Coronary heart disease

Part 2: Studies challenge the cholesterol theory

None of the many human intervention studies into the causes of heart disease conducted over the last half century looked solely at one aspect of diet — fat. They were all 'multiple interventions' which changed several dietary constituents, and included other factors such as exercise, cigarette smoking, and so on. For this reason, ascribing any benefit to just one aspect is impossible.

In 1988, however, an opportunity presented itself when a trial was conducted on a group of people suffering multiple food allergies who had high cholesterol levels.[1]

Because of their range of allergies, their diet was restricted to cut out sugar (sucrose), milk and all cereal grains. In this diet most of their calories came not just from fat, but from beef fat. Beef fat, we are told, is 'unhealthy' because it raises cholesterol levels, but that was not confirmed in this study: instead of rising, the patients' total blood cholesterol levels fell by 27.5% from an average of 6.84 mmol/L (263 mg/dL) to an average of 4.9 mmol/L (189 mg/dL); their 'good' HDL cholesterol levels increased from 21% of the total to 32%; and their triglyceride levels decreased from an average of 1.13 grams per litre to a more healthy average of 0.74 grams per litre. The authors say:

'These findings raise an interesting question: are elevated serum cholesterol levels caused in part not by eating animal fat (an extremely "old food"), but by some factor in grains, sucrose, or milk ("new foods") that interferes with cholesterol metabolism?'

After such a study, it should be no surprise that a survey conducted in South Carolina of adults with 'bad' dietary habits — the eating of red meat, animal fats, fried foods, butter, eggs, whole milk, bacon, sausage, cheese and the use of solid fats to cook vegetables — found their blood cholesterol levels were only marginally affected by their diet.[2]

Coronary heart disease is rare in Polynesians who eat a high saturated fat diet. In Britain a Medical Research Council survey also showed that men eating butter ran half the risk of developing coronary heart disease compared to those using margarine.[3]

Dr William Castelli, Director of the Framingham Study, wrote in 1992:

'In Framingham, Massachusetts, the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower people's serum cholesterol. . .'[4]

Because cholesterol is a major component in all animals' bodies, eggs have a very high cholesterol content. That is why we are still told to eat no more than about 3 a week. Dr Uffe Ravnskov did his own test of this theory by eating a total of 59 eggs over 9 days. Did his cholesterol level shoot up? No, it fell by more than 11% from 7.23 mmol/L to 6.39 mmol/L.[5]

Dr George V. Mann was involved with the Framingham Study and also conducted extensive studies of the Maasai, whose diet is very high in saturated fat but who do not suffer from CHD at all. His work led him to the conclusion that:

'The diet-heart hypothesis has been repeatedly shown to be wrong, and yet, for complicated reasons or pride, profit and prejudice, the hypothesis continues to be exploited by scientists, fund-raising enterprises, food companies and even governmental agencies. The public is being deceived by the greatest health scam of the century.'[6]

In 2002 the hearts of 11 young adults aged under 35 years, who had died within an hour of the onset of cardiac symptoms, were examined for the type of underlying plaque complication and the time of onset of clot formation. Only one of the eleven culprit lesions was rich in cholesterol.[7]

In fact, careful analysis of the available data, including randomised trials, indicates that, contrary to a widespread opinion, cholesterol lowering does not appear to be a very effective way of reducing cardiac and overall mortality in the general population.[8]

These are just a few examples; there have been many such studies. See The Cholesterol Myth for more.

References

1. Newbold HL. Reducing the serum cholesterol level with a diet high in animal fat. South Med J 1988; 81: 61-3
2. Lackland DT, Wheeler FC. The need for accurate nutrition survey methodology: The South Carolina experience. J Nutr 1990; 120: 11S: 1433-1436. 3. Nutr Week 22 Mar 1991; 21: 12: 2-3.
4. Castelli WP. Concerning the possibility of a nut . . . Arch Int Med 1992; 152: 1371-1372.
5. Ravnskov U. The Cholesterol Myths. New Trends Publishing Inc, Washington DC, 2000. p 109.
6. Coronary Heart Disease: The Dietary Sense and Nonsense. George V. Mann, ed. Veritas Society; London, 1993.
7. Henriques de Gouveia R, van der Wal AC, et al. Sudden unexpected death in young adults. Eur Heart J 2002; 23: 1433-1440.
8. de Lorgeril M, Salen P. Cholesterol lowering and mortality: time for a new paradigm? Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2006; 16: 387-90.