My Portuguese mother cooks almost exclusively by frying in fat, and consumes a ton of cholesterol…has better cholesterol results than I do.
I’m on the genetics predisposition crew, however I don’t limit myself to thinking I’m stuck there, there are a lot of options to treat it
Excessive carbohydrates effect cholesterol more than dietary cholesterol intake. Dietary cholesterol intake is more of an issue with those who are genetically predisposed to cholesterol issues.
$$$$$$$
It’s become very tough to determine what’s needed vs. what’s just given. Pharma companies obviously love anything that you’re on forever, regardless of whether it’s statins, opiates, or HIV drugs.
Given that being ‘dependent’ or ‘addicted’ leads to more predictable and repeatable (ie profitable) sales, it’s inevitable that bad practices will eventually be pushed by someone out there. These types of drugs require way higher scrutiny and all data should be 100% open.
It’s almost impossible to not have some level of conspiracy somewhere here by at least one of these companies.
I don’t know what I’ll be like when I’m say 60, but at this point, I think I’d rather treat with testing diets and exercise than go on statins. In terms of healthy longevity, I still statins are a crapshoot for someone willing to try different diets and continue training.
From one thing I read, this actually makes sense. As I recall, the test measures the cholesterol your body produces, so eating more could actually lower your production.
How much is excessive? What level of intake is it comparing? Are they comparing 0 mg intake to 200 mg, or are they adding 200 mg to an uncontrolled diet?
I agree, drugs that are treating symptoms rather then the underlying cause should be used in conjunction with actual treatments, physical therapy, dietary interventions, ect
There is value in the drugs but I disagree with the way they are being used.
Research carbohydrate induced hypertriglyceridemia. Single largest factor in the us in elevated triglyceride levels which obviously effect HDl/LDL. It’s not a set grams, more of excessive particularly refined in amounts that remove vital macros like protein and especially fats.
Sorry I missed the memo on this, why do you need cholesterol in your diet?
Let’s not get into another cholesterol debate…LOL
Sorry, the sciencey part of me won’t let me not question statements like that. 
That’s fine but science also proves genetics is the key factor in high and low cholesterol levels.
I have yet to see proof of that being the case for most people.
Regardless lowering dietary cholesterol intake does lower blood cholesterol.
The claim he made is that cholesterol is the substrate by which your body produces all of its endogenous hormones (including testosterone, adrenal hormones, and even vitamin D). Let’s not turn this article into a stupid debate about HDL vs LDL vs dietary cholesterol. Cholesterol is essential in your body, but isn’t an essential nutrient, meaning sufficient quantities can be produced by the body with proper fat intake to make cholesterol consumption technically unnecessary.
But a lot of people want more hormone precursor in their bodies cuz broscience. A lot of people don’t cuz correlation to heart disease. Not sure about this part of the science, but I don’t think it relates to this article.
I moved that thread here, but @Christianmelon is right - cholesterol-free interventions have been used and people weren’t dropping dead. The body adapts well. But it’s still beneficial.
Whoa now I’m the one who said that. And my post is directly related to that article and its reference to cholesterol without getting into the weeds that this thread does. Bullshit moving my post here
Ya I am going to have to agree, moving these post here was kind of bs, particularly the first one calling out the misinformation.
Requesting my first post and twenty’s be moved back. @Mike
Alternative solution to be considered in the future: just delete @Brawn 's stupid posts if he changes the topic from the article to his fiery passion for the dietary cholesterol vs serum cholesterol debate.
Oh, so I am stupid. Thanks for letting me know. EVERYTHING I SAID ABOUT CHOLESTEROL IS TRUE. Sorry if you can’t accept facts.
Explains my position
no it works like this
ok, do you have any evidence
My doctor said so
Well I can’t ask your doctor, and doctors can be wrong
No she’s like smart
Ok but that still isn’t evidence, could you give me a study or something?
Well I am going to trust my DOCTOR over a random forum user
That’s fine, but I can’t base what advice I give off of what a random forum user said his doctor told him
My position is still right, sorry you can’t accept facts
Its not that i’m against you being right, its that you keep making absolute statements in regards to health and then refuse to back any of it up with evidence, but then keep coming back and saying what I’m saying is wrong while still refusing to back any of it up, and you’re a moderator, I somewhat expect a higher level of discourse out of someone in a position of power.
Well my bad. Everyone said let’s not turn this into a cholesterol argument, so I moved it to the cholesterol argument where we could discuss cholesterol-free interventions. It really had nothing to do with the post over there. But I’ll fix the old post with a strikethrough
PDF:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/17512433.2018.1519391?needAccess=true
Statins are useless. LDL-C is not the problem.
We slowly get closer to the truth…