Disastrous findings from Keto/Low Carb/High fat diet CTA study

[Rabbi]

I am just going to drop this for info for any user that is confused or at a loss for the state of dietary messaging and fearmongering online.

There has been an ever growing constituency of health shitfluencers and gurus pushing very high red meat and saturated fat diets which eventually results in elevated LDL cholesterol. It has been well established within cardiology that LDL cholesterol (not dietary) is an independent risk factor for the development of coronary artery disease (CVD) that is both a necessary and sufficient cause.

The hypothesis of the authors of this paper and like many others including Paul Saladino is what follows:

1. Cholesterol is not a Risk factor in and of itself, it only becomes a problem when other metabolic markers are poor
2. Individuals who tend to have high cholesterol tend to be metabolically unhealthy
3. Metabolically unhealthy people tend to have high(er) inflammation
4. This inflammation interacts with blood cholesterol causing it to oxidize within the artery resulting in damage thus heart disease
5. There are individuals who have high cholesterol (induced by diet primarily) whom have good health in other metabolic parameters including weight, these people are termed 'Lean Mass Hyper Responders' (LMHR)

There are a number of issues with this but I will forgo them for the sake of brevity.

Now researchers in the griftosphere of nutrition got together and decided to make a study design to test their hypothesis, nothing wrong with this.
They recruited handpicked people who were metabolically healthy and had as follows

• Very high LDL-C levels (≥190 mg/dL) after adopting a low-carb or ketogenic diet
• Low triglycerides (≤80 mg/dL)
• High HDL-C (≥60 mg/dL)
• Lean body composition

They then followed these people up for 1 year and used a CTA scan (CT- angiogram), this is important because it is an extremely precise measurement which can detect both calcified and soft plaques allowing the researchers to track changes in plaque volume over time, helping to evaluate cardiovascular risk and disease progression. It’s especially useful in studies aiming to detect early signs of atherosclerosis before symptoms appear.

Their primary outcome is to measure the mean change in plaque volume over this year so they can better understand whether or not LDL cholesterol impacts plaque progression in lean metabolically healthy people.

So far so good

Now lets get to the study itself

Plaque Begets Plaque, ApoB Does Not: Longitudinal Data From the KETO-CTA Trial

Changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) among people following a ketogenic diet (KD) are heterogeneous. Prior work has identified an in…

www.sciencedirect.com

Here is the pre-release conclusion of the authors

In lean metabolically healthy people on KD, neither total exposure nor changes in baseline levels of ApoB and LDL-C were associated with changes in plaque. Conversely, baseline plaque was associated with plaque progression, supporting the notion that, in this population, plaque begets plaque but ApoB does not.

They report that LDL cholesterol did not impact the progression of atherosclerosis

One of the authors is Nick Norwitz

he does sensationalist crap nutrition stunts on Youtube.
This guy came on my radar for being extremely slimy and posting viral videos on YouTube about eating tons of bacon/lard/butter etc and it not affecting his cholesterol. But he would never report his baseline intake of saturated fat nor would he report his baseline cholesterol numbers or any of his actual lab reports before and after. So I knew it was going to be a crapshoot when I saw his name, there are a few more there.

Anyways he and the other authors have already gone to task in media talking about how much of a success the trial is for their theory of the LMHR phenotype.

Low-carb keto diet may not raise heart disease risk, new study suggests

A low-carb keto diet may not increase the risk of heart disease, despite elevated cholesterol levels, a new study suggests. Researchers and doctors weigh in.

www.foxnews.com

Keto diet's high cholesterol not a factor in heart disease, says study

One of the ketogenic diet's major perceived drawbacks is an increase in LDL, or so-called bad cholesterol. A new study, though, says that this cholesterol spike doesn't fit the conventional science in terms of its disease-causing ability.

newatlas.com

New research from The Lundquist Institute finds ketogenic diet-induced high cholesterol does not predict heart disease

A one-year prospective study found that very high cholesterol in 100 otherwise metabolically healthy individuals on a ketogenic diet for an average of 5...

www.globenewswire.com

.

