New model could explain old cholesterol mystery • Hacker News Board

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#11

Post by blakesterz » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:20 PM UTC

It'll be interesting to see how this theory stands up. It seems like they're on the right path, tying together several things that seem to be problems.

The homeoviscous adaptation to dietary lipids (HADL) model explains controversies over saturated fat, cholesterol, and cardiovascular disease risk

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article-abstract/113/2/277/610...

"Corresponding with the model, we suggest alternative contributing factors to the association between elevated LDL cholesterol concentrations and ASCVD, involving dietary factors beyond SFAs, such as an increased endotoxin load from diet–gut microbiome interactions and subsequent chronic low-grade inflammation that interferes with fine-tuned signaling pathways."

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#12

Post by throwaway2245 » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:21 PM UTC

hpoe wrote: post #3

This is why I have three things I never trust the experts in. - How to be healthy - How to educate - How to raise kids It seems like every decade we find out everything we did last decade was bad and wrong but now we've finally for sure got it figured out, and this time we know we are right because we have fancier gadgets and more citations in our name. From Frued to the Food Pyramid it seems that the experts always…

I learned recently that the Food Pyramid was created by the Department of Agriculture in the US, i.e. not by the Department of Health.

So, not experts. (Not in the field they were claiming).

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#13

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:24 PM UTC

nofnziti wrote: post #10

elhudy wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edited to say "animal products" rather than meat.

I wasn't trying to nitpick your comment. Even excluding animal products it's still possible to eat a diet high in saturated fat.

But dietary cholesterol itself only comes from animal products, which is probably why the Dr. said to cut out all animal products.

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#14

Post by chihuahua » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:29 PM UTC

I find this article quite fascinating. It provides a bit of a glimpse into how science can work, and how difficult it is to gain valid knowledge on some topics. It's also a reminder that "science" isn't just a simple process that you follow to find the truth. Sometimes people ask the wrong question, or draw the wrong conclusion from experiments. It seems that research related to nutrition and health has a fair amount of this.

It reminds me of my own experience earlier this week where I needed to call a certain service. The API has 2 parameters. I thought that one was required and one was optional. But whenever I called the service with 1 parameter, it failed. Eventually I thought "maybe both parameters are required" and called the service with 2 parameters, and it worked. So I concluded "both parameters are required". But later I discovered that the service was just flaky and it was a coincidence that it started working just at the moment when I added the second parameter. After that experience it's difficult to know what to trust, when everything could be due to randomness and unreliability.

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#15

Post by hpoe » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:29 PM UTC

wnevets wrote: post #4

hpoe wrote: post #3

This is why I have three things I never trust the experts in. - How to be healthy - How to educate - How to raise kids It seems like every decade we find out everything we did last decade was bad and wrong but now we've finally for sure got it figured out, and this time we know we are right because we have fancier gadgets and more citations in our name. From Frued to the Food Pyramid it seems that the experts always…

I'm always confused when I read/hear people say things like this. Do people think there is a skyscraper downtown with a giant sign on it that says Expert HQ on it or something where they release their findings from?

I understand that science is multi-facted discipline and there are a lot of people who have dedicated their lives to their craft and discovering truth because of their desire to solve human suffering and figure out how the world works.

I also think there are a bunch of "scientists" that like the veneer that comes with the title like to spend their time talking on TV, going to parties, chairing committees and stealing credit from people doing work. They are aided and abetted in this endevour by the popular media and politicians who just want to slap out some new "discovery" to get clicks.

The first group is anxious for their work to be peer reviewed, tries to explain things simply, and will do what they do even if there was no reward and no one appreciated their work. They have qualifications.

The second group uses jargon to try and confuse people, hate when people call them on things, use their influence to restrict funding to others and publicly deride their opponents who disagree with them. They have credentials.

Unfortunately, society generally listens to the 2nd group over the first group because they often tell them what they want to hear.

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#16

Post by hpoe » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:30 PM UTC

arkitaip wrote: post #7

hpoe wrote: post #3

This is why I have three things I never trust the experts in. - How to be healthy - How to educate - How to raise kids It seems like every decade we find out everything we did last decade was bad and wrong but now we've finally for sure got it figured out, and this time we know we are right because we have fancier gadgets and more citations in our name. From Frued to the Food Pyramid it seems that the experts always…

So who do you trust on these matters?

Generally common sense, good wisdom, and my own understanding of the situation as well as my personal investigation.

Like everything I need to know about nutrition is "eat food, but not too much, try and get a variety, generally plants are better for you than sugar, fast regularly and get exercise."

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#17

Post by nofnziti » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:35 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #13

nofnziti wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't trying to nitpick your comment. Even excluding animal products it's still possible to eat a diet high in saturated fat.

But dietary cholesterol itself only comes from animal products, which is probably why the Dr. said to cut out all animal products.

And saturated fats are linked to higher LDL. What are we disagreeing about?

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#18

Post by tomkat0789 » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:37 PM UTC

arkitaip wrote: post #7

hpoe wrote: post #3

This is why I have three things I never trust the experts in. - How to be healthy - How to educate - How to raise kids It seems like every decade we find out everything we did last decade was bad and wrong but now we've finally for sure got it figured out, and this time we know we are right because we have fancier gadgets and more citations in our name. From Frued to the Food Pyramid it seems that the experts always…

So who do you trust on these matters?

I've personally be satisfied with what I'll call "informed" common sense. An example from health is the documentary "In Defense of Food" where the journalist uses a little science and history to create the heuristic: "Eat food, mostly plants, not too much." None of those insights are really surprising, the only exception maybe being the "mostly plants part".

A downside of depending on complicated theories from experts is that it makes a "priesthood" of people telling you what to think all the time. I think there are enough examples from health, environmental, and privacy policy making to demonstrate that the "priests" don't always have the public's best interests in mind.

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#19

Post by elhudy » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:39 PM UTC

nofnziti wrote: post #10

elhudy wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edited to say "animal products" rather than meat.

I wasn't trying to nitpick your comment. Even excluding animal products it's still possible to eat a diet high in saturated fat.

No worries, I should have just said she "eats healthy".

Re: New model could explain old cholesterol mystery

#20

Post by josefresco » Fri, Feb 12, 2021, 5:39 PM UTC

I have an auto-immune disease. The medication prescribed has the side effect of making my "bad" LDL cholesterol skyrocket. I tried everything from diet, to exercise to bring it back down but nothing worked. I'm now on a Statin medication which solved the issue but I'm not thrilled about yet another medication.

Before my disease I ate like an average American (sugar, meat, dairy etc.) and my LDL cholesterol was high. I was diagnosed, changed my diet and my LDL dropped to healthy levels. Later I started a new medication (JAK inhibitor) and it jumped back up, but my diet did not change.

I read this article twice and have no idea how it applies to my situation.