Re: Should we really be lowering cholesterol
From: Jay Tanzman (jtanzman_at_sph.llu.edu)
Date: 08/28/04
- Next message: Robert: "Re: Canadian doctors coming to the US"
- Previous message: Robert: "Re: MD pleads politicians instead of courts"
- In reply to: Wolfbrother: "Re: Should we really be lowering cholesterol"
- Next in thread: Robert: "Re: Should we really be lowering cholesterol"
- Reply: Robert: "Re: Should we really be lowering cholesterol"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:18:39 -0700
Wolfbrother wrote:
> "Robert" <RobertJ@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<10itrga10hgaq72@corp.supernews.com>...
>
>>"Wolfbrother" <rangerhasten@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:6eb8f6eb.0408261224.479b1839@posting.google.com...
>>
>>>Ray K <raykosXXX@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:<VamXc.4809$ZD4.5182422@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
>>
>>>>Is lowering cholesterol really a good thing? Regardless of method -
>>>>prescription drugs, diet, supplements - it seems like treating a symptom
>>>>rather than the underlying cause. The question becomes, why is
>>>>cholesterol too high?
>>>>
>>>>Many of the body's hormones are derived from cholesterol. Suppose that,
>>>>for whatever reason, the conversion of cholesterol to hormone A is only
>>>>half as efficient as in our youth or in a healthier body. Perhaps the
>>>>increase in cholesterol is the body's attempt to maintain the proper
>>>>level of hormone A. Of course if the conversions of cholesterol to
>>>>hormones B and C are okay, then hormones B and C will be become too
>>
>> high.
>>
>>>>I welcome your comments on this possibility, as well as any other
>>>>theories as to why the body might elevate its production of cholesterol,
>>>>thus making its reduction unwise.
>>>>
>>>>(I'm aware that the constant lowering of "safe" levels is an attempt to
>>>>get more people on expensive drugs. I'm also aware that reducing
>>>>cholesterol levels below a certain level isn't really a valid end point;
>>>>incidence of heart attacks or strokes or death from them are probably
>>>>better ones. And I'm aware that half the people dying from heart attacks
>>>>have none of the alleged major risk factors: high LDL or total
>>>>cholesterol levels, smoking, obesity, etc. So no need to raise these
>>>>points.)
>>>>
>>>>Ray
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes it is true that lowering cholesterol with drugs is not safe.
>>>Cholesterol does indeed rise with age and the body does this for good
>>>reason. It is a well established fact that not only is cholesterol
>>>not a risk factor in elderly people, but those with the highest
>>>cholesterol live longer.
>>>
>>>
>>>facts about the benefits of high cholesterol by Uffe Ravnskov
>>>
>>
>>
>>Not facts only spin. Talk about spin. So low cholesterol is bad?
>>Most people with heart attacks have a low cholesterol?
>>He spins the fact that maybe the young have stress and it causes the
>>cholesterol to go up well then wouldn't that make the people with high
>>cholesterols more resistent to heart attacks.
>>He takes unrelated things and takes a spin on them.
>>He is one big myth
>>A heart attack is caused by blocked arteries as a result of "cholesterol"
>>build up. It cloggs the arteries. What in the hell does he think causes the
>>clogged artery? Giant Bacteria? One big ball of bacteria? Cut out an artery
>>and look at it and see what's there. Its not a myth moron.
>
>
>
> You really are pathetic. I hope you are enjoying your statins. We
> will see who the moron is when you are dead from your stupidity.
At least he won't be dead from _your_ stupidity.
-Jay
- Next message: Robert: "Re: Canadian doctors coming to the US"
- Previous message: Robert: "Re: MD pleads politicians instead of courts"
- In reply to: Wolfbrother: "Re: Should we really be lowering cholesterol"
- Next in thread: Robert: "Re: Should we really be lowering cholesterol"
- Reply: Robert: "Re: Should we really be lowering cholesterol"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
