How To CORRECTLY Lower Cholesterol & Why

Lowering cholesterol is crucial for health and longevity, but unfortunately most people aren’t getting this right. So what is cholesterol, why and how do we lower it, and can we lower cholesterol too much?

✨15% Discount Code: BRAD ✨

✨10% Discount Code: BRAD ✨

Here are the links to the research papers referenced in the video:

Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
0:30 Cholesterol is Essential
0:55 Cholesterol Transport Issues
1:35 What Cholesterol Do We Worry About?
3:05 Why Lower Cholesterol?
3:28 How Can We Lower ApoB?
4:38 How Low Do We Want ApoB?
7:00 Cholesterol Medications
7:30 Common Cholesterol Myths
If you like this video please smash the thumbs up button, it really helps with the Youtube algorithm :-)
#Cholesterol #Lifespan #health

The links above are affiliate links, so I receive a small commission every time you use them to purchase a product. The content contained in this video, and its accompanying description, is not intended to replace viewers’ relationships with their own medical practitioner. Always speak with your doctor regarding the content of this channel, and especially before using any products, services, or devices discussed on this channel.

[DrBradStanfield]

• www.donotage.org/products | Use code BRAD for 10% off

[jasonsteffek]

Last year, my LDL was 135, and prescribed Lipitor 20 mg. Less than a month later, emphasis of lower carb by eating nutrient dense foods, IF and no added sugar my LDL plummeted to 32. I also lost 25 lbs. Upon hearing the news of the new LDL level, my cardiologist recommended that I cease the statin as that level was too low. I have not been on the statin since and have lost a total of 132 lbs so far.

[AL-rffr]

Statins lowered my cholesterol greatly but they affected my left arm to the point I could barely raise it or use it. Then the same issue began with my right arm and I told the Dr, I can’t take this anymore . After 2 months the muscle pain went away and better ever since. I’ve been going on 9 years now with no pain since dropping the Statins

[joshvanderbilt]

I experienced for years a very low level muscle fatigue from statins I was unaware of. I assumed it was part of aging. Recently the statin dose was increased and the muscle fatigue became readily apparent. I switched to Niacin and the fatigue completely disappeared and I could comfortably jog again for miles. I had numerous episodes of muscles feeling locked up with statins. All of this is gone.

[danieljrgensen]

If anyone wants to know Dr. Brad's biggest opponent on youtube, regarding who defends not using cholesterol lowering drugs....this is a american cardiologist(immigrated from india) named Dr. Nadir Ali.

Go watch the video from him called
"do statins prevent or cause heart disease? Should LDL be called bad cholesterol?"

Would love to see Dr. Brad make a response to that particular video....as would lots of other health enthusiasts like me, that feel this area in medicine really needs to be clarified better, as to what is up and down with cholesterol treatments...

[Letsplay]

From my perspective there seems to be a flaw in the logic of using cholesterol lowering medication: If the liver is putting extra cholesterol in the blood it means that it detects that cholesterol is deficient somewhere in the body. By lowering the amount in the blood it doesn't solve the underlying problem; it merely masks it and eventually the issue will worsen.

[susankitchin]

It is my understanding that the small dense particles are not a problem in themselves, it depends on whether or not those particles are GLYCATED. I also understood that a higher LDL is NOT a risk, if the other metabolic markers are good, e.g higher HDL, and lower triglycerides. With higher HDL and lower Triglycerides, you will naturally have larger particles, and less glycation.

[MariusMitrache]

I'm a 38 yo bodybuildider ( 21 years of lifting weights ). I had a 101 LDL cholesterol 5 years ago, went vegan and did blood work periodically. My LDL went 46, 42, and last time I checked was 36. My diet is not perfect, is very proteincentric ( because of bodybuilding ) and I ocasionally endulge in junky foods, never the less these are the numbers, also apoB is 44, and HDL cholesterol is also 44. Maybe someone can find this helpful 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Kingramze]

There's no doubt that ApoB levels correlate with risk, but it would be great for more research behind the mechanism for how and why it gets lodged into arterial walls -- whether it's genetic mutations like ApoB "little a" or glycation or oxidation of ApoB or glycation, oxidation, and/or physical damage from high blood pressure on the arterial walls that makes them more susceptible to interacting with the ApoB... or if it's just a clean correlation with concentration levels over time.

There are always outliers that have clean healthy arteries, but high LDL that make me think there's more to the story, even if the statistical average shows a seemingly simple correlation.

[pardogg]

Glad you pointed out that CT coronary calcium scores do not measure non-calcified plaques. So a score of 0 does not mean no plaques are present!

