Fat and Cholesterol Don’t Cause Heart Attacks and Statins Are Not The Solution Kindle Edition

Finally, someone speaks the truth about fat and cholesterol. Highly recommend this book. It's written in a reference style but it is easy to understand and full of studies backing up what is written.

As a side remark, first there way in February 2009 I started reading, and buying, books especially concerning cholesterol. This because then by the blood measures for me and my wife, it for my wife turned out that her total cholesterol number was on 276. And we then by 2 hospital doctors were told she had to start on taking Statin drugs.However, during the week before this second meeting in the hospital, I had gone in to search information about cholesterol, and then among other now had copies of the papers for the heart attack calculators, from Harvard Medical School. Therefore, I told the doctors that the paper for women showed us that there was nothing wrong with the connection between her age and the max cholesterol number, which she had.But, “of course”, the doctors answered back that we were in Thailand, not in USA, so for her this paper was not valid!But my wife, a Thai, trusted the doctors, but after taking the first of these Statins, she got so bad that never again she took one more. And during the following years, she started to trust me more than the doctors.Now here in year 2018, when now after 9 years, by another case, when I met one of the doctors again, I then asked him “What about cholesterol, and if it’s higher than 200?” Then he answered back “That’s fine, cholesterol is healthy”. I then to him bought a copy of this book. Especially so that he can learn more about cholesterol, besides written by really experts, instead of now just told that cholesterol is god, opposite to earlier told that it is bad.I have bought and read 20 books especially about cholesterol, but of course, also many other doctor and health books, but in this book, I still found more science information about cholesterol, caused by so many top qualified people’s writings.Among other much more for example historically concerning cholesterol longer bag in time. Among other we read about there was back 160 years ago, when the ‘cholesterol hypothesis’ first came, and was won by Virchow, instead of Rokitansky. And as it here is written, had it instead been Rokitansky who had won, then probably, the ideas, which we now have been told during 60 years, about cholesterol, blood, and heart disease, newer would have resulted in coming.We know Framingham, and the Framingham Study, which is the study that have been running through most years, and from there I recall that way back in 1986 we got the information telling that for each 1% drop in cholesterol there would be an 11% increase in coronary and total mortality. This I told to a 80 years old Danish person, there way back 6-8 years ago, who then had been measured in having 275 total in cholesterol, and then by Thai doctors told to start on Statin. To me he answered back, that the Americans foctors don’t know anything about health, and neither do I anything, as I am not a doctor. Then 1 to 1 1/2 month later, when measued again, then total number now only was 150! I loked many thimes on the paper, to trust my eyes. Shortly after this he had the first heart attack.But there on the sides 9-10, in the book, we read that the director of the Framingham Study from 1966 to 1979, newer referred to the cholesterol as being a powerful predictor of heart disease, and that this discovery first came out after he had retired!At one place in the book we read about a research where in on country they took the 0.6% of the persons having the highest cholesterol number, that it even up to more than 1,000, and found that there were nothing bad in this. And then among other I recall, probably in the book written by McCully, Kilmer S., MD., “The Heart Revolution”, that the higher cholesterol number a person have, then statistically, the higher IQ!I have read a couple of book written by Uffe Ravnskov, but here in this book, it’s strangle for me to read the interview with Uffe Ravnskov, because there on the side 34 then reading: “the professor accused me for fraud and asked me to leave the department”, there in 180 in Lund, in Sweden. Because for me, in 1989, the new department chief for 3 departments there in Risø, Denmark, then told me that no matter which education I would take they would be invalid from the same day as I got the proof, and asked me to leave the department. I am engineer, and had discovered failures made in Risø, by really going in the depth with my works, and praised to the clouds in the other departments. But never before have I heard anything about this case had happened for Ravnskov.

