Paul Saladino· MD
So once again, APOB is better than LDL because it does account for that VLDL. Uh but it still doesn't give us the full story.
Loading…
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.
So once again, APOB is better than LDL because it does account for that VLDL. Uh but it still doesn't give us the full story.
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.
and trust me virtually all of the early trials that showed low HDL cholesterol was bad news were never ever adjusted for April B your LDL particle counts because I'm gonna tell you right now and that includes Framingham which I alluded to earlier
and it's interesting to me that with all the emphasis that's so many of the lipid guidelines have put on non-hdl cholesterol they all still say ldl cholesterol and the american guidelines clearly state apob and non-hdl are better than ldl but the world is has remained and it's a phenomenon that i'm that i don't really understand how resistant the lipid world has been to change
there are there are a handful of studies that show that non-hdl cholesterol may be equal to b there are more studies that actually show apob is better
that is still an inferior predictor of risk relative to apob yes