#120

You can’t multiply different hazard ratios like this.
It’s interesting because it’s clearly wrong.

A bit amusing to look at people come to the wrong and deadly conclusions because they are using one of the worst evidence available. They must come to their conclusions based on 62 women who got early CHD around age 48, who had high lipids, triglycerides, were obese, and in an association study.

Just like they come to conclusions based on the vaccine because of dozens of reports or anecdotes.

It’s almost as if bad scientific thinking is nothing strange to them because they have severe bias. They like to accuse scientists of bias, when in reality they are just projecting.

Lp(a) is six times more atherogenic than apoB:

Not like the table says “Lp(a) 1.22” “ApoB 1.89”.

#121

I have already responded to this multiple times.
I am not going to repeat what I already said.
It is also hijacking a very good topic about Lp(a) to discuss this over and over.

#122

Here again LPIR is like the canary in the coal mine…it is an early warning system.
“According to new research, the recently developed lipoprotein insulin resistance (LPIR) score can identify T2D risk years before glycemic abnormalities are clinically detectable.” This is for diabetes but because of the connection between diabetes and heart disease, it would be considered early warning for both.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/resource-centers/contemporary-approaches-type2-diabetes/predicting-t2d-risk-much-earlier-lpir-score/1881

“Likewise, metabolomic markers such as the lipoprotein insulin resistance (LPIR) score that predict both T2DM and CVD should be considered to assess and target IR”

https://academic.oup.com/jes/article/8/1/bvad167/7499346

And here’s another one:
“LPIR was the strongest correlate of insulin resistance and a value of >44 was associated with the highest cardiometabolic risk—findings that strongly support the versatility of using a universal LPIR scoring system across race/ethnicities in both children and adults. Biomarkers of insulin resistance that can be applied across different racial and ethnic groups in both youth and adults, with a single blood draw, could prove extremely useful in a clinical setting. LPIR, alone or in combination with GlycA, is potentially an important addition to the clinician’s toolbox and should be explored as predictive tools of cardiometabolic risk in prospective studies of diverse youth populations.”
" LPIR is a non-insulin dependent fasting test that quantifies one of the earliest manifestations of insulin resistance—dyslipidemia characterized by elevations in triglyceride and lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations. LPIR is already an emerging diagnostic and risk stratification tool in adults (30, 31) because elevations in LPIR precede the development of abnormal glucose tolerance."

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/endocrinology/articles/10.3389/fendo.2021.665292/full

1 Like
#123

We have an article written by an MD. It’s about studies done by Harvard and the Mayo Clinic and 28000 female health professionals over 21 years. You say it is meaningless because Dayspring! Another study by Harvard and Boston Children’s hospital did a diet study with 164 participants given one of 3 diets over a 20 week period. It doesn’t come out how you like it so you say it’s wrong? lp(a) can’t be controlled by diet? The study shows it can, and there have been studies before that said the same thing.

Do you ever get cognitive dissonance?

I don’t know anybody that can be so biased without financial compensation. How much are you paid to be on here?

#124

Try not to take it personally. We all know that it"s @AnUser . On his bad days he’s like a bull in a china shop. But on his good days he can be quite interesting and unique.

#126

Since you brought up Attia, let me just point to his podcast (I’m sure that you have seen it) where he talks about Lp(a), ApoB, LDL-C, insulin, insulin resistance and oral glucose tolerance test (2h-BG test). The start of insulin talk is at 12:40. He says that insulin resistance (LPIR) is a very early predictor of heart disease.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAw4KMoBTPo&t=1s

My post on 2h-BG test and LPIR:

https://spotify.localizer.co/t/those-who-limited-their-eating-to-eight-hours-a-day-were-91-per-cent-more-likely-to-die-from-cardiovascular-disease/12782/35?u=ng0rge

And as an extra bonus, one more Kansel quote…
"I don’t watch Dr. Atia any longer ever since he suggested having 5 meals per day. plus he’s gone mainstream with eat your vegies crap. I’m more of a carnivore and fasting type of guy. To me anyone that is against fasting has absolutely no clue about health and should NOT be a doctor. Plus, in one of podcast I heard him say that he was doing heavy exercises while fasting to gain muscle, but he couldn’t gain any so he stopped doing fasting. How on planet earth can you gain muscle if your calorie/protein intake is zero, and supposedly he is a doctor LOL, and that did it to me on him. So from now on Atia is in my list of being a total BOZO.