THEY NEVER FUCKING REPORTED THE CHANGE IN PLAQUE VOLUME IN THEIR PAPER.
THEY COMPLETELY OMITTED THEIR PRIMARY FUCKING OUTCOME

This is extremely concerning on multiple levels, its intentionally misleading and the authors cut the single most crucial point of data needed for their analysis.

You can zoom into their figure they've provided

So for interpretation, any dot at 0 had zero change in plague over the yearr, any dot below the zero line had a regression in plague and any dot above had an increase in plaque over the year.

How does it compare?

1. There is 1 dot below zero meaning their plaque reduced
2. There are 3 dots at zero meaning there was no change
3. All other dots (over 100ish participants) are above zero meaning their plague showing progression and narrowing of the artery in just one years time

This is a horrific finding, over >95% of participants had plaque progression significant enough in just one year that it was detected by the CT scan and was statistically significant. Their arteries are snapping shut in real in time.

So what happens next?
After screaming shitting and pissing one of their authors coughs up the data for the raw numbers of mean plague change (the outcome they said they would measure) on twitter.

So the plaque progression was 18.8 mm^3

A useless number without a reference point, which brings us to the next question how does this compare to other population?
Well we don't even need to speculate, the exact same institute with many of the same authors did a similar study on healthy patients except these people DID NOT have elevated cholesterol.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4139340

So what was their plaque progression over 1 year?
It was 4.9 mm^3.

That's right, when comparing two populations head to head both metabolically healthy but one with high LDL induced through a high saturated fat diet, the high LDL group has plaque progression ~3.8 times or 280% greater than the group with normal LDL cholesterol.

	Healthy With Normal Cholesterol	Healthy with High Cholesterol
Plague progression 1-Year	4.9 mm^3	18.8 mm^3

THIS IS THE KEY TAKE AWAY FROM THE STUDY YOU CAN DNRD THE REST

So how exactly did the authors come to their conclusion as to why LDL did not affect the progression of plague?
Well they merely compared very high and extremely high LDL people to each other as opposed to a healthy control group, and deduced that because there was no gradient LDL did not affect the plague.

This would be like comparing a smoker who smokes 30 vs 32 cigarettes a day and deducing that cigarettes do not cause lung cancer because there is negligible difference between the two groups.

Make no mistake, the authors of this study know better they are trying to intentionally mislead their audience, they had a hypothesis is failed miserably now they are trying to spin it as a positive.

As a side note people have noted that if you point this out to any of the authors especially the Norwitz pencil neck moron he will instantly block you and carry on helping people write op-eds about this horrific research.

Here is an actual acredited MD-PhD doctor interviewing the head author of the entire study who seems to be almost clueless


Its a long watch but ill TLDR it;

The head author who seems to be plugged away from online shenanigans has no idea what the other authors have been spewing.
He concedes that there are multiple incorrect statements in the paper including statements that state that plague was stable (when it was not it was progressing)
He goes onto say that there will likely need to be a retraction of this study and be rewritten to accurately represent the findings.


SO THE TLDR FOR THE WHOLE RANT

IF YOU GET A HIGH READING FOR CHOLESTEROL ON YOUR BLOOD TEST AND YOUR DOCTOR TELLS YOU NEED TO LOWER IT, DO NOT PLAY SMARTASS THINKING YOU KNOW BETTER, YOU DONT.

SECONDLY, STOP SPEWING GARBAGE 24/7 SAYING THAT ELEVATED LDL IS NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER AS LONG AS YOUR HEALTHY TO PEOPLE WHO DONT KNOW ANY BETTER ON THIS FORUM, IT IS ABOLUSTELY NOT.

