You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

OrphanWilde comments on [LINK] Cholesterol and mortality - Less Wrong Discussion

8 Post author: NancyLebovitz 15 January 2013 04:06PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (9)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 15 January 2013 07:04:32PM 4 points [-]

I think it's already pretty-well established in medical literature that not all cholesterol is equivalent; LDL and HDL cholesterol are associated with higher and lower risks, respectively. The abstract for this study doesn't suggest they were differentiated.

More speculatively: Given this is in Norway, which non-authoritative sources on the internet suggest has an average diet consisting largely of fish, which is relatively high in HDL and low in HDL cholesterol compared to red meat, their diets would favor HDL cholesterol.

(I'm a dietary skeptic; I've seen the consensus reverse itself too frequently to take it seriously as a science, and I've seen too many people whose overall apparent health improved switching to diets which the consensus claims is unhealthy. But these seem like serious confounding issues for conclusions drawn from this study.)

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 15 January 2013 07:32:25PM 2 points [-]

The second study was of Austrians, who probably don't eat as much fish. It's interesting that, while it also found that low cholesterol is dangerous, it found somewhat more danger from high cholesterol.