Peter Attia· MD
I'd agree with you except I think there is value in knowing what a triglyceride is for other reasons
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
I'd agree with you except I think there is value in knowing what a triglyceride is for other reasons
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
it's the particle okay when you're measuring the triglyceride you're just measuring a blob of liquid in a bunch of particles and you need to know the number of them so it's an important number in the sense of If You're A lipoprotein guy trying to figure things out if it's extremely high it increases the risk of pancreatitis but I haven't seen any solid evidence that triglyceride itself is pro-athrogenic
people show using Mr that triglycerides were quote causing or associated with increased risk but when you took into account the non-hdl cholesterol or the apob disappears
if it's extremely high it increases the risk of pancreatitis but I haven't seen any solid evidence that triglyceride itself is pro-athrogenic