THIRD, IF YOU ARE GETTING SERIOUS NUTRITION ADVICE FROM THIS FORUM IT MAY ALREADY BE OVER

 

[Rabbi]

@Reckless Turtle you may be one of the only sane ones in this topic

 

[Reckless Turtle]

@Reckless Turtle you may be one of the only sane ones in this topic

I'm not reading all of that, but chubby Indians, such as @asdvek and @Never Get Up, are the only nutrition experts who should be trusted here.

 

[Rabbi]

I'm not reading all of that, but chubby Indians, such as @asdvek and @Never Get Up, are the only nutrition experts who should be trusted here.

Thank you bhai.
I need to go back to reading my Ray Peat books

 

[jon_chase89]

Not surprised, "carbs are bad and saturated fat is good" has become a meme uncritically repeated by imbeciles

 

[Never Get Up]

Skip to 2:15.

 

[Never Get Up]

Not surprised, "carbs are bad and saturated fat is good" has become a meme uncritically repeated by imbeciles

You have a low IQ.

 

[copercel123]

I am just going to drop this for info for any user that is confused or at a loss for the state of dietary messaging and fearmongering online.

There has been an ever growing constituency of health shitfluencers and gurus pushing very high red meat and saturated fat diets which eventually results in elevated LDL cholesterol. It has been well established within cardiology that LDL cholesterol (not dietary) is an independent risk factor for the development of coronary artery disease (CVD) that is both a necessary and sufficient cause.

The hypothesis of the authors of this paper and like many others including Paul Saladino is what follows:

1. Cholesterol is not a Risk factor in and of itself, it only becomes a problem when other metabolic markers are poor
2. Individuals who tend to have high cholesterol tend to be metabolically unhealthy
3. Metabolically unhealthy people tend to have high(er) inflammation
4. This inflammation interacts with blood cholesterol causing it to oxidize within the artery resulting in damage thus heart disease
5. There are individuals who have high cholesterol (induced by diet primarily) whom have good health in other metabolic parameters including weight, these people are termed 'Lean Mass Hyper Responders' (LMHR)

There are a number of issues with this but I will forgo them for the sake of brevity.

Now researchers in the griftosphere of nutrition got together and decided to make a study design to test their hypothesis, nothing wrong with this.
They recruited handpicked people who were metabolically healthy and had as follows

• Very high LDL-C levels (≥190 mg/dL) after adopting a low-carb or ketogenic diet
• Low triglycerides (≤80 mg/dL)
• High HDL-C (≥60 mg/dL)
• Lean body composition

They then followed these people up for 1 year and used a CTA scan (CT- angiogram), this is important because it is an extremely precise measurement which can detect both calcified and soft plaques allowing the researchers to track changes in plaque volume over time, helping to evaluate cardiovascular risk and disease progression. It’s especially useful in studies aiming to detect early signs of atherosclerosis before symptoms appear.

Their primary outcome is to measure the mean change in plaque volume over this year so they can better understand whether or not LDL cholesterol impacts plaque progression in lean metabolically healthy people.

So far so good

Now lets get to the study itself

Plaque Begets Plaque, ApoB Does Not: Longitudinal Data From the KETO-CTA Trial

Changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) among people following a ketogenic diet (KD) are heterogeneous. Prior work has identified an in…

www.sciencedirect.com

Here is the pre-release conclusion of the authors


They report that LDL cholesterol did not impact the progression of atherosclerosis

One of the authors is Nick Norwitz
View attachment 3661274
he does sensationalist crap nutrition stunts on Youtube.
This guy came on my radar for being extremely slimy and posting viral videos on YouTube about eating tons of bacon/lard/butter etc and it not affecting his cholesterol. But he would never report his baseline intake of saturated fat nor would he report his baseline cholesterol numbers or any of his actual lab reports before and after. So I knew it was going to be a crapshoot when I saw his name, there are a few more there.

Anyways he and the other authors have already gone to task in media talking about how much of a success the trial is for their theory of the LMHR phenotype.

