# Is the "lipid hypothesis" all hogwash? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 16, 2011, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532 "2011-02-16T02:36:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![typoink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@typoink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typoink)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/1 "2011-02-16T02:36:51Z")
My wife recently watched a documentary (“Fat Head,” if you’re interested) which makes the claim that, despite consensus support, the “lipid hypothesis” (ie high cholesterol causes cardiovascular heart disease) has very little clinical support. It initially struck me as another fringe-y theory, and the documentary wasn’t particularly convincing to me. But I did a little more digging out of curiosity, and it’s got me a little curious. It sounds like quite a few of the folks saying it’s crap have solid credentials and understand the concepts of medical research well. Their argument is basically that the clinical evidence for the lipid hypothesis is very weak and that it’s become consensus through the non-scientific avenues of “making a whole lot of sense on paper” and a government panel cherry-picking evidence because it was headed by folks who bought into a woo diet popular at the time. It’s hardly convincing, but I haven’t seen much in the way of good rebuttals. Being far from an expert on any of the involved elements, I thought I’d put the question out there: should I trade my morning oats for a slab of bacon? ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/2 "2011-02-16T02:51:43Z")
> [@typoink](#): > > It sounds like quite a few of the folks saying it’s crap have solid credentials and understand the concepts of medical research well. Like who? I watched it and IIRC, those experts were folks from the [Weston A. Price](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=552661) Foundation and [Kevin Trudeau](http://www.skepdic.com/trudeau.html). ---
**Author:** ![typoink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@typoink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typoink)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/3 "2011-02-16T03:04:52Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > Like who? I watched it and IIRC, those experts were folks from the [Weston A. Price](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=552661) Foundation and [Kevin Trudeau](http://www.skepdic.com/trudeau.html). The doc makes mention that the head of a government center for nutrition or science or something or other was one of the dissentors who was ignored. The others in the doc seemed wishy-wishy, but my random googlin’ suggested a fair few MDs and otherwise credentialed folks. The honest truth is that, lacking specialized knowledge, I’m not in a position to analyze credentials well. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/4 "2011-02-16T03:42:27Z")
> [@typoink](#): > > The doc makes mention that the head of a government center for nutrition or science or something or other was one of the dissentors who was ignored. > > The others in the doc seemed wishy-wishy, but my random googlin’ suggested a fair few MDs and otherwise credentialed folks. The honest truth is that, lacking specialized knowledge, I’m not in a position to analyze credentials well. How about doing a search here on the Dope? [Let’s talk about Dr. Weston A. Price and his theories](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=552661) or any of several on Trudeau, like [Help me convince my father that Kevin Trudeau is a lying bag of horseshit](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=431088) Or just Google Weston A. Price quack or Kevin Trudeau quack. It doesn’t matter if they claim that the sun comes up in the east. If you see their names head for the sunrise in the west. With luck Jackmannii will be here to say the same thing in rational scientific language. ---
**Author:** ![typoink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@typoink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typoink)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/5 "2011-02-16T05:20:29Z")
That’s getting off the track: I’m aware there’s quackery on the “natural foods” folks. I also don’t recall Fat Head mentioning Trudeau or Price; if the folks interviewed were connected, I didn’t notice the connection. I’ll admit I was paying 2/3s attention. My question is: is there good science supporting the lipid hypothesis? I did do a search on these very boards, and found several people stating the evidence is poor, but it seemed to generally be an aside, not the focus. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/6 "2011-02-16T05:28:00Z")
> [@typoink](#): > > My question is: is there good science supporting the lipid hypothesis? Look under “Scientific consensus” in the following wiki article. > **[Lipid hypothesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_hypothesis)** > > The lipid hypothesis (also known as the cholesterol hypothesis) is a medical theory postulating a link between blood cholesterol levels and the occurrence of cardiovascular disease. A summary from 1976 described it as: "measures used to lower the plasma lipids in patients with hyperlipidemia will lead to reductions in new events of coronary heart disease". It states, more concisely, that "decreasing blood cholesterol \[...\] significantly reduces coronary heart disease". > As of 2023, there is int... ---
