypotheses may explain the paradoxical relationship.

    "Lipoproteins are good at absorbing bacterial endotoxin. An intriguing notion is that the reason for
    the immune system activation seen in heart failure patients is related to bowel wall edema, allowing
    bacterial translocation into the body. It may be that lipoproteins mediate a beneficial effect by
    mopping up any bacterial proteins before they cause immune system activation," he says. "I tend to
    like the lipoprotein idea."

    But he cautions on the use of cholesterol-lower statins for chronic heart failure patients.

    "If [health professionals] are using cholesterol-lowering statins, they are doing that without
    evidence that what they are doing is correct. What we say to them is get those patients, those with
    chronic heart failure, to clinical trials so it can be studied further," Clark says.

    However, some caution that lower cholesterol may not necessarily be the cause of the higher
    mortality in heart failure patients, but may be a indicator of other factors that might be linked.

    Dr. Robert Doughty, a research fellow at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, who was not
    connected with the study but reviewed the data, emphasized the results cannot determine that low
    cholesterol was the cause of worse outcomes in the heart failure patients.

    "We have to be careful about this data. Don't get me wrong, and it is very interesting data,"
    Doughty says. "But we should not automatically extrapolate this group of patients who may be at the
    endgame of their disease, and don't forget -- chronic heart failure patients are at the end stages
    of their disease."

    "Just because there is association doesn't mean there is causality. This study is important, but
    there is more work needed to be done for that group which has progressed further along with heart
    failure due to coronary heart disease," he adds.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  2. an exerpt from the illustrative reference... ~~
    Dr. Robert Doughty, a research fellow at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, who was not
    connected with the study but reviewed the data, emphasized the results cannot determine that low
    cholesterol was the cause of worse outcomes in the heart failure patients.

    "We have to be careful about this data. Don't get me wrong, and it is very interesting data,"
    Doughty says. "But we should not automatically extrapolate this group of patients who may be at the
    endgame of their disease, and don't forget -- chronic heart failure patients are at the end stages
    of their disease." ~~

    I would tend to agree pb

    Diarmid Logan said:

    healthcentral.comNewsFullText.cfm

    The Cholesterol Paradox

    A study finds higher levels may actually benefit people with heart failure.

    By Andrew Conaway

    HealthDay Reporter

    TUESDAY, Dec. 2 (HealthDayNews) -- A new study turns common sense on its head by suggesting high
    cholesterol levels may actually help people with heart failure.

    Despite the fact that high blood cholesterol has been linked to increased risk for ailments
    such as coronary vascular disease and blocked arteries, especially in combination with other
    risk factors, the finding that higher levels may help this group have researchers scratching
    their heads.

    "On the face of it, the result seems quite surprising, given the strong association between
    cholesterol and vascular disease. However, we have been developing for some time the notion that
    heart failure is a metabolically stressful illness," says Dr. Andrew L. Clark of Castle Hill
    Hospital and the University of Hull in England. Clark is co-author of the study, which appears in
    the Dec. 3 issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

    "A high cholesterol level can be seen as good in that it indicates a greater reserve to deal with
    metabolic stresses. And this is supported by some of the other studies. . . showing a greater
    survival with increasing body weight in heart failure and following heart surgery," Clark adds.

    Researchers from Castle Hill Hospital, along with colleagues in London and Berlin, studied 417
    patients with chronic heart failure and found the chance of survival increased 25 percent for each
    39-milligram-per-deciliter (mg/dl) increment in total cholesterol.

    On average, patients with a total cholesterol level of 232 mg/dl had a 25 percent higher survival
    rate than heart failure patients with a total cholesterol level of 193 mg/dl. Experts say a total
    cholesterol figure under 200 mg/dl is desirable.

    Although the results of this study go against the usual "lower cholesterol is better" advice, they
    reinforce findings in several previous studies that linked lower cholesterol with poorer prognosis
    in heart failure patients, the study says.

    Clark says two hypotheses may explain the paradoxical relationship.

    "Lipoproteins are good at absorbing bacterial endotoxin. An intriguing notion is that the reason
    for the immune system activation seen in heart failure patients is related to bowel wall edema,
    allowing bacterial translocation into the body. It may be that lipoproteins mediate a beneficial
    effect by mopping up any bacterial proteins before they cause immune system activation," he says.
    "I tend to like the lipoprotein idea."