Low-carb keto diet may not raise heart disease risk, new study suggests

A low-carb keto diet may not increase the risk of heart disease, despite elevated cholesterol levels, a new study suggests. Researchers and doctors weigh in.

www.foxnews.com

Keto diet's high cholesterol not a factor in heart disease, says study

One of the ketogenic diet's major perceived drawbacks is an increase in LDL, or so-called bad cholesterol. A new study, though, says that this cholesterol spike doesn't fit the conventional science in terms of its disease-causing ability.

newatlas.com

New research from The Lundquist Institute finds ketogenic diet-induced high cholesterol does not predict heart disease

A one-year prospective study found that very high cholesterol in 100 otherwise metabolically healthy individuals on a ketogenic diet for an average of 5...

www.globenewswire.com

.

THEY NEVER FUCKING REPORTED THE CHANGE IN PLAQUE VOLUME IN THEIR PAPER.
THEY COMPLETELY OMITTED THEIR PRIMARY FUCKING OUTCOME

This is extremely concerning on multiple levels, its intentionally misleading and the authors cut the single most crucial point of data needed for their analysis.

You can zoom into their figure they've provided

View attachment 3661306

So for interpretation, any dot at 0 had zero change in plague over the yearr, any dot below the zero line had a regression in plague and any dot above had an increase in plaque over the year.

How does it compare?

1. There is 1 dot below zero meaning their plaque reduced
2. There are 3 dots at zero meaning there was no change
3. All other dots (over 100ish participants) are above zero meaning their plague showing progression and narrowing of the artery in just one years time

This is a horrific finding, over >95% of participants had plaque progression significant enough in just one year that it was detected by the CT scan and was statistically significant. Their arteries are snapping shut in real in time.

So what happens next?
After screaming shitting and pissing one of their authors coughs up the data for the raw numbers of mean plague change (the outcome they said they would measure) on twitter.

View attachment 3661289
So the plaque progression was 18.8 mm^3

A useless number without a reference point, which brings us to the next question how does this compare to other population?
Well we don't even need to speculate, the exact same institute with many of the same authors did a similar study on healthy patients except these people DID NOT have elevated cholesterol.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4139340

So what was their plaque progression over 1 year?
It was 4.9 mm^3.

That's right, when comparing two populations head to head both metabolically healthy but one with high LDL induced through a high saturated fat diet, the high LDL group has plaque progression ~3.8 times or 280% greater than the group with normal LDL cholesterol.

	Healthy With Normal Cholesterol	Healthy with High Cholesterol
Plague progression 1-Year	4.9 mm^3	18.8 mm^3

THIS IS THE KEY TAKE AWAY FROM THE STUDY YOU CAN DNRD THE REST

So how exactly did the authors come to their conclusion as to why LDL did not affect the progression of plague?
Well they merely compared very high and extremely high LDL people to each other as opposed to a healthy control group, and deduced that because there was no gradient LDL did not affect the plague.

This would be like comparing a smoker who smokes 30 vs 32 cigarettes a day and deducing that cigarettes do not cause lung cancer because there is negligible difference between the two groups.

View attachment 3661319

Make no mistake, the authors of this study know better they are trying to intentionally mislead their audience, they had a hypothesis is failed miserably now they are trying to spin it as a positive.

As a side note people have noted that if you point this out to any of the authors especially the Norwitz pencil neck moron he will instantly block you and carry on helping people write op-eds about this horrific research.

Here is an actual acredited MD-PhD doctor interviewing the head author of the entire study who seems to be almost clueless


Its a long watch but ill TLDR it;

The head author who seems to be plugged away from online shenanigans has no idea what the other authors have been spewing.
He concedes that there are multiple incorrect statements in the paper including statements that state that plague was stable (when it was not it was progressing)
He goes onto say that there will likely need to be a retraction of this study and be rewritten to accurately represent the findings.


SO THE TLDR FOR THE WHOLE RANT

IF YOU GET A HIGH READING FOR CHOLESTEROL ON YOUR BLOOD TEST AND YOUR DOCTOR TELLS YOU NEED TO LOWER IT, DO NOT PLAY SMARTASS THINKING YOU KNOW BETTER, YOU DONT.

