People with genetic syndromes that lead to very high cholesterol levels have a markedly increased incidence of coronary disease, and mutations in specific cholesterol metabolism genes in mice leads to cholesterol deposits in their arteries.
The bottom line is that cholesterol levels are a significant risk factor for coronary disease, unquestionably. That doesn't mean there aren't other important risk factors. There clearly are, including high blood pressure, smoking, and genetics.
The statins, incidentally, have been shown to decrease vascular inflammation.
People like you are far more dangerous. You have no credentials, you make no citations, you reference no conditional results. You make casual blanket statements implying total knowledge of a subject you could be reading off of a cereal box in your mother's basement - except that you're obviously paid to carefully reverse the key relationship this doctor is carefully examining, and negate the very concepts he's presenting, with ZERO support for your brain farts.
And s for inflammation being well-established, is that why so many people are still dying of it? You want to cite some references to go with your one-liners?
People with genetic syndromes that lead to very high cholesterol levels have a markedly increased incidence of coronary disease, and mutations in specific cholesterol metabolism genes in mice leads to cholesterol deposits in their arteries.
So what does this bullsh!t have to do with the causitive relationship between cholesterol buildup and inflammation? How do you know those mice don't have a genetic predisposition towards inflammation that leads to the cholesterol deposits? Where the hell are your citations? Where are your conditional conclusions? Where are your conditions at all? Where is the link between mice and humans in this particualr area? You're full of it, and you know it.
The bottom line is that cholesterol levels are a significant risk factor for coronary disease, unquestionably. That doesn't mean there aren't other important risk factors. There clearly are, including high blood pressure, smoking, and genetics.
The bottim line is that you are doing everything you can to cloud the immense importance of this potential finding. And once again you simply throw out a laundry list of fators and pretend it's intelligent, when citations, causations, interations, and relative importance of factors that can be directly affected by anti-inflammatories is comletely ignored. You're pathetic.
The statins, incidentally, have been shown to decrease vascular inflammation.
Really? According to what studies? In what context? And how do you know this isn't the only reason they work at all, and that you're not confirming this doctors findings while trying to dismiss it? Or is this your verson of a limited hangout, a plausible denial where, after dissuading the readers from seriously considering these findings about the role of inflammation, you wash your hands, laugh, and say "buyer beware."
I think you attempted mass murder with your post, and probably for a shill paycheck at that.
But don't worry - there's no such thing as karma, and as for God, well, you're obviously smarter than God, and your bullshit is so good it will never be held against you. And why? Because you're a fricking genius, that's why. people just have no idea how smart you are, do they? How frustrating for you.