I still don't understand why cholesterol is such a touchy subject for some people. Usually any type of argument that lower cholesterol is better is met with rebuttals such as have you read so-and-so or seen such-and-such study. As if anyone who believes in lowering blood cholesterol is just a mindless drone following the status quo.
Do people really look into the arguments of the cholesterol skeptics? I have, and I'm not very impressed. For example, here's the website for the International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics. First, a good bit of the research cited is dated, and lot of the newer studies that get cholesterol below threshold levels is not included. Second, a lot of the research cited has nothing to do with cholesterol, but are just other journal articles of those who are members. Third, there is a focus on statins, and just because someone is for lowering cholesterol doesn't mean they are for taking statins.
People who cite groups like this act as if there are mountains of evidence behind their position - evidence just waiting to be discovered by us poor enlightened souls. My other favorite is so-and-so wrote a book about how the cholesterol theory is bogus - as if writing a book makes it so. People write books about all kinds of things - UFOs, tarot cards, etc. - and obviously writing a book about these things doesn't somehow make them true.
So then you get to the heart of the matter, the scientific evidence. From a theoretical viewpoint, it seems that humans should have low blood cholesterol. This is due to the fact that 1) all free-living mammals have relatively low blood cholesterol, and 2) humans in their natural environment (hunter-gatherers) have low blood cholesterol.
The empirical evidence is much trickier. Earlier studies didn't lower cholesterol enough, and therefore the results of the studies are mixed. Newer studies show the real value of lower cholesterol is when LDL gets below 70.
But honestly, I don't think some cholesterol skeptics really study or even care about the empirical evidence. They seem to have another agenda. Part of it seems the need to be a rebel, "don't believe the party line on this, it's bull." Another part is conspiracy-minded, "it's all just a sham paid for by the drug companies." And third, they seem to want to force you to switch your beliefs, as if a person is not capable of making up their own mind.
One last point: it's much tougher to try and prove a relationship exists than to shoot one down. Skeptics too often take the easy way out, automatically rejecting any evidence that doesn't fit into their belief system. Lowering cholesterol reduces heart disease? Hogwash, there must be something wrong with this study somewhere.
Being skeptical is valuable, especially in modern society with all the con artists and misinformation out there. But it pays to be skeptical of the skeptics as well.