SECONDLY, STOP SPEWING GARBAGE 24/7 SAYING THAT ELEVATED LDL IS NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER AS LONG AS YOUR HEALTHY TO PEOPLE WHO DONT KNOW ANY BETTER ON THIS FORUM, IT IS ABOLUSTELY NOT.

THIRD, IF YOU ARE GETTING SERIOUS NUTRITION ADVICE FROM THIS FORUM IT MAY ALREADY BE OVER

Israel twin

 

[jon_chase89]

You have a low IQ.

Now let's see yours

 

[loyolaxavvierretard]

View attachment 3662096


Now let's see yours

Brutal. He is doing Mensa Norway Matrices and will post shortly after repeating until he gets a 130 score

 

[ScramFranklin]

Yes, and it’s wild how so many of the “carb bad saturated fat good” religion are touting this study as a win. 18.8mm^3 lmao.

You can do keto and be healthy, but not via butter and lard and avoiding vegetables.

 

[Never Get Up]

View attachment 3662096


Now let's see yours

Being high IQ has nothing to do with man made values.

To be considered high IQ, you need to know exactly how to survive and reproduce.

You need to understand how nature works.

You eat carbohydrates from plants and their associated toxins.

You have a low IQ.

 

[Never Get Up]

Yes, and it’s wild how so many of the “carb bad saturated fat good” religion are touting this study as a win. 18.8mm^3 lmao.

You can do keto and be healthy, but not via butter and lard and avoiding vegetables.

You have a low IQ and do not understand human physiology.

Humans are obligate hyper carnivores.

 

[ey88]

good thread

sick of people spewing bs about diet when they really have no clue

 

[Never Get Up]

good thread

sick of people spewing bs about diet when they really have no clue

Me too.

I’m sick of people claiming meat is healthy for you.

Veganism is the species appropriate diet for human beings.

 

[ScramFranklin]

You have a low IQ and do not understand human physiology.

Humans are obligate hyper carnivores.

Yes keep listening to Bart Kay lmao and hyperfocusing on mechanistic data

 

[Never Get Up]

Yes keep listening to Bart Kay lmao and hyperfocusing on mechanistic data

Joined: July 29, 2019

Posts: 1,397

Reputation: 1,281

 

[ScramFranklin]

Joined: July 29, 2019

Posts: 1,397

Reputation: 1,281

Looksmaxing: have done more than 99% of users

 

[Never Get Up]

Looksmaxing: have done more than 99% of users

I’m in the 1% that you haven’t done more than.

You eat plants.

We are not the same.

You are not a looksmaxxer.

You are a looksminner.

 

[loyolaxavvierretard]

Looksmaxing: have done more than 99% of users

Bud you talking to a madman

 

[jeff1234]

Israel twin

 

[Rabbi]

I’m in the 1% that you haven’t done more than.

You eat plants.

We are not the same.

You are not a looksmaxxer.

You are a looksminner.

You can opine over Bart Kay and his shitty mechanistic hypotheses until the sun dies of heat death.
It doesnt change the fact that these people have plaque build up almost 4x greater than a healthy population.

Is accelerated plaque formation primal?
Is >95% of a cohort developing plaque ideal?

 

[Never Get Up]

You can opine over Bart Kay and his shitty mechanistic hypotheses until the sun dies of heat death.
It doesnt change the fact that these people have plaque build up almost 4x greater than a healthy population.

Is accelerated plaque formation primal?
Is >95% of a cohort developing plaque ideal?

There’s 0 evidence that a 100% carnivore diet causes plaque build up.

0 100% controlled studies with humans locked in labs for multiple decades at the same genetic outset.

Associations do not inform on causality.

 

[Rabbi]

There’s 0 evidence that a 100% carnivore diet causes plaque build up.

0 100% controlled studies with humans locked in labs for multiple decades at the same genetic outset.

Associations do not inform on causality.

