The theory that dietary cholesterol is a cause of cardiovascular disease should never have got any traction. The evidence for a link between dietary cholesterol and cardiovascular disease was very weak and circumstantial from the onset and things only went downhill from there. Initial studies were lacking objective scientific evidence and instead relied more on propaganda and wishful thinking. Following the initial reports performed by Ancel Keys, many studies have had to rely on the assumption that an associations proves a cause and effect. Further, studies on eggs have shown no effect on plasma cholesterol levels and yet eggs are claimed to be damaging to the cardiovascular system due to the cholesterol they contain. Based on what? Where is the evidence? Even after decades without any strong evidence linking dietary cholesterol to cardiovascular disease, scientist persist in publishing papers with clear bias, trying to prove a link exists. It has become so obvious this is propaganda, I wonder why people take it seriously.
Studies repeatedly show that eggs are not damaging to the cardiovascular disease. The cholesterol they contain does not cause elevations in plasma cholesterol. In fact, eggs contain many heart healthy nutrients, including B vitamin and fatty acids.
For example, in a recent study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, researchers performed a meta analysis on previous studies that had investigated the effects of dietary cholesterol on the risk of cardiovascular disease. This research included 40 studies published between 1979 and 2013 which in turn included a total of 361,923 subjects. The results of this analysis showed that dietary cholesterol was not significantly associated with coronary heart disease or haemorrhagic stroke. The study did suggest that dietary cholesterol increased plasma total cholesterol, however, as I have shown elsewhere, this is because increasing the dietary cholesterol concentration of the diet also usually decreases the fibre content of the diet, and it is the latter that alters cholesterol metabolism. However, even if dietary cholesterol did increase total cholesterol, as both low density and high density cholesterol also increase, the risk of cardiovascular disease is not altered, and so the point is moot.
As dietary cholesterol levels increase the fibre content of the diet must decrease. This explains associations seen between high animal fat diets and increases in plasma cholesterol levels.
Therefore this meta analysis clearly showed that dietary cholesterol did not increase the risk of cardiovascular disease. However, despite the obvious findings the researcher conclusion was that ‘Reviewed studies were heterogeneous and lacked the methodologic rigor to draw any conclusions regarding the effects of dietary cholesterol on CVD risk. Carefully adjusted and well-conducted cohort studies would be useful to identify the relative effects of dietary cholesterol on CVD risk’. So in effect the lack of evidence from decades of study is because we were not designing the right studies to find the evidence, and that the evidence must be found through larger and more expensive studies. This is propaganda purporting to be science. If there is a lack of evidence for an effect, that suggests there is no effect. At what point do you accept the consistent results and stop wasting money to try to convince people that eggs are bad for the health? Science needs a shake up, there is too much dead wood in the system.
RdB