2 Likes
#127

No, I’m absolutely ok. My brother has been treating me like that my whole life and we work together every day.

I’m guessing @AnUser comes from lawyers because he seems to think arguments and winning matter. They really don’t. It’s of no use whatsoever. What matters is gaining knowlege. I picked up a few nice things with the article and still have some questions about how and why they need NMR to test the blood. But I have an idea what LPIR is and may give it a try.

I spent 90% of the day outside. We got a couple inches of rain and it’s starting to smell like spring here.

3 Likes
#128

Maybe he just needs certainty. Having control. Being strong.

#129

Where did he mention LPIR?
Either way this LP-IR score ideology (of a greater insulin resistance ideology which downplays atherogenic particles and necessary causes of ASCVD) is not for me, there is a specific audience it is for, specifically for them. It is how it is.

1 Like
#130

Maybe he just needs to get laid. Not sure why you guys keep feeding him with the attention he craves. It’s not good for him and it’s not good for you and it’s not good for the thread :wink:

2 Likes
#131

I imagine you’re not paid to be here. So I wonder, at what $ tag do you value your time, by the hour? Realize how much money you’ve wasted in fruitless arguing with someone that biased for whatever reason.

#132

I do enjoy reading the site and I watch things I don’t understand all the time, but I don’t think anybody anywhere would pay me to post here. Pharma might pay me to shut up?

On the other hand, he takes the jabs and brags about it, if you ever mention statins he makes sure to defend and there has never been a pharmaceutical he doesn’t love. If he’s not on their massive payroll, he should be.

2 Likes
#133

My point is you’re wasting your time in fruitless arguments with him, and I assume your time is valuable to you.

1 Like
#134

It’s unfortunate this thread has devolved into juvenile personal attacks. I expect better from this forum.

#135

Thanks for the “color”! And yes, we shouldn’t derail the thread any further, But let me make one important point. Lot’s of intellectuals have quirky personalities and can be difficult but are often worth the trouble. If all you want is information…talk to the AI chatbots. If someone here really annoys you, ignore them or mute them. I like all the personalities here…good and bad, I just fight back when it appears that they are being mean to someone. @medaura everybody wants attention, whether that’s good for you or them depends on what kind of attention you give them.

1 Like
#136

I find it kind of absurd to dismiss arguments by saying “have sex”. According to that logic no one should be here anyway. Why bother caring about aging, health and longevity when you could just follow your primal urges and procreate all the time?

#137

It was just a joke…I enjoy the humor.

#138

:point_up_2:That is a contradiction in multiple ways. Enough said.

1 Like
#139

I actually don’t block anyone. Everyone has something to contribute and I get value even from that user’s posts sometimes. Arguing can be good and healthy too — but not when it’s clear one party is just in it for arguing’s sake. When I say maybe he should get laid, I mean I detect frustrated unmet needs from someone who’s not stupid wasting his time and everyone else’s in inane arguments that seem to require being willingly obtuse. And when I see that someone is clearly venting spleen or trying to scratch an unreachable itch, I just move on. I will say the threads tend to suffer when people can’t help themselves from trying to engage a dead end.

1 Like
#140

I’m not arguing for aguing’s sake. I might be bad at arguing or I am arguing with the wrong people. If someone says explicitly they don’t care about arguments and logically contradict themselves, use logical fallacies and don’t seem to respond to arguments then I should learn from that. It makes sense.

3 Likes