    But he cautions on the use of cholesterol-lower statins for chronic heart failure patients.

    "If [health professionals] are using cholesterol-lowering statins, they are doing that without
    evidence that what they are doing is correct. What we say to them is get those patients, those
    with chronic heart failure, to clinical trials so it can be studied further," Clark says.

    However, some caution that lower cholesterol may not necessarily be the cause of the higher
    mortality in heart failure patients, but may be a indicator of other factors that might be linked.

    Dr. Robert Doughty, a research fellow at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, who was not
    connected with the study but reviewed the data, emphasized the results cannot determine that
    low cholesterol was the cause of worse outcomes in the heart failure patients.

    "We have to be careful about this data. Don't get me wrong, and it is very interesting data,"
    Doughty says. "But we should not automatically extrapolate this group of patients who may be at
    the endgame of their disease, and don't forget -- chronic heart failure patients are at the end
    stages of their disease."

    "Just because there is association doesn't mean there is causality. This study is important, but
    there is more work needed to be done for that group which has progressed further along with heart
    failure due to coronary heart disease," he adds.

    --
    ~~~ Patrick Blanchard, M.D., A.B.F.P. Board Certified in Family Practice
    familydoctor.orgblanchard ~~~ SonoScore Winning against heart attack and stroke
    sonoscore.comsonoscore.com

  3. "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    healthcentral.comNewsFullText.cfm

    The Cholesterol Paradox

    A study finds higher levels may actually benefit people with heart failure.

    That's not what the study showed. It showed better outcomes in patients with higher cholesterol
    levels. The study did not show that high cholesterol levels benefit people with heart failure.
    You are already attaching causality to it. I would tend to go along with the notion that sick
    people in general will have lower cholesterol and thus the association of poor outcomes in
    whatever disease you are studying. Conversely, people who are eating well are the ones not
    experiencing a lot of severe symptoms and you would see higher cholesterol. Survey paper work
    research studies in which variables are not manipulated are of limited use. They only show
    associations but do nothing to prove causality. Cholesterol levels associated with coronary
    artery disease when used as a risk factor for CAD is valid only in the younger age group. I don't
    recall the cutoff but older individuals who do not have CAD and a high cholesterol actually are
    better off. This is another paradox and shows that cholesterol per say is not the sole factor in
    determining outcomes or risk factors.

  4. "Robert" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    healthcentral.comNewsFullText.cfm

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The Cholesterol Paradox

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    A study finds higher levels may actually benefit people with heart failure.

    Quoted message said:

    That's not what the study showed. It showed better outcomes in patients with higher cholesterol
    levels. The study did not show that high cholesterol levels benefit people with heart failure. You
    are already attaching causality to it.

    I am attaching nothing to it. All I did was cut and paste an article. If you have problems with the
    article then I suggest that you contact the author.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  5. Robert said:

    Cholesterol levels associated with coronary artery disease when used as a risk factor for CAD is
    valid only in the younger age group. I don't recall the cutoff but older individuals who do not
    have CAD and a high cholesterol actually are better off. This is another paradox and shows that
    cholesterol per say is not the sole factor in determining outcomes or risk factors.


    I certainly agree that cholesterol is not the sole factor for disease.

    you must be cautious as to the definition of CAD however, and then ask yourself how you would prefer
    to be 'profiled'. many studies use a hard clinical event like heart attack or stroke as the measured
    outcome of the study. some use death. as we all know, these are late consequences of atherosclerosis
    and not the prefered 'profile' for ourselves. CAD, or atherosclerosis, or CVD, or cardiovascular
    disease, or hardening of the arteries? how is the disease measured? you can profile someone with
    risk assesment and 'suppose' they have atherosclerosis, or you can actually measure it.

    --
    ~~~ Patrick Blanchard, M.D., A.B.F.P. Board Certified in Family Practice
    familydoctor.orgblanchard ~~~ SonoScore Winning against heart attack and stroke
    sonoscore.comsonoscore.com

  6. Patrick Blanchard said:

    an exerpt from the illustrative reference... ~~
    Dr. Robert Doughty, a research fellow at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, who was not
    connected with the study but reviewed the data, emphasized the results cannot determine that
    low cholesterol was the cause of worse outcomes in the heart failure patients.

