|
|
|
|
|
by PragmaticPulp
1757 days ago
|
|
> And while I agree that a lot of what saladino says doesn’t have enough evidence to be totally sure, what everyone always ignores is when saladino points out that there isn’t enough evidence to be sure of the lipid hypothesis of heart disease. This is a common, but lazy, trope trotted out by people like Saladino. It's the same "It's just a theory" argument that climate change deniers use. There is a lot of evidence showing that things like elevated LDL cholesterol has a cumulative (area under the curve) negative effect on heart health, and that saturated fat consumption is directionally negative for heart health. You'd be hard pressed to find an actual cardiologist or researcher who believes these things aren't true. So why do you choose to believe a known salesman with a conflict of interest in promoting his expensive supplements and books on the topic? You seem to be assuming a specific conclusion is true and cherry-picking the single person who wants to sell that conclusion to you. There are plenty of citations to the contrary, many of which are in the article linked above. |
|
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01455-4