Good luck finding a study that fulfills your perquisites it will never happen.
Its always 'I have X feature that protects me from an outcome'

We have large scale studies on mendillian randomisation finding an almost linear increase with LDL levels and heart disease.

The most comprehensive dataset on the carnivore diet as of now is a facebook survey

 

[Never Get Up]

Good luck finding a study that fulfills your perquisites it will never happen.
Its always 'I have X feature that protects me from an outcome'

We have large scale studies on mendillian randomisation finding an almost linear increase with LDL levels and heart disease.
View attachment 3663545
The most comprehensive dataset on the carnivore diet as of now is a facebook survey

Stopped reading at prospective Cohort studies.

 

[Rabbi]

Stopped reading at prospective Cohort studies.

Your health your choice man

 

[DR. NICKGA]

Nice thread, i really like it

Yes the massive evidence that they found out that high level of saturated fat = high cholesterol = heart attack

There is too much evidence, you cannot deny it

raw meat eaters or dangerous psuedoscientists on social media need to be stopped

 

[Never Get Up]

Your health your choice man

My health has increased by 1000% ever since going 100% raw carnivore last year.

I haven’t ate plants in 10 months.

I look the best that I’ve ever have in my entire life.

 

[DR. NICKGA]

ignore @Never Get Up

I destroyed him with the fiber argument = he started acting like a child, he started to insult me

https://looksmax.org/threads/stop-c...-carbohydrate-addiction.1399204/post-20299050

You cannot argue with ragebaiters

 

[Never Get Up]

ignore @Never Get Up

I destroyed him with the fiber argument = he started acting like a child, he started to insult me

https://looksmax.org/threads/stop-c...-carbohydrate-addiction.1399204/post-20299050

You cannot argue with ragebaiters

 

[DR. NICKGA]

@Rabbi you should make a thread on how satured fat = heart attack

I will give you all the studies you want, literaly sll of them

 

[Deleted member 77820]

ignore @Never Get Up

I destroyed him with the fiber argument = he started acting like a child, he started to insult me

https://looksmax.org/threads/stop-c...-carbohydrate-addiction.1399204/post-20299050

You cannot argue with ragebaiters

Agree

 

[Deleted member 77820]

@Rabbi you should make a thread on how satured fat = heart attack

I will give you all the studies you want, literaly sll of them

Aslong you keep them in check
i try to keep them at 0.3g/lb of Bw

 

[DR. NICKGA]

Asking you keep them in check
i try to keep them at 0.3g/lb of Bw

Yeah, smart choice

 

[Rabbi]

@Rabbi you should make a thread on how satured fat = heart attack

I will give you all the studies you want, literaly sll of them

When I get the time brother.
There are really good nutrition channels that can break the data down, my favourite source is Nutrition Made Simple by Gil Carvalho.

Any unbiased look at the data will lead you to the conclusion that saturated fat intake should be moderated for Poly and Monounsaturated fats.

 

[Deleted member 77820]

When I get the time brother.
There are really good nutrition channels that can break the data down, my favourite source is Nutrition Made Simple by Gil Carvalho.

Any unbiased look at the data will lead you to the conclusion that saturated fat intake should be moderated for Poly and Monounsaturated fats.

Non processed Pufa fats in my opinion are the best

 

[Deleted member 77820]

I am just going to drop this for info for any user that is confused or at a loss for the state of dietary messaging and fearmongering online.

There has been an ever growing constituency of health shitfluencers and gurus pushing very high red meat and saturated fat diets which eventually results in elevated LDL cholesterol. It has been well established within cardiology that LDL cholesterol (not dietary) is an independent risk factor for the development of coronary artery disease (CVD) that is both a necessary and sufficient cause.

