Re: Stupid cholesterol question

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/24/03 8:38:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

steffamily@... writes:

> Is cholesterol " sticky " and that's what makes it stick to the walls

> of your arteries? Some lady was saying this on Oprah, and I was

> under the impression that it's not cholesterol that clogs arteries,

> but oxidized fat (esp. polyunsaturated). Can anyone clear this up

> for me, or direct me to an online article? Thanks.

Suffice it to say the lady on Oprah is an idiot. Arterial plaque is I think

mostly made up of calcium, and may or may not contain fats and cholesterol,

depending on a variety of factors. Arterial plaque is *supposed* to be in your

arteries, it's what fixes abrasions in the arteries. The problem is when

there are lesions in the plaque, i.e. raised parts rather than smooth and even

plaque. The inclusion of fats and cholesterol in the plaque correlate with and

seem to cause these lesions. The only kind of cholesterol that has been

correlated with these lesions is VLDL, which is a very tiny subset of LDL, and

is

raised by eating high-carb in particular fructose, and has an inverse

relationship with HDL, which is raised primarily by fat, saturated in

particular. I.e.

eating saturated fat and low-sugar would minimize VLDL levels.

There is evidence but not proof that oxidized fats and cholesterol can cause

atherosclerotic plaques.

Really not much is known about this in terms of causation but what is known

for sure is that neither saturated fat nor cholesterol in the diet will

increase likelihood of these lesions, and neither will either HDL or LDL

cholesterol

in the blood.

I would recommend The Cholesterol Myths to start.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/24/03 10:51:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

s.fisher22@... writes:

> -------->hmmmh...that is a good point. although, it seems that different

> parts of the body concentrate specific fatty acids, ie; dha in the brain,

> retina and CNS, linoleic acid in the skin, SFAs surrounding internal organs,

> etc. but maybe since the blood is the *transport* vehicle then it might

> reflect dietary intake more than organs that require concentrations of

> specific fatty acids?

I would think so. Also, it certainly isn't clear that pufa or any other

fatty acid actually play any useful role in arterial plaque. It seems to me

like

it's some sort of defect in metabolism of the plaque, and random fat-soluble

stuff gets stuck in it. But who knows? As far as I know, no one really

understands exactly what's going on in these lesions. As people get older, the

plaque more and more produces lesions, and also more and more has fat and

cholesterol included in it. It seems either the inclusion of fat and

cholesterol in

the plaque (but *not* in the *diet*) is causing the lesions, or the lesions,

while negative, are some sort of response to a third factor-- perhaps some

different type of abrasion occuring in the vessel-- which increases with age,

and

requires lipids in the plaque. Again, afaik, no one knows.

So, it's pretty clear that DHA is roughly a constant in the brain, and is

necessary for brain function, but afaik that's not true for plaque-- that plaque

needs n-6s to form or is more useful or harmful with more n-6s. In fact,

since plaque in young people apparently has not much lipids, n-6s are obviously

not necessary for formation of plaue. But maybe they are necessary for

formation of lesions. But one study finding people on average have 50% pufa in

arteral plaque certainly doesn't prove that. I haven't seen the study, but I've

never gotten the impression from the numerous quotes I've seen on it that they

adjusted for diet. Do people who have a low pufa diet, and high sfa diet, have

less plaque, and does their plaque still contain 50% pufa? or does their

plaque reflect their blood lipid profile or their dietary lipid profile?

usually when wapf cites this study it is as evidence against the idea that

saturated fat is " artery clogging. " i think that use is perfectly justified. i

just think it's jumping the gun to extrapolate that pufa must be

" artery-clogging. "

chris

[Guest guest]

>>>>Also I want to say on PUFA that I don't think the study that found

arterial

plaque to be a majority PUFA is any evidence whatsoever that dietary PUFA is

causal in arterial plaque. It could as easily be explained that the fatty

acid

composition simply reflected the diet, which is now majority n-6 pufa

probably, and maybe plaque is a WAPer would be mostly saturated.

-------->hmmmh...that is a good point. although, it seems that different

parts of the body concentrate specific fatty acids, ie; dha in the brain,

retina and CNS, linoleic acid in the skin, SFAs surrounding internal organs,

etc. but maybe since the blood is the *transport* vehicle then it might

reflect dietary intake more than organs that require concentrations of

specific fatty acids?

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...