First of all, it's never about what your LDL happens to be right now. It's about what you've been exposed to your whole life. Sometimes you see denialists cite cross-sectional studies (with no follow-up time) as evidence that LDL doesn't matter. This is why that's wrong. (2/10)
This is a very clear illustration how risk manifests over time. Most of us get CVD at some age - with lower lifetime exposure, you can push it further and further. Perhaps until you die of something else. (3/10)
But of course other risk factors also have an effect. They determine your vulnerability to LDL. With higher vulnerability due to non-lipid risk factors, less LDL is needed to initiate and progress CVD. (4/10)
And here's how and why the timing of intervention matters. If you're already at high risk, a modest reduction in LDL will yield only a modest benefit. However, if you begin earlier in life, even a modest reduction yields greater benefit over time due to cumulative exposure (5/10)
It's common to see LDL-denialists cite clinical trials where reduction in LDL yields small benefit. However, these are usually done on patients with either advanced disease ("too late") or otherwise low risk (takes a long time to see the outcome benefit). (6/10)
Again, the cumulative exposure matters and it's illustrated here when comparing the genetic effects of low LDL and reduction via statins (7/10)
The benefit is proportional to lowering, which is a very clear (but just one of many) indication of a causal effect. (8/10)
Those who claim that LDL doesn't matter ( = LDL-deniers) are dangerous quacks. Please don't listen to them. (9/10)
On a personal note, I have somewhat bad LDL genetics myself. I also love the taste of foods that elevate it. I have strong cognitive bias to believe that LDL is harmless. However, the evidence is so overwhelming I can't. (10/10)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
First of all, TCM is BS. It may have been useful thousands of years ago when nothing was known about science but nowadays we know better. Besides, "modern TCM" was pretty much invented by Chairman Mao in the 50's: slate.com/articles/healt… (2/16)
Look at this terrifying aim of the review! "WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR TCM TO SPREAD TO WESTERN SOCIETIES". Ideological bias, much? (3/16)