The hypothesis of the authors of this paper and like many others including Paul Saladino is what follows:

1. Cholesterol is not a Risk factor in and of itself, it only becomes a problem when other metabolic markers are poor
2. Individuals who tend to have high cholesterol tend to be metabolically unhealthy
3. Metabolically unhealthy people tend to have high(er) inflammation
4. This inflammation interacts with blood cholesterol causing it to oxidize within the artery resulting in damage thus heart disease
5. There are individuals who have high cholesterol (induced by diet primarily) whom have good health in other metabolic parameters including weight, these people are termed 'Lean Mass Hyper Responders' (LMHR)

There are a number of issues with this but I will forgo them for the sake of brevity.

Now researchers in the griftosphere of nutrition got together and decided to make a study design to test their hypothesis, nothing wrong with this.
They recruited handpicked people who were metabolically healthy and had as follows

• Very high LDL-C levels (≥190 mg/dL) after adopting a low-carb or ketogenic diet
• Low triglycerides (≤80 mg/dL)
• High HDL-C (≥60 mg/dL)
• Lean body composition

They then followed these people up for 1 year and used a CTA scan (CT- angiogram), this is important because it is an extremely precise measurement which can detect both calcified and soft plaques allowing the researchers to track changes in plaque volume over time, helping to evaluate cardiovascular risk and disease progression. It’s especially useful in studies aiming to detect early signs of atherosclerosis before symptoms appear.

Their primary outcome is to measure the mean change in plaque volume over this year so they can better understand whether or not LDL cholesterol impacts plaque progression in lean metabolically healthy people.

So far so good

Now lets get to the study itself

Plaque Begets Plaque, ApoB Does Not: Longitudinal Data From the KETO-CTA Trial

Changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) among people following a ketogenic diet (KD) are heterogeneous. Prior work has identified an in…

www.sciencedirect.com

Here is the pre-release conclusion of the authors


They report that LDL cholesterol did not impact the progression of atherosclerosis

One of the authors is Nick Norwitz
View attachment 3661274
he does sensationalist crap nutrition stunts on Youtube.
This guy came on my radar for being extremely slimy and posting viral videos on YouTube about eating tons of bacon/lard/butter etc and it not affecting his cholesterol. But he would never report his baseline intake of saturated fat nor would he report his baseline cholesterol numbers or any of his actual lab reports before and after. So I knew it was going to be a crapshoot when I saw his name, there are a few more there.

Anyways he and the other authors have already gone to task in media talking about how much of a success the trial is for their theory of the LMHR phenotype.

Low-carb keto diet may not raise heart disease risk, new study suggests

A low-carb keto diet may not increase the risk of heart disease, despite elevated cholesterol levels, a new study suggests. Researchers and doctors weigh in.

www.foxnews.com

Keto diet's high cholesterol not a factor in heart disease, says study

One of the ketogenic diet's major perceived drawbacks is an increase in LDL, or so-called bad cholesterol. A new study, though, says that this cholesterol spike doesn't fit the conventional science in terms of its disease-causing ability.

newatlas.com

New research from The Lundquist Institute finds ketogenic diet-induced high cholesterol does not predict heart disease

A one-year prospective study found that very high cholesterol in 100 otherwise metabolically healthy individuals on a ketogenic diet for an average of 5...

www.globenewswire.com

.

THEY NEVER FUCKING REPORTED THE CHANGE IN PLAQUE VOLUME IN THEIR PAPER.
THEY COMPLETELY OMITTED THEIR PRIMARY FUCKING OUTCOME

This is extremely concerning on multiple levels, its intentionally misleading and the authors cut the single most crucial point of data needed for their analysis.

You can zoom into their figure they've provided

View attachment 3661306

So for interpretation, any dot at 0 had zero change in plague over the yearr, any dot below the zero line had a regression in plague and any dot above had an increase in plaque over the year.

How does it compare?

1. There is 1 dot below zero meaning their plaque reduced
2. There are 3 dots at zero meaning there was no change
3. All other dots (over 100ish participants) are above zero meaning their plague showing progression and narrowing of the artery in just one years time

This is a horrific finding, over >95% of participants had plaque progression significant enough in just one year that it was detected by the CT scan and was statistically significant. Their arteries are snapping shut in real in time.

