Peter Attia· MD
hdl-c is just categorically not a useful metric it is like a first-order term
Loading…
We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
hdl-c is just categorically not a useful metric it is like a first-order term
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.
HDL cholesterol tells us nothing about HDL function in fact anytime you increase HDL cholesterol pharmacologically you seem to make patients worse
I personally think it's a waste of time to even put it in the lipid profile other than it's used in certain calculations that are popular nowadays like non HDL cholesterol
so again how do I know I can't use hdl-c as a metric to tell me I'm deliberating plaque in your artery walls ivory
which is hdl cholesterol the number that everybody sees when they look at their lipid panel that if it's below 40 milligrams per deciliter is probably flagged as being too low if it's above 70 your doctor gives you a high five that is measuring the concentration of cholesterol within an hdl particle now it doesn't tell you anything about the functionality of that particle