    "We have to be careful about this data. Don't get me wrong, and it is very interesting data,"
    Doughty says. "But we should not automatically extrapolate this group of patients who may be at
    the endgame of their disease, and don't forget -- chronic heart failure patients are at the end
    stages of their disease." ~~

    I would tend to agree pb

    As would I, Patrick.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

    --
    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.com

  7. "Patrick Blanchard, M.D." <blanchard@sonoscore_nospam.com> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Robert said:

    Cholesterol levels associated with coronary artery disease when used as


    a

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    risk factor for CAD is valid only in the younger age group. I don't recall the cutoff but older
    individuals who do not have CAD and a high cholesterol actually are better off. This is another
    paradox and shows that cholesterol per say is not the sole factor in determining outcomes or
    risk factors.


    I certainly agree that cholesterol is not the sole factor for disease.

    you must be cautious as to the definition of CAD however, and then ask yourself how you would
    prefer to be 'profiled'. many studies use a hard clinical event like heart attack or stroke as
    the measured outcome of the study. some use death. as we all know, these are late consequences of
    atherosclerosis and not the prefered 'profile' for ourselves. CAD, or atherosclerosis, or CVD, or
    cardiovascular disease, or hardening of the arteries? how is the disease measured? you can
    profile someone with risk assesment and 'suppose' they have atherosclerosis, or you can actually
    measure it.

    --
    ~~~ Patrick Blanchard, M.D., A.B.F.P. Board Certified in Family Practice
    familydoctor.orgblanchard ~~~ SonoScore Winning against heart attack and stroke
    sonoscore.comsonoscore.com

    That is the problem that I was actually referring to in terms of sole determinant as their are a
    large group of conditions with a diverse group of contributing factors. Risk assessment in terms of
    pre-screening in symptomatic individuals goes on a very generalized lipid profile. As more is
    learned especially in the realm of genetics these individuals will be sorted out better and more
    specific modalities can thus be used and developed. It is always better to attack the initiator of
    the cascade rather than the end result.

  8. "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "Robert" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    healthcentral.comNewsFullText.cfm

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The Cholesterol Paradox

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    A study finds higher levels may actually benefit people with heart failure.

    Quoted message said:

    That's not what the study showed. It showed better outcomes in patients with higher cholesterol
    levels. The study did not show that high


    cholesterol

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    levels benefit people with heart failure. You are already attaching causality to it.

    I am attaching nothing to it. All I did was cut and paste an article. If you have problems with
    the article then I suggest that you contact the author.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

    I stand corrected. I was commenting on the article which you posted here and I was responding to it.
    I don't know why I would contact the author as he did not post it here.

  9. Robert said:


    "Patrick Blanchard, M.D." <blanchard@sonoscore_nospam.com> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Robert said:

    Cholesterol levels associated with coronary artery disease when used


    as


    a

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    risk factor for CAD is valid only in the younger age group. I don't recall the cutoff but
    older individuals who do not have CAD and a high cholesterol actually are better off. This is
    another paradox and shows that cholesterol per say is not the sole factor in determining
    outcomes or risk


    factors.

    Quoted message said:


    I certainly agree that cholesterol is not the sole factor for disease.

    you must be cautious as to the definition of CAD however, and then ask yourself how you would
    prefer to be 'profiled'. many studies use a hard clinical event like heart attack or stroke as
    the measured outcome of the study. some use death. as we all know, these are late consequences of
    atherosclerosis and not the prefered 'profile' for ourselves. CAD, or atherosclerosis, or CVD, or
    cardiovascular disease, or hardening of the arteries? how is the disease measured? you can
    profile someone with risk assesment and 'suppose' they have atherosclerosis, or you can actually
    measure it.

    -- ~~~ Patrick Blanchard, M.D., A.B.F.P. Board Certified in Family Practice
    familydoctor.orgblanchard ~~~ SonoScore Winning against heart attack and stroke
    sonoscore.comsonoscore.com

    That is the problem that I was actually referring to in terms of sole determinant as their are a
    large group of conditions with a diverse group of contributing factors. Risk assessment in terms
    of pre-screening in symptomatic individuals goes on a very generalized lipid profile.

    yes, a size 9 shoe does not fit everyone. Some do better with a size
    7.89523 instead.

    this difference is the foundation of risk assesment vs actual measure of atherosclerosis. even
    NMR profiling of LDL-C subclasses is still considered risk assesment and not a measure of the
    disease itself.

