i'm mike, and today, one of america's favorite slogans: "eating cholesterol doesn't raise cholesterol." we're gonna look at the two tricks that industries use to manipulate science to get to that conclusion. and also we're gonna crack open some studies showing what actually happens
type of diet for high cholesterol, within your body after you eat cholesterol, on an hour-by-hour basis. there seems to be a trend today in dietary advice that the healthier thing is the opposite of common sense. that fat doesn't make you fat,
that being overweight is actually healthier, that meat doesn't cause cancer, and that eating more cholesterol doesn't raise cholesterol. and this idea about cholesterol in particular is plastered everywhere. it's got articles about it. there are books, whose authors, when talking about heart attacks, leave such gems as: "do you know a better way of dying?" but what research gave us the idea that eating more cholesterol raises cholesterol in the first place? well, in addition to the animal studies, there are also the chemistry of atherosclerotic plaques, worldwide epidemiology, and human feeding studies.
there have countless studies like this meta-analysis, showing that blood cholesterol concentration is clearly increased by added dietary cholesterol, leading scientists to say that the human body has no tolerable level of cholesterol intake. so what happened that obscured our view of this research and the other mountains of researchers linking dietary cholesterol to cholesterol levels? this brings me to crooked industry science. let's look at two ways that cholesterol sensitive industries engineer their studies. firstly, they take advantage of fasting cholesterol levels. here is a legitimate study that shows what happens to
blood cholesterol after a meal with no cholesterol and meals with various levels of cholesterol -- in this case from eggs. for some scale, jamie oliver's two egg omelette puts you here. if any sane person actually saw this graph, they would drop the cholesterol myth instantly. but most people never get anywhere near this stuff. as you may have guessed, the egg industry was not pleased by these findings, so their angle: wait until cholesterol goes back down to fasting levels.
from some distinguishably non-vegan reviewers of this egg research: "fasting ldl cholesterol levels are determined mainly by cholesterol production in the liver overnight, and have little to do with what the patient consumed the previous day..." fasting cholesterol is actually where this chart started and can be reached again after 11 or 12 hours of no eating. and that's where they grab their data.
sneaky, little hobbitses. but that's not what's happening in reality. in reality, lunch happens and then dinner happens. the danger of this is summed up by those non-vegans, again, with: "dietary cholesterol increases cardiovascular risk, probably mainly because of the postprandial (or: after-meal) effects: for several hours after a high-cholesterol meal there is an increase in oxidative stress,
vascular inflammation, and adverse effects on endothelial function (or: the lining of your arteries)..." this explains why a heavy meal can increase your chance of getting a heart attack by four times within two hours of eating. nevertheless, these egg industry studies, trickle down to nutritionists like chris kresser, leading them to say: "[...]eating cholesterol isn't going to give you a heart attack." ...let that sink in. it's also important to note, that eating cholesterol specifically raises your ldl (or: "bad cholesterol"), as this feeding study shows. this study had everybody eat the same diet for two weeks. then they devided them
into different diet groups. after four weeks: here is the raise in ldl (or: "bad cholesterol") for the high saturated fat / low cholesterol group. and add a few eggs worth of cholesterol and it's about five times worse. showing that saturated fat and cholesterol kind of team up together to raise your bad cholesterol. the next industry trick is to take advantage of the cholesterol ceiling.
from this meta-analysis, here is a study showing the relationship between cholesterol eaten and how much cholesterol rises, highlighting that it depends on how much you already eat. add three eggs worth of daily cholesterol to a diet of somebody like a vegan, who eats no cholesterol and -- boom -- it shoots up dramatically.
but add an omelette for someone who has already been eating jamie oliver's bacon superfood diet every day, and you get a tiny reaction. so you can experiment on people who already have a high cholesterol intake, like the average american, and escape statistical significance. in other words: "[...] changes in serum (or: blood) cholesterol would be expected to be minimal if cholesterol
was added to a diet already rich in cholesterol." so when you're designing your egg study, look at people who are eating the standard american diet (sad) and if you happen to get any people that are slightly healthy and see a raise in cholesterol, call them "hyperresponders" and forget about them. then stamp your study with the accurate but totally evil: "[...] these data indicate that the consumption of a high-cholesterol diet does not negatively influence the atherogenicity of the ldl particle."
then you get a media shitstorm about how cholesterol is your "best friend". this whole premise is very well illustrated by comparing the cancer risk of people that smoke between 20 - 30 years and the risk of people that smoke for over 30 years. no difference! because it's all horrible. it seems that we're simply studying a sick population. "if exposure to a necessary agent is homogenous within a population, then case/control and cohort methods will fail to detect it."
and since the us is a country where fatty streaks, which are the beginning of atherosclerosis, are found in virtually all three-year-olds, you can see where this becomes pretty easy for the industry. and i know what you're thinking; i'm probably pulling the industry conspiracy card, which has no backing, but that is not true. wait until you see the american egg board's reaction to this study that found a similar exponential increase in artery damage with egg consumption as it did with smoking cigarettes -- two thirds as much artery blocking, to be exact. american egg board e-mails were acquired through the freedom of information act (foia), exposing their efforts to combat this without letting the public know it was them, by enlisting their "'friends' in the scientific community."
when talking to those "scientist friends", they said: "[...] we will certainly compensate you." but industry corruption is not all too surprising nowadays, so let's move on to the final piece of the puzzle, and that is: ideal levels of bad cholesterol. if you've seen my videos, you know that ideal levels of bad cholesterol, as defined by paleo founders (that are very anti-vegan), is between 50 - 70 mg/dl and that ideal level of bad cholesterol is only seen in populations of people that don't consume any cholesterol, also known as vegans, which should really be proof enough that dietary cholesterol increases cholesterol. in conclusion: anyone that tells you that dietary cholesterol does not raise cholesterol is completely insane
or has just fallen for industry science. in the end, you can either cut out cholesterol and live a life like this and end up with ideal cholesterol or keep eating cholesterol and roll the dice three times a day. so ditch animal products since they are the only source of dietary cholesterol and if you have done that, if you've gone on a plant based diet and seen your cholesterol lower, feel free to make it known in the comments below. also, if you haven't subscribed already, go ahead and do that.
all right. thank you for watching!
0 komentar