This book is a useful compilation of information on heart disease, cholesterol, fats and health in general from multiple authors.There is a bit of overlap between authors... but it's useful to get the same info from different perspectives.This book has leading edge info on sulfation of cholesterol which is hard to obtain.I've been wondering for years about sulfation... now finally it's starting to come together.The book is a good summary of why cholesterol is unlikely to be the problem... including Duane Gravelind's (NASA spacedoc) own experience.Duane has manually done counts of statin side effects using the FDA database because he wasn't allowed access to more advanced tools.His hard work has put better numbers to the statin problem and he has clarified many of the relevant pathways.This was one of his last collaborations before his recent death from the cumulative side effects of statins.This book points out not only that feeding rabbits saturated fat is not a reasonable model for what occurs in humans but that many of the early trials used hydrogenated vegetable oils (turned polyunsaturated vegetable oils into saturated fats) to prove that saturated fats are bad for us. We know that trans fats (produced in hydrogenation of vegetable oils) cause heart disease... so why this crucial distinction has eluded so many researchers is perplexing. Originally the link between trans fats and heart disease was disputed which may explain some of the early confusion. This book joins the dots in this area nicely... and is the first to do so this clearly.Palm oil is the one area where the book may not have looked carefully enough at the evidence .Palm oil has 13x the amount of Beta carotene (vitA) as a carrot.It has all 8 types of vitamin E.We know that many of these vitamins survive frying... even multiple times.We also know that the level of aldehydes is very low in saturated fats compared to unsaturated fats.Yet the research suggests palm oil causes heart disease?In most studies the researchers don't clearly identify what kind of palm oil is being used.It is not unusual for palm oil to be hydrogenated despite the fact that it is already ~70% saturated fat (30% unsaturated).It is rare for research to be carried out on unprocessed palm oil... most of it is clarified (at the very least).Thus the conclusions are surprising and it would be nice if the authors addressed some of these potential confounding factors?Much of this book naturally follows on from Mary Enig's work on fats... and much of her work seems to have influenced many of the authors.RIP Mary EnigOne thing missing from the book is any mention of aldehydes.These have come up as a problem in polyunsaturated oils when subjected to high temperatures (frying).At high temperatures the level of aldehydes is ~200x greater in polyunsaturated fats than saturated fats.Aldehydes are linked to disease processes in the body.This seems like something worthy of a mention?Adding a chapter to address this issue would be a good idea.Critques of cholesterol trials raise some interesting problems with analyses including using old data in preference to newer data.Studies after 2005 were required to disclose more data... and have somehow often been ignored in analyses.This is counter-intuitive... and suggests a problem.Additional problems exist with disclosure of data... as the conclusions of many researchers cannot be checked unless they release data.There is no requirement to release a lot of data... so many researchers don't.The book is well referenced so you can easily check where the info is coming from.The language is often quite technical (some authors write as if they were writing for journals)... which may put off less technically proficient readers?The editor could simplify some of the more convoluted sentences?If you're interested in this area then this is an up-to-date summary of what is going on.The only reason it gets 4 stars is that there are quite a few typo's in the book andt could use a bit of editing.The style of each author is different and the editor hasn't tried to unify the styles for the book.This makes it a bit annoying as some authors are very easy to follow... and some are not.A couple of authors are not native english speakers and the editor ought to have corrected some of their grammar... as it makes them a bit hard to understand.Likewise the use of abbreviations was annoying when the abbreviation did not include the full term somewhere early in the piece.Given that most of us are not experts in this field it's also useful to repeat the full abbreviation a few times through the text.This is especially useful when multiple abbreviations are being used... as you have a tendency to remember some and forget others.Despite the problems with grammar the foreign language authors add depth to the book... and it is much better because of their contribution.It is nice to hear the perspective of the Japanese and the Eastern Europeans... not just the English speaking countries.Please put some diagrams in the book?We would love to see what the molecules look like.This was one of the frustrations with the book.Most people would gladly pay more for diagrams (a picture is worth a thousand words)?These quibbles are all fixable in a second edition.I liked this book a lot despite the quibbles.Thanks for writing such an interesting compilation of information.:-)

One of the first and most comprehemnsive collections of papers that debunk the crazy world of statins.

I like this book because it covers both the medical issue and why many in the general public believe the exact opposite of the truth. When two sides in a controversy are contradicting each other, a person like myself must find reliable information about health. For me it is personal, each day when I decide what to eat, and how to improve my health with the best available food. I plan to buy more copies of the book to give to my friends. Next year (year 2020) the US federal department of agriculture plans to revise its dietary guidelines, and I hope enough people will read this book and other books like it, to learn about fat and cholesterol, and use this information to push the US FDA to recognize and recommend to eat more fat, less carbohydrate.

I am a sceptic about statins and this book is a collection of scholarly articles written by a group of skeptics. I can’t give it a five star rating because, although it isn’t giving medical advice, to believe or inform one’s own care regarding cholesterol using this as a guide, would go against common mainstream medical thinking. Interesting, yes, a basis for a discussion with your physician, wow, they would have to be a skeptic themselves or very open minded to the ideas.

En inglés.. Very well written and researched. I am familiar with the topic and rate this book quite highly.

I bought this for my mom.