    Quoted message said:

    As more is learned especially in the realm of genetics these individuals will be sorted out better
    and more specific modalities can thus be used and developed. It is always better to attack the
    initiator of the cascade rather than the end result.


    yes, I think gene therapy will drive treatment for those with advancing atherosclerosis in
    the future.

    --
    ~~~ Patrick Blanchard, M.D., A.B.F.P. Board Certified in Family Practice
    familydoctor.orgblanchard ~~~ SonoScore Winning against heart attack and stroke
    sonoscore.comsonoscore.com

  10. "Robert" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "Robert" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:

    "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...
    > healthcentral.comNewsFullText.cfm

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > The Cholesterol Paradox

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > A study finds higher levels may actually benefit people with heart failure.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    That's not what the study showed. It showed better outcomes in patients with higher
    cholesterol levels. The study did not show that high


    cholesterol

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    levels benefit people with heart failure. You are already attaching causality to it.

    I am attaching nothing to it. All I did was cut and paste an article. If you have problems with
    the article then I suggest that you contact the author.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

    I stand corrected. I was commenting on the article which you posted here and I was responding to
    it. I don't know why I would contact the author as he did not post it here.

    You would contact the author since you are apparently taking issue with something that he wrote.

  11. "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > You would contact the author since you
    are apparently taking issue

    Quoted message said:

    with something that he wrote.

    So when someone posts an article such as you have then we should not respond to it here but contact
    the author privately about any objections.

    I wonder if everyone here knows that. Thank you for the clarification.

  12. "Robert" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]

    Quoted message said:


    "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > You would contact the author since you
    are apparently taking issue

    Quoted message said:

    with something that he wrote.

    So when someone posts an article such as you have then we should not respond to it here but
    contact the author privately about any objections.

    I wonder if everyone here knows that. Thank you for the clarification.

    *Sigh* Please reread your original post to me. You made the mistake of thinking that I was saying
    something about the research when it was the author who had made the statement.

    --
    Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - mailgate.orgmailgate.org

  13. Once upon a time, our fellow Diarmid Logan rambled on about "Re: The Cholesterol Paradox." Our
    champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    Quoted message said:

    All I did was cut and paste an article.

    Aaackk!

    Don't you know that cut & pasting an article is *not* permitted in a science forum?

    Besides, all learned people agree that it is 'cut & copy.'

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

  14. In article said:

    "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > You would contact the author since you
    are apparently taking issue

    Quoted message said:

    with something that he wrote.

    So when someone posts an article such as you have then we should not respond to it here but
    contact the author privately about any objections.

    No, one should comment in the NG on the article _and_ optionally contact the author about any
    objections with the article, but one should not attribute its objectionable points to the poster of
    the article when the poster is clearly not the author.

    Quoted message said:

    I wonder if everyone here knows that.

    Perhaps they do now.

    Van

    --
    Van Bagnol / v a n at wco dot com / c r l at bagnol dot com ...enjoys - Theatre / Windsurfing /
    Skydiving / Mountain Biking ...feels - "Parang lumalakad ako sa loob ng paniginip" ...thinks - "An
    Error is Not a Mistake ... Unless You Refuse to Correct It"

  15. "Van Bagnol" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    In article said:

    "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > You would contact the author since
    you are apparently taking issue

    Quoted message said:

    with something that he wrote.

    So when someone posts an article such as you have then we should not


    respond

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    to it here but contact the author privately about any objections.

    No, one should comment in the NG on the article _and_ optionally contact the author about any
    objections with the article, but one should not attribute its objectionable points to the poster
    of the article when the poster is clearly not the author.

    I mistook the intro to the article as written by the poster. I commented that I stood corrected on
    that point and then it got into weidness.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    I wonder if everyone here knows that.

    Perhaps they do now.

    Van

    --
    Van Bagnol / v a n at wco dot com / c r l at bagnol dot com ...enjoys - Theatre / Windsurfing /
    Skydiving / Mountain Biking ...feels - "Parang lumalakad ako sa loob ng paniginip" ...thinks - "An
    Error is Not a Mistake ... Unless You Refuse to Correct


    It"

  16. John 'the Man' <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Once upon a time, our fellow Diarmid Logan rambled on about "Re: The Cholesterol Paradox." Our
    champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    Quoted message said:

    All I did was cut and paste an article.

