Fats, cholesterol and cardiovascular disease index

The Cholesterol Myth If the hypothesis that a fatty diet causes heart disease is true, why has over fifty years of trials and studies failed to confirm it? It's certainly not for want of trying

Oils and fats: The significance of temperature
whether different fats and oils are harmful or not depends on their temperature of use.

Öle und Fette: Die Bedeutung der Temperatur:
Ob Fette und Öle gut für uns sind hängt von der Temperatur ab.

Salt and Blood Pressure — more nonsense?

Saturated fat reduces risk of heart disease in post-menopausal women

STATINS and other cholesterol-lowering drugs. These drugs are being aggressively marketed. But are they worth taking? What are the benefits — if any? What harm may they cause?

Mediterranean Paradoxes Why do Mediterranean countries enjoy low levels of heart disease, while eating a high-fat diet?

Why is premature heart disease mortality in Britain declining? After a seemingly inexorable rise in deaths from coronary heart disease, all of a sudden they started to decline. There have been several attempts to explain increases in the disease and attempts have also been made to explain the decline. But the suggestion that recent dietary changes, reductions in cholesterol and smoking habit, etc, have accounted for the decline are unconvincing, particularly since the decline began before there was any significant change in these lifestyle patterns. This paper looks in more depth.

How statistics in medicine can mislead "Taking X will reduce your risk of a heart attack by 50%." When drug companies and the media want to get headlines, they use relative risk statistics. These are usually quite misleading. This paper by Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD, first published in the British Medical Journal, gives the facts on the real benefits of heart disease treatment.

Fats aren't bad for us . . .
In March 2001, the journal Science published an article by the American journalist, Gary Taubes, in which he pointed out the flaws in the cholesterol theory. Entitled The Soft Science of Dietary Fat , you can read it here.
. . . Oh, yes they are! . . .
Taubes' article was vehemently opposed by the supporters of the cholesterol/heart disease theory. Dr Scott Grundy wrote this riposte on behalf of the 'conventional' medical world. Here it is.
. . . If they are, why do you have to lie?
But the references Grundy quoted in support of his contention that heart disease is related to blood cholesterol, actually did no such thing. Dr Uffe Ravnskov and others, including this author, pointed this out in a letter to Science published in February 2002. This is it. This illustrates how those who promote the cholesterol myth try to fool the public.

Why is a cholesterol level of 5.2 (200) 'healthy'? We all know that 5.2 (200 if you are in the USA) is the 'healthy' maximum blood cholesterol level. If you have ever wondered how these figures were arrived at, Mary Enig, PhD, tells here.