Cholesterol

Posted by Andrew Wadge on January 29th 2007 in Science, safety and health

I was interested in my nutritionist colleagues take on last week’s Daily Mail article, The Cholesterol Con?.

It challenges the medical orthodoxy about the role of statins for people (myself included) with high cholesterol.  The Mail article, by GP Dr Robert Kendrick, followed up a report in The Lancet (Are lipid-lowering guidelines evidence-based?). It too examines the role of statins to prevent coronary heart disease (CHD). 

The Agency doesn’t give advice about statins because they’re a medicine and not part of our remit. Whenever we’re asked about them we suggest that people seek medical advice. But we do recommend that people reduce the amount of saturated fat they eat to reduce the risk of developing CHD.  

This is based on a broad range of evidence, primarily from epidemiological studies, which suggests that a high intake of saturated fat is associated with increased risk of CHD.  Intervention trials have also found that people who eat a lot of saturated fat increase their levels of LDL-cholesterol levels, the ‘bad’ cholesterol that’s a risk factor for CHD. 

My colleagues in the Agency's Nutrition Division tell me there hasn’t yet been large intervention trials to establish the direct link between saturated fat intake and CHD itself.  

The Agency wants to help clarify this relationship and is currently awaiting the results of the FSA-funded intervention trial which is examining the effects of different amounts and types of dietary fat and carbohydrate on a wide range of risk factors associated with the development of CHD in over 500 people.  It is set to report in spring 2008.   Meanwhile, check out our advice.

add new comment

cholesterol

Posted by VAL (not verified) on 05/02/2007 - 17:40

You say that there hasn't been large intervention trials to establish the direct link between saturated fat intake and CHD. What about the MRFIT trial done in America on approx 13,000 men, of whom half were given the conventional dietary advice and half were not. There was no significant difference in CHD moratality, and the slight difference in morbidity, I would have thought could probably be ascribed to the fact that the advised group were encouraged to give up smoking

The trouble is, that there is so much money to be made by food and drugs manufacturers from the cholesterol theory and these are the very people sponsoring the research. There are so many factor linked to intake of fat, eg obesity ,lack of exercise, and stress, and although these are supposed to be discounted in trial designs, it is all too easy to put a preconceived slant on results! Furthermore, biased interpretation has to be challenged by someone in order for it to be withdrawn and who is there who would have comparable motivation resources to do this? - no-one, I suspect.

This sort of information has

Posted by Mike Lowe (not verified) on 29/01/2007 - 13:58

This sort of information has been around for years (although, interestingly, I was unaware of the statins part). A diet based on fruit, veg and plenty of quality animal food (fats included) will keep you fit and healthy indeed.

It's just a shame there's so many nutritionists and health and fitness 'experts' out there that still insist you should avoid all fats.

It's almost offensive to our ancestors to say, don't eat this natural piece of fatty fish, have this processed cereal bar with extra omega 3.

If people were educated to the actual function of fats and the damage that man-made fats can do, we'd all be better off. Maybe the FSA should start offering more advice on that?!