Peter Attia· MD
and so far at least with pharmacologic lowering of apob with the currently fda approved drugs there is no signal of harm
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.
and so far at least with pharmacologic lowering of apob with the currently fda approved drugs there is no signal of harm
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.
there are other ways to treat apob besides diet and so I feel like if part of the argument for I need to have this apob high is because the diet that's making it high is producing other benefits that's sort of not necessary right one can consume a diet that if it needs to be in a certain way and produce a high apob you could still continue to consume that diet and just pharmacologically address the apob problem
if you're just talking about managing lipoprotein risk it really comes down to pharmacology