Re: Cholesterol Levels Can't Be Too Low (report)

"Blocked" <blockedthedoc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in part:

>The reporter in the above press story may have quoted Topol M.D., but
>his name is not part of the study group (abstract below).
>
>Anything "wrong" with the study M.D.'s?
>
>Seem to me that the point is that:
>1. Lower LDL is better and,
>2. Higher doses of statins did not produce markedly more side effect
>than lower doses.
>3. Since there is little no disparity between the dosage costs, where
>is the Pfizer conspiracy?

My point in the OP was that the science reporting (the journal) was accurate
and talked about super low LDL. But the journalist writing up the science to
make it available to the masses creates the impression that *total
cholesterol* of 40 or so has been found safe and even beneficial.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
.