$29 Billion Reasons to Lie about Cholesterol

Millions of people around the world are currently taking medications to lower their cholesterol. In England alone, around 7 million people are taking cholesterol-lowering statins in the hope of reducing their risk of a heart attack. But an increasing number of doctors and researchers are questioning the supposed link between cholesterol and heart disease.

At the same time, many people are concerned about the mass prescription of medications. In particular, prescribing medications to people who are, for the most part, perfectly healthy.

A team is now working on a documentary about the cholesterol hypothesis.  The documentary will address several key issues: Have the facts about cholesterol and heart disease been distorted by pharmaceutical companies keen to increase their profits? Have our health authorities done their job to protect us from these commercial interests?

29 billion dollars is a conservative estimate of the current value of the cholesterol-lowering industry.

29 billion pounds is what cardiovascular disease costs the UK economy each year.

If the focus on cholesterol has been a mistake, then the greatest cost is associated with the lost opportunity to tackle heart disease.

 

Read More 

$29 Billion Reasons to Lie About Cholesterol29 Billion Reasons to Lie about Cholesterol provides the facts; enabling readers to make informed choices about the prevention of heart disease and diabetes.

Embedly Powered

via Google

 

Low Cholesterol and Infections

by Uffe Ravnskov, M.D., Ph.D.

Several researchers have claimed that statin treatment prevents infections. Recently a Dutch group published an analysis of the statin trials where the authors had reported the number of infections. Not unexpectedly they didn´t find any difference between the statin groups and the controls (those who got an ineffective placebo pill).

In an editorial in the same issue of British Medical Journal, where the Dutch report was published, Beatrice Golomb commented the study. It was certainly not expected either because, as she wrote, a number of relevant factors may distort the results. One of them is the fact that among 632 statin trials, only eleven reported the number of infections, and “most authors declined to provide the omitted information when approached”. “The best evidence”, she concluded, “is that statins should not be used to forestall infection or its consequences.” 

There is even evidence of the opposite. As Golomb also pointed out, low cholesterol is a risk factor for infection, and as we have a plausible mechanism to propose, we send a letter to British Medical Journal, now published as a Rapid Response.

If you sympathize with our letter you are most welcome to vote (on the right hand column). Many positive votes may possibly increase its chance to become published in the paper version as well.

 

Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD, independent investigator
President of THINCS, The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics
Magle Stora Kyrkogata 9, 22350 Lund, Sweden
tel +46 46145022  or  +46-702580416
www.ravnskov.nu/uffe


Low Cholesterol and Cancer

by Uffe Ravnskov, M.D., Ph.D.

In many western countries more and more get cancer although at the same time more and more people stop smoking, one of  the most cancer provoking factors. Members of The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics think that the reason is the increasing use of cholesterol lowering drugs. Those who promote such treatment argue that no analysis of the statin trials have shown any association and some even claim that the statins protect against cancer.

There are many ways to cover up the fact that lowering cholesterol may lead to cancer, but there are also numerous observations that point to low cholesterol as the villain.

But how can low cholesterol lead to cancer? This is a good question, and there is an answer. The reason is that the lipoproteins partake in the immune defense system, and because many cancers are caused by virus or bacteria.

Together with two members of THINCS, Kilmer McCully, the discoverer of the association between homocysteine and atherosclerosis, and Paul Rosch, President of the American Institute of Stress, I have tried to present the facts around this issue. The paper has finally been published in Quarterly Journal of Medicine. Before that, we sent the paper to six different medical journals (not at the same time of course), all of which rejected it. Here are their arguments:

Archives of Internal Medicine: I regret to inform you that its priority rating is not sufficiently high to warrant our considering it further for publication. Based on our initial review, we will not be sending the paper for additional outside editorial review.

CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians: Thank you for submitting your proposal for an article on “Low cholesterol, cancer and the role of lipoproteins” to CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. It is our editorial policy to concentrate on articles that address cancer more broadly (treatment modalities used for many cancer types, current treatment of common types of cancer, public health issues relevant to several cancer types, etc.). For these reasons, we cannot consider your article for publication in CA. However, you may want to consider submitting your article to CANCER, another peer-reviewed American Cancer Society journal, which publishes more focused papers such as the one you have described.

Cancer: Thank you for your recent manuscript submission of “Low cholesterol, cancer and the role of lipoproteins” (CNCR-11-2485) to Cancer.  Your paper has undergone initial review. I am sorry to report that it was not deemed to be of broad enough interest to our readership to merit further evaluation.

JAMA: Thank you for your inquiry. However, JAMA is not able to consider your manuscript for publication.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute: I am sorry that we shall not be able to use the above-titled manuscript. After careful evaluation, the Editorial Board did not accord it a priority sufficient for further consideration.

Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal:  Thank you for submitting the manuscript # SCAR-2011-0151 entitled “Low cholesterol, cancer and the crucial role of lipoproteins” to the Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal. The questions raised are important, indeed, and deserve a thorough analysis and discussion. Admittedly not being an expert on this field, my impression is that the present manuscript is polemic in style, and biased. This view was shared by one leading cancer epidemiologist; he/she finds the present selection and interpretation of the literature superficial and subjective. Hence I choose not to forward your manuscript to our reviewers.

Read the paper yourself and tell me if it the paper is not “of broad enough interest” or if it is “polemic in style” or if “its priority rating is not sufficiently high”

What I have told you here is no exception. Many of our members including myself can tell you about how difficult it is to publish papers that go counter to conventional wisdom.

 

Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD, independent investigator
Spokesman; THINCS, The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics
Magle Stora Kyrkogata 9, 22350 Lund, Sweden
tel +46 46145022  or  +46-702580416
www.ravnskov.nu/uffe

 

Reference

Ravnskov U, McCully KS, Rosch PJ. The statin-low cholesterol-cancer conundrum. QJM. 2011 Dec 8. [Epub ahead of print]

 

Krill Oil Demonstrates Beneficial Regulation of Genes Involved in Glucose, Lipid & Cholesterol Metabolism in the Liver

Aker BioMarine announces a publication of a new preclinical study on krill oil. The study results showed a significantly higher impact on gene regulation in the liver when the omega-3 fatty acids were given in the form of phospholipids (krill oil), compared to the triglyceride form (fish oil). More specifically, krill oil downregulated the activity of pathways involved in hepatic glucose production as well as lipid and cholesterol synthesis. The data also suggested that krill oil-supplementation increases the activity of the mitochondrial respiratory chain.

Read More