No orthodoxy lacks accompanying heretics; it often seems that science is a business of proceeding abruptly and messily from one steady state consensus to another via the mechanism of heresy. It is of course worth bearing in mind that most heretics do turn out to be wrong, and are consequently forgotten by all but the most painstaking of scientific historians. In the paper I’ll point out today, the orthodoxy of blood lipid levels as a cause of cardiovascular disease is challenged. The heresy is to suggest that it isn’t the lipids at all, but all down to a matter of chronic inflammation.
This is a tough topic to arbitrate, because raised lipids, such as cholesterol, and raised inflammation go hand in hand. Dietary approaches to tackling cholesterol levels are minimally effective in the grand scheme of things, as dietary content is only a small factor in the lipid content of blood, but they also, inconveniently, tend to move the needle on inflammation as well. The calorie content of the diet, considered over the long-term, is linked to lipids and inflammation in equal measures via the amount of visceral fat tissue an individual carries. Therapies that are available and