Paul Saladino· MD
Maybe it’s time to consider the mounting evidence this is wrong, too?
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.
Maybe it’s time to consider the mounting evidence this is wrong, too?
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.
the assumption is that these little proteins these LDLs they are particularly at larger quantities they're kind of just crashing into your cells that line the vessel walls known as the endothelial cells particularly in the arteries and so because of that they're just they're slowly eroding their way into the vascular wall and creating more and more plaque and the story is it's described as often that it's just progressive like there's no regressive miss to it's just a they often referred to and I mentioned this in the talk a lifetime burden lipoprotein burden that the more that there is and at the higher and higher gradient the worse the potential outcome for people
and then it gets really complicated when you start looking at the lipids because then the lipid hypothesis gets tied into this and the idea that LDL cholesterol uh is is bad for humans or is directly injurious to the endothelium and that's a whole separate podcast that I've done