So what happens next?
After screaming shitting and pissing one of their authors coughs up the data for the raw numbers of mean plague change (the outcome they said they would measure) on twitter.

View attachment 3661289
So the plaque progression was 18.8 mm^3

A useless number without a reference point, which brings us to the next question how does this compare to other population?
Well we don't even need to speculate, the exact same institute with many of the same authors did a similar study on healthy patients except these people DID NOT have elevated cholesterol.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4139340

So what was their plaque progression over 1 year?
It was 4.9 mm^3.

That's right, when comparing two populations head to head both metabolically healthy but one with high LDL induced through a high saturated fat diet, the high LDL group has plaque progression ~3.8 times or 280% greater than the group with normal LDL cholesterol.

	Healthy With Normal Cholesterol	Healthy with High Cholesterol
Plague progression 1-Year	4.9 mm^3	18.8 mm^3

THIS IS THE KEY TAKE AWAY FROM THE STUDY YOU CAN DNRD THE REST

So how exactly did the authors come to their conclusion as to why LDL did not affect the progression of plague?
Well they merely compared very high and extremely high LDL people to each other as opposed to a healthy control group, and deduced that because there was no gradient LDL did not affect the plague.

This would be like comparing a smoker who smokes 30 vs 32 cigarettes a day and deducing that cigarettes do not cause lung cancer because there is negligible difference between the two groups.

View attachment 3661319

Make no mistake, the authors of this study know better they are trying to intentionally mislead their audience, they had a hypothesis is failed miserably now they are trying to spin it as a positive.

As a side note people have noted that if you point this out to any of the authors especially the Norwitz pencil neck moron he will instantly block you and carry on helping people write op-eds about this horrific research.

Here is an actual acredited MD-PhD doctor interviewing the head author of the entire study who seems to be almost clueless


Its a long watch but ill TLDR it;

The head author who seems to be plugged away from online shenanigans has no idea what the other authors have been spewing.
He concedes that there are multiple incorrect statements in the paper including statements that state that plague was stable (when it was not it was progressing)
He goes onto say that there will likely need to be a retraction of this study and be rewritten to accurately represent the findings.


SO THE TLDR FOR THE WHOLE RANT

IF YOU GET A HIGH READING FOR CHOLESTEROL ON YOUR BLOOD TEST AND YOUR DOCTOR TELLS YOU NEED TO LOWER IT, DO NOT PLAY SMARTASS THINKING YOU KNOW BETTER, YOU DONT.

SECONDLY, STOP SPEWING GARBAGE 24/7 SAYING THAT ELEVATED LDL IS NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER AS LONG AS YOUR HEALTHY TO PEOPLE WHO DONT KNOW ANY BETTER ON THIS FORUM, IT IS ABOLUSTELY NOT.

THIRD, IF YOU ARE GETTING SERIOUS NUTRITION ADVICE FROM THIS FORUM IT MAY ALREADY BE OVER

Note
Lipids are irrelevant
When My hdl is sky high i feel like a god and get 0 sides
I only get sides whne my Ldl take a hit tho

And i don’t think diet screw you its mainly how you response to androgens i think

 

[Rabbi]

Note
Lipids are irrelevant
When My hdl is sky high i feel like a god and get 0 sides
I only get sides whne my Ldl take a hit tho

And i don’t think diet screw you its mainly how you response to androgens i think

Its hard to determine feeling from cholesterol in and of itself since its largely asymptomatic.
It may be a fragment of dietary fat intake?
I know I feel like shit on a low fat diet, I always keep it north of 25%

 

[Rabbi]

Bump

 

[kalefartbomb]

OP typed all of that based on a number derived from heterogenous noise data, which is why it wasn't included.

Studies - especially junk studies like this one - should not be the reason to eat or not eat foods. You should eat what you are evolved to eat. If there's something people like OP should learn from things like this it is that nutritional science is worthless. Even the second study cited invokes junk data.