Peter Attia· MD
the point only being there is there was a precedent for you can lower cholesterol and worsen events yeah
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.
the point only being there is there was a precedent for you can lower cholesterol and worsen events yeah
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 mechanism that it's believed that this drug worked is it prevented the conversion of desol to cholesterol that's the final step of cholesterol synthesis in one of the two Pathways yeah and so when you gave people this drug and the name always escapes me um uh triol or something like that when you gave people this drug their cholesterol went down significantly and the drug was approved on the basis of cholesterol lowering not on the basis of outcomes today cholesterol drugs are only approved on the basis of outcomes as well uh but then had to be pulled from the market because you saw the events so I don't think they ever investigated it um but I think today we look back and we think that desol acted perhaps as bad if not worse than cholesterol in terms of the oxidative process so you basically lowered cholesterol but the precursor went through the roof and the precursor was at least as bad if not more damaging