**Author:** ![typoink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@typoink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typoink)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/7 "2011-02-16T05:40:12Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > Look under “Scientific consensus” in the following wiki article. > > [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid\_hypothesis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_hypothesis) Yep, I have: it indicates that a lot of doctors said they think it’s true in a survey, suggests that there’s good research, and points out that there are critics saying the research is poor. That’s why I’m asking. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/8 "2011-02-16T05:52:02Z")
> [@typoink](#): > > Yep, I have: it indicates that a lot of doctors said they think it’s true in a survey, suggests that there’s good research, and points out that there are critics saying the research is poor. > > That’s why I’m asking. No, it doesn’t; it answers your question. It doesn’t say “a lot of doctors said they think it’s true in a survey”; it says, \*"The National Institute of Health held a consensus development conference reviewing the scientific evidence in 1984, during which a panel of 14 experts unanimously voted “yes” on the questions of whether blood cholesterol was causal and whether reducing it would help to prevent heart disease.[10] The panel concluded: ``` It has been established beyond a reasonable doubt that lowering definitely elevated blood cholesterol levels (specifically, blood levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol) will reduce the risk of heart attacks caused by coronary heart disease..."* ``` Did you look at the footnotes? [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3304704](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3304704) > **[Review of clinical trials: proving the lipid hypothesis - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2073909/)** > > The Lipid Hypothesis, which states that lowering blood cholesterol levels should significantly reduce the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD), has been repeatedly tested in primary and secondary intervention trials. Viewed as a whole, it is... > **[LDL-cholesterol lowering and atherosclerosis--clinical benefit and possible...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9260486/)** > > The results of several lipid-lowering randomized trials have been released during the past years and have confirmed the lipid hypothesis. Reduction of cholesterol by potent drugs in clinically symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with above-average... > **[The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial results. II. The...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6361300/)** > > In the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial (LRC-CPPT), a 19% lower incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) in cholestyramine-treated men was accompanied by mean falls of 8% and 12% in plasma total (TOTAL-C) and low-density... ---
**Author:** ![typoink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@typoink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typoink)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/9 "2011-02-16T06:52:11Z")
Apologies for being flip. The footnotes certainly suggest there’s research out there. I suppose my real question should be this: if folks like THINCS ([http://www.thincs.org/](http://www.thincs.org/)) are quacks, is there any good rebuttal or refutation out there? I’ll admit I’m having trouble entirely finding out what the allegations of these guys are – but that’s not because they’re cagey. Uffe Ravnskov has written multiple books on the subject, but I’m not seeing his specific allegations in doing a cursory glance. Understand, I’m not trying to defend this position – I’m just curious and my usual anti-woo, anti-bullshit skeptic bells aren’t quite dinging yet. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/10 "2011-02-16T06:58:28Z")
> [@typoink](#): > > I suppose my real question should be this: if folks like THINCS ([http://www.thincs.org/](http://www.thincs.org/)) are quacks, is there any good rebuttal or refutation out there? Here’s a start: > **[The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics](https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-international-network-of-cholesterol-skeptics/)** > > There is an organization that calls itself The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics (THINCS). Its members “thinc” they are smarter than the average doctor. They “thinc” that cholest ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/11 "2011-02-16T14:04:00Z")
I haven’t heard of any of these quacks, rather, my impression was that the history of research was: in the 60s, doctors found that a lot of heart infarct patients had high cholerstol and arteriosclerosis, and so that one caused the other caused the third. This sounded plausible and was borne out by the current data collected. So doctors started recommending patients to lower their cholerostol, and give medication if necessary to that effect. Sometime in the 80s, scientists discovered that cholerostol could be differentiated into High (Hdl) and Low- (LDL) cholerstol, and that one was the “bad” stuff causing arteriosclerosis, and the other one the “good” stuff that helped your body. So now the recommendation was to lower your bad cholerstol and increase your good cholerstol, meaning that all food had to be measured again. Then a bit later, a new study looked at the rates of cholerstol and arteriosclerosis among a big number of people, and to the surprise of the researchers, while most with arteriosclerios also had high cholersterol, a lot with high cholerstol didn’t have arteriosclerios. Together with some troubling side effects of common cholerstol, and the fact that 75% of cholerostol is produced by the body itself, not from food, because cholerstol is a building block of many body-produced compounds, doctors stopped forbidding the daily breakfast egg as bad, and stopped prescribing cholerstol -blockers in all cases, instead looking at other health indicators additionally. My impression of the current consensus is that some people are likely to get arteriosclerosis from high cholerstol, but not all - obviously depending on the genetic makeup. The general recommendation is not so much to take blockers, but to live healthy by not eating as much “bad” fat and getting a lot of exercise. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_T](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/12 "2011-02-16T15:58:03Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > My impression of the current consensus is that some people are likely to get arteriosclerosis from high cholerstol, but not all - obviously depending on the genetic makeup. This is similar to my impression of the relationship between salt intake and high blood pressure, that for some people, but not all, it’s a concern. It appears to me the medical profession is unable or unwilling to sort out who would be harmed from these substances from who would not, and defaults to “better safe than sorry” blanket recommendations for everyone to limit their salt intake and keep their cholesterol levels down. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/13 "2011-02-16T18:46:49Z")
One alternate theory is that arteriosclerosis is the result of a chronic low-grade infection with Chlamydia Pneumoniae. ---
**Author:** ![typoink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@typoink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typoink)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/14 "2011-02-16T21:50:06Z")
Hm, sounds like my gut instinct was about right. Funny how often “the truth’s in the middle” seems to shake out… ---
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/15 "2011-02-16T22:12:37Z")
I think the problem with theories about human biology is that it’s really hard to test any hypothesis, because you can’t just go experimenting on human bodies. Serious, controlled experiments are difficult and very expensive to conduct. So we tend to place a lot of emphasis on the relatively small number of seemingly respectable trials that have been conducted. But I think the truth is that we are still in the dark ages in this area. We simply don’t know what has caused the apparent increase in heart disease, obesity, and other so-called diseases of civilisation. Cholesterol, or certain types of cholesterol, may be a risk factor in heart disease, but the term “risk factor” can be misleading. All it means is that there is a correlation, not necessarily a cause. Cholesterol seems to be associated with heart disease, but is not known to cause it, no more than the presence of firemen is known to cause fires, despite being strongly associated with them (to use one of the sceptics’ favourite illustrations). It could be that something else causes heart disease, and cholesterol levels rise in order to combat it. If that is the case, then artficially reducing cholesterol is the last thing we should be doing. ---
**Author:** ![Surreal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@Surreal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Surreal)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2011, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/16 "2011-02-17T06:26:36Z")
It’s complete horseshit. See Gary Taubes’ _Good Calories Bad Calorie_s for an overview. Also see these previous threads: > **[Does coconut milk have a lot of "bad" cholesterol?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=548379)** > > Well, there’s not much more to the question than that. I am looking for a reputable cite about the amount of cholesterol in coconut milk. Any help appreciated. > **[Animal fat is evidently not bad for you. Can this be right?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=548605)** > > I’m not trying to get into Great Debates territory here. I’m hoping someone with a knowledge of nutrition science can shed some light on this: http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/ajcn.2009.27725v1 I’m not one to let one study overthrow... > **[What causes heart attacks?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=572480)** > > I recently had a “near death” experience, which led to my becoming very confused about heart disease. I was a runner all my life, and ate only the “right” foods, until I ended up in the ICU. While recovering from my heart attack, I was told the... > **[Does Eating Pure Lard Improve Your Cholesterol?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=550898)** > > As I understand it, eating lard increases LDL (“bad” cholesterol) but simultaneously increases HDL (“good” cholesterol). So eating lard would cause total cholesterol to increase, but total cholesterol is a fairly worthless metric when it comes to... ---
**Author:** ![needscoffee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/needscoffee/32/1076_2.png) [@needscoffee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/needscoffee)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2011, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/17 "2011-02-17T07:01:46Z")
My memory is getting pretty awful, but I thought that Gary Taubes wrote that it was beginning to appear as though the culprit was a lipoprotein which transports LDL cholesterol. Yes, [here is an article he wrote for the NY Times about cholesterol](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/opinion/27taubes.html?_r=1) which describes it and the cholesterol/heart disease questions. It’s a couple years old now, though, so there could be more current answers. ---