    Aaackk!

    Don't you know that cut & pasting an article is *not* permitted in a science forum?

    Besides, all learned people agree that it is 'cut & copy.'

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

    God, another fool who thinks that he is the Lord of the Internet!

  17. "Robert" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    "Van Bagnol" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    In article said:

    "Diarmid Logan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > You would contact the author since
    you are apparently taking issue
    > with something that he wrote.

    So when someone posts an article such as you have then we should not


    respond

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    to it here but contact the author privately about any objections.

    No, one should comment in the NG on the article _and_ optionally contact the author about any
    objections with the article, but one should not attribute its objectionable points to the poster
    of the article when the poster is clearly not the author.

    I mistook the intro to the article as written by the poster. I commented that I stood corrected on
    that point and then it got into weidness.

    No, you are the one that made it "weird".

  18. [email hidden] (Diarmid Logan) wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    John 'the Man' <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Once upon a time, our fellow Diarmid Logan rambled on about "Re: The Cholesterol Paradox." Our
    champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

    Quoted message said:

    All I did was cut and paste an article.

    Aaackk!

    Don't you know that cut & pasting an article is *not* permitted in a science forum?

    Besides, all learned people agree that it is 'cut & copy.'

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

    God, another fool who thinks that he is the Lord of the Internet!

    Hey, hey, hey , HEY! He is not a fool. He is a mental defective.

    TC

  19. Doctors,

    You may be interested to check these links. westonaprice.orghd.html
    westonaprice.orgfats phony.html

    I hope that you don't recommend anymore to your patients to eat large quantity of margarine and to
    avoid butter. On a nutrition basis, the worst things for many diseases is hydrogenated vegetable
    oils, high consumption of cheap vegetable oils (rich in omega 6 fatty acids) combined with low
    consumption of long chain omega 3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA in fish oils only). The imbalance in the
    omega6:omega3 ratio is a big problem today for almost everybody living in industrialised countries.

    Serge

    "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Patrick Blanchard said:

    an exerpt from the illustrative reference... ~~
    Dr. Robert Doughty, a research fellow at the University of Auckland in


    New

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Zealand, who was not connected with the study but reviewed the data, emphasized the results
    cannot determine that low cholesterol was the


    cause

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    of worse outcomes in the heart failure patients.

    "We have to be careful about this data. Don't get me wrong, and it is


    very

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    interesting data," Doughty says. "But we should not automatically extrapolate this group of
    patients who may be at the endgame of their disease, and don't forget -- chronic heart failure
    patients are at the


    end

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    stages of their disease." ~~

    I would tend to agree pb

    As would I, Patrick.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

    --
    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.com

  20. This is very interesting. Thank you.
    Patrick
    On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:44:21 -0500, Opti-Énergie <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Doctors,

    You may be interested to check these links. westonaprice.orghd.html
    westonaprice.orgfats phony.html

    I hope that you don't recommend anymore to your patients to eat large quantity of margarine and to
    avoid butter. On a nutrition basis, the worst things for many diseases is hydrogenated vegetable
    oils, high consumption of cheap vegetable oils (rich in omega 6 fatty acids) combined with low
    consumption of long chain omega 3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA in fish oils only). The imbalance in
    the omega6:omega3 ratio is a big problem today for almost everybody living in industrialised
    countries.

    Serge

    "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Patrick Blanchard said:

    an exerpt from the illustrative reference... ~~
    Dr. Robert Doughty, a research fellow at the University of Auckland in


    New

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Zealand, who was not connected with the study but reviewed the data, emphasized the results
    cannot determine that low cholesterol was the


    cause

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    of worse outcomes in the heart failure patients.

    "We have to be careful about this data. Don't get me wrong, and it is


    very

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    interesting data," Doughty says. "But we should not automatically extrapolate this group of
    patients who may be at the endgame of their disease, and don't forget -- chronic heart failure
    patients are at the


    end

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    stages of their disease." ~~

    I would tend to agree pb

    As would I, Patrick.

    Humbly,

    Andrew

    --
    Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.com


    --
    ~~~ Patrick Blanchard, M.D., A.B.F.P. Board Certified in Family Practice
    familydoctor.orgblanchard ~~~ SonoScore Winning against heart attack and stroke
    sonoscore.comsonoscore.com

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.