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.
as long as you can both store and make use of fat even if you're relying more on it then the apob containing lipoproteins don't seem to have that likewise association with risk we would expect if we're taking the lipid hypothesis broadly
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 found that they did not have rapid development of plaque and again this seems to make sense from the perspective of their lipid metabolism was functioning as we would expect there wasn't there wasn't a better uh explain their higher LDL it was the opposite that they were actually functionally using their lipids in order to survive properly and that's probably a good thing thing doesn't seem to be matched with a likewise outcome of higher levels of plaque development
the thing doesn't seem to be matched with a likewise outcome of higher levels of plaque development so again I'm constantly Landing in the model that to me makes more sense for which as long as you can both store and make use of fat even if you're relying