**Author:** ![rhubarbarin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/eb9ed0/32.png) [@rhubarbarin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rhubarbarin)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2011, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/18 "2011-02-17T19:10:20Z")
I have have spent years reading the available research and discussion, and am inclined to think that the lipid hypothesis (which is not based on any solid evidence at all!) is total hogwash - dangerous hogwash. There is so much we don’t understand about the human body yet, so much more research to be done before we have the answers. I do feel certain enough that ‘aretery clogging saturated fat!!’ isn’t harmful to health that I eat something like 100g of it per day. 🙂 I had an excellent lipid panel before and after I started doing this, so I’m worry-free. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2011, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/19 "2011-02-18T05:59:29Z")
Hogwash? Most certainly not. As completely settled of a question as it is often made out to be? No. High LDL cholesterol is certainly associated with increased risk of heart disease and there is proven measurable benefit in terms of lowering the rate of death from heart disease when LDL cholesterol is lowered with certain statins. Controversy exists, as discussed in [this article](http://www.theheart.org/article/1174743.do) about [a recent Cochrane review](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CD004816/frame.html), as whether the benefit is big enough to justify their use in _lower risk_ individuals. But the debate there is not if there is an effect, just how big and if the benefit justifies the societal cost for those at relatively lower risk. It is not completely clear that the effect is directly attributable to the cholesterol lowering however; correlation is not causation. Indeed it may work more through some other effect, such as an anti-inflammatory one. Unfortunately performing studies that actually look at mortality as the outcome are very expensive to do, as they require very large subject pools, so many studies use surrogate outcomes, which limit the strength of the data. The evidence for dietary changes as a means to reduce heart disease mortality is also not quite as iron clad, or at least as dramatic, as it is often portrayed. That may be because people rarely succeed in keeping up with dietary changes, some that the advice may have been a bit off target (historically replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturated ones and carbohydrates, which in some cases have been even worse. OTOH diets fairly low in saturated fats, simple carbs, and highly processed foods (salts and nitrates), and higher in whole grains, nuts, legumes, fish, and lean meats, is associated with good health outcomes whatever the actual mechanism and statins beneficial effects are real whether or not it mainly attributable to its hypocholesterolemic effects or not. ---
**Author:** ![Surreal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@Surreal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Surreal)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2011, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532/20 "2011-02-18T06:11:13Z")
More research regarding the Lipid Hypothesis: > **[The fallacies of the lipid hypothesis - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18615352/)** > > Most researchers to-day consider that a high intake of saturated fat and elevated LDL cholesterol are the most important causes of atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease. The lipid hypothesis has dominated cardiovascular research and prevention... > **[PRIME PubMed | End of the road for the diet-heart theory?](https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18609049/abstract/End_of_the_road_for_the_diet_heart_theory)** > > A personal account of the diet-cholesterol-heart hypothesis during the last sixty years, from its start with Jeremiah Stamler and Ancel Keys, its rapid rise and progressive fall during the last years. It is pointed out that the clinical picture of a... > **[A hypothesis out-of-date. the diet-heart idea - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12507667/)** > > An almost endless number of observations and experiments have effectively falsified the hypothesis that dietary cholesterol and fats, and a high cholesterol level play a role in the causation of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. The... > **[Surprising decline of cardiovascular mortality in Switzerland: 1951-1976.](https://jech.bmj.com/content/33/2/114.abstract)** > > In Switzerland the age-standardised death rate for 'all diseases of the circulatory system' decreased by 22% in males and by 43% in females between 1951 and 1976, which represented a third and nearly a half respectively of the decrease in all deaths.... > **[Science, atherosclerosis and the "age of unreason": a review - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8117583/)** > > Research in atherosclerosis has been dominated by the lipid hypothesis. The pathology of both the cholesterol-fed animal and of familial hypercholesterolemia has been misrepresented. The vascular lesions of these disorders are not atherosclerotic but... > **[Cholesterol does not cause coronary heart disease in contrast to stress - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18609060/)** > > The belief that coronary atherosclerosis is due to high cholesterol from increased saturated fat intake originated from experiments in herbivorous animals. It was reinforced by reports allegedly demonstrating this sequence of events in various... > **[Low serum cholesterol and external-cause mortality: potential implications...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19135214/)** > > Among a national random sample of community-based men, lower baseline cholesterol predicted external mortality and revealed an interaction with morbid depression. Patients presenting with low cholesterol and morbid depression in clinical practice may... [http://www.ahjonline.com/article/S0002-8703(08)00571-1/abstract](http://www.ahjonline.com/article/S0002-8703(08)00571-1/abstract) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-lipid-hypothesis-all-hogwash/571532.md?page=2)