T Nation

Statin Nation

I figured some on here would like this http://www.statinnation.net/ it’s available for streaming rental for $5.

There is also a good write up of how the medical industry has misunderstood cholesterol.

[quote]Explosiv wrote:
There is also a good write up of how the medical industry has misunderstood cholesterol.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/the-cholesterol-myth-that_b_676817.html[/quote]
I enjoy reading review articles written for the public as I am a major proponent of dissemination of knowledge. There is obviously a dumbing down of the material, but does there really need to be spreading of misinformation?
This one in particular stands out. It seems like a thorough review, however it makes countless mistakes; mixes correlation and causation; makes illogical conclusions; and presents unscientific hypotheses. People get tricked because it makes a few valid arguments then follows it up with rubbish. It is easy to fall into the trap of accepting anything once the author has established some sort of credibility.

For instance, do people really believe that lowering blood LDL cholesterol levels lead to a decrease in cholesterol available for hormone production and compromises cell viability?
Doesn’t it make more sense that lower LDL cholesterol would indicate a more efficient pathway?
Think about blood glucose for a minute. Having a high fasting blood glucose indicates a problem with insulin sensitivity or insulin secretion. The glucose isn’t getting into the cells and instead just hanging around in the blood.
For those who know a bit more: How about IDL? You do know that IDL is taken up by cells, right? You do know that cholesterol is also transferred to cells by non-receptor non-lipoprotein uptake processes, right?

There is a reason why cholesterol (in all forms) was researched in atherosclerosis. There are reasons why it is still being researched.

@JF: Sorry to hijack, mate. I know the you video posted was about statins.

no worries, it’s all related

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120921/LIVING/709219972/1685

Oh look, it’s this thread again.

No statins here

[quote]kakno wrote:
Oh look, it’s this thread again.[/quote]

just figured I’d pass along the info for this doc for anyone interested, not to start a debate again

[quote]kakno wrote:
Oh look, it’s this thread again.[/quote]

http://www.statinnation.net/about-me/

Engineering background? Seems qualified enough on medical issues to me.

On a side note, I am now giving free breast exams to hot chicks, and as an engineer I am totally qualified.

It’s oxygen man…doctors are all paid off by the oxygen companies to slap us on the bum when we’re born so that we take that first big breath and get hooked for life then you need that shit every 10 seconds for the rest of your life!

My parents knew this and forbid the doc to spank me so I have never actually breathed air…because believe it or not it’s all a scam! You don’t need it! I’ll tell you you may think you need it and can’t live without but me? I’ve never touched the stuff and I’m fine.

There’s me…and Aquaman. We know the truth.

[quote]waldo21212 wrote:
http://www.statinnation.net/about-me/

Engineering background? Seems qualified enough on medical issues to me.

On a side note, I am now giving free breast exams to hot chicks, and as an engineer I am totally qualified.[/quote]

Actually, I think an engineer is much better equipped to interpret studies than a doctor. DOE est.

oh to have one’s head buried in the sand

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]waldo21212 wrote:
http://www.statinnation.net/about-me/

Engineering background? Seems qualified enough on medical issues to me.

On a side note, I am now giving free breast exams to hot chicks, and as an engineer I am totally qualified.[/quote]

Actually, I think an engineer is much better equipped to interpret studies than a doctor. DOE est.[/quote]
What do you base that on? Over here, all doctors spend at least 6-9 months of their education doing research long before getting their license, a little more when you specialize and then at least 5 years more if you want any kind of senior position. What makes you think this dude with a bachelors degree in engineering better at interpreting medical studies than a doctor?

What makes you think the avg doctor in the US looks at studies?

[quote]kakno wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]waldo21212 wrote:
http://www.statinnation.net/about-me/

Engineering background? Seems qualified enough on medical issues to me.

On a side note, I am now giving free breast exams to hot chicks, and as an engineer I am totally qualified.[/quote]

Actually, I think an engineer is much better equipped to interpret studies than a doctor. DOE est.[/quote]
What do you base that on? Over here, all doctors spend at least 6-9 months of their education doing research long before getting their license, a little more when you specialize and then at least 5 years more if you want any kind of senior position. What makes you think this dude with a bachelors degree in engineering better at interpreting medical studies than a doctor?[/quote]

That every doctor I’ve ever talked to has trouble understanding even the most basics of causation and correlation. (and for that matter, the medical industry)

I’d give the edge in statistical analysis (isolation of variables, design of experiments, statistical significance, est.) to an engineer. It certainly isn’t unrelated like you were saying.

and again I will state that a former journal editor has stated that most of the results/stats posted about studies even within the studies themselves are often false, or overstated

Bottom line is that there is an issue of cognitive dissonance.

When you really start looking at issues and realizing that things are not as they seem, you become skeptical. And this makes you lose the 100% faith you have in medicine/doctors/pharma/gov’t that probably existed at some point in your life.

You realize that you are being lied to or taken advantage of for your money based on faulty research and studies. So you either accept this, and lose a lot of faith in the people making these regulations and giving this advice.

OR

You keep believing everything 100% and when people question something you respond “he’s a doctor, what would you know, he went to medical school”.

This whole “but he’s a doctor …” thing is annoying as hell

If someone comes up with evidence to prove their theory with sound logic does it matter what their background is?

if a hobo says 1+1=2 it’s right, he’s not wrong because he is a homeless man

conversely if a Phd rocket scientist says something retarded it doesn’t mean it’s right.

[quote]kakno wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]waldo21212 wrote:
http://www.statinnation.net/about-me/

Engineering background? Seems qualified enough on medical issues to me.

On a side note, I am now giving free breast exams to hot chicks, and as an engineer I am totally qualified.[/quote]

Actually, I think an engineer is much better equipped to interpret studies than a doctor. DOE est.[/quote]
What do you base that on? Over here, all doctors spend at least 6-9 months of their education doing research long before getting their license, a little more when you specialize and then at least 5 years more if you want any kind of senior position. What makes you think this dude with a bachelors degree in engineering better at interpreting medical studies than a doctor?[/quote]

Because doctors know shit about math, or about statistics or about methodology or about the difference between correlation and causation and, worst of all, pretend that they do.

There was a doctor not too long ago who invented a method how to determine the space under a curve, approximating it with triangles, like for blood sugar measurements and such.

This was published in several medical journals.

If you dont get why this is fucking funny, you Sir, are part of the problem.