[newyorkguy]

Just before watching this video, I was watching another on youtube. The channel is called Talking with Docs, and 2 surgeons, one of whom was taking statins, were discussing the effectiveness of statins. This was from 1 year ago. They referred to a JAMA study, which they didn't give the date for, but it was clearly recent. The title of the study was, Do Statins Actually Work, Evaluating the Association between Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Relative and Absolute Effects of Statin Treatment, A Systematic Review and MetaAnalysis.
They discussed the relative and absolute risk reduction on several endpoints. The absolute risk reduction is the one that counts. It was 0.8% for all-cause mortality, 1.3% for heart attack and 2.4% for stroke, very low numbers. The number needed to treat which is closely related to the absolute risk reduction was 77 people taking statins for 4.4 years to prevent 1 heart attack. This NNT has been known for years, yet almost all medical professionals tout the effectiveness of statins. The surgeon in the video said he was going to speak to his doctor about whether to continue taking statins. Statins are supposed to convert soft plaque into hard, yet there is little effect on the outcome.
I think the one weakness in Dr. Attia's presentation in his new book is his assertion that cholesterol levels should be what they were at birth. This is the one position that he takes which is not supported by scientific evidence. It's just a hypothesis and I think many professionals would not be convinced by it.

[DrJK-wmec]

There are people with really high LDL that have ZERO atherosclerosis

Also….the ApoB must be oxidized for it to get trapped in the endothelial wall. You can do a simple blood test to check to see if you have oxidized ApoB

[Handelson]

How do I reconcile what you are saying compared to Youtuber and heart surgeon Dr Pradip Jamnadas? Everything I'm reading says the problem is not cholesterol, but rather glycated cholesterols when one consumes lots of sugars and carbs. Also my brother just started taking statins and he complains about arthritis, muscle aches and weakness when he did not have those problems before the statins..

[barkmaker]

Cholesterol is used to repair damage in the cardiovascular system caused by high blood sugar levels. Just reduce and keep your blood sugars low. ...but also probably a good idea not to go overboard on cholesterol levels as well. Life's about balance. ...and quality.

[UnknownUser-scjx]

why would you worry about cholesterol unless it's the atherogenic forms like LP(a) or SDLDL. in the vast majority of studies people with higher cholesterol live longer, have better cognition and better immune health, it would be better to focus on lowering blood sugar, insulin and triglycerides.

[-Is-The-New-]

Great video and information. However, this 2019 study says the following "TC levels associated with lowest mortality were 210–249 mg/dL, except for men aged 18–34 years (180–219 mg/dL)..."

So, it appears that if you are 60, 70, 80, etc. you would have the lowest mortality rate if your TC was between 210 - 249.

In addition, there are people that have a TC of 300 and live to be centenarians. Please Google the people from Limone, Italy.
All I am saying is that just because a person may have a TC of 240, it does not mean that he or she should take statins.

[Handelson]

Dr Brad, are there not studies that show that there is no difference in heart attack events between those that take statins and those that do not?

[jeffreymagedanz]

I am in awe of how much information was fit into less than 10 minutes.

[betzib]

I cannot believe you think the mediterranean diet is best for this effect when Dr Esselstyn and Dean Ornish have such better results. Also what are you going to do about statins raising blood sugar

[privateerburrows]

What's not being said here is that, for instance, 3:14 "lowering LDL cholesterol" is deceptive terminology, since LDL is a lipoprotein ... NOT a (type of) cholesterol. In fact, there are no "types" of cholesterol. Also not being said is that the reason these lipoproteins are delivering cholesterol to arterial walls is usually to patch over cracks that cannot be repaired due to inability to make collagen, which is most often due to lack of vitamin C. Following the Pauling Protocol of 6 grams of vitamin C and 3 grams of lysine per day (add a bit of glycine if you will), is a good way of facilitating collagen synthesis, and therefore repair of arterial damage, which in turn makes patching cracks with cholesterol unnecessary. And if we want to go a little deeper in the causality chain rabbit hole, we can question why were there cracks in the arteries to begin with, and it was likely due to one of two things: caramelization or calcification ... or both. Caramelization occurs when you eat as much carbohydrates as most people do and the constant and perpetual spiking of insuline results in cellular skepticism, also known as reduced insulin response, or pre-diabetic metabolic syndrome, which results in some of the blood sugar not being taken up, which then remains in the blood, caramelizing red cells and arterial walls. Calcification occurs when people hear about calcium and vitamin D and start taking them, but forget to take vitamin K2.

EDIT: 4:20 "Reduce saturated fat" is a bunch of brain-wash. I subscribed to this channel about a week ago, and now I'm having to un-subscribe. Saturated fat is exactly what our cell-walls need. When cell walls are built out of unsaturated fats, for lack of dietary saturated ones, they become less flexible and less permeable due to all the kinks in unsaturated fats, which tend to tangle up the phospholipids inside the walls. Our cells need straight and simple saturated fats to build healthy walls. Also, we have enzymes that can de-saturate saturated fats to make unsaturated ones, if necessary; but we cannot make saturated fats from unsaturated ones; so saturated fats should be our first choice. Additionally, unsaturated fats rancidize faster than saturated fats, all other things being equal, and consumption of rancidized fats is really, really bad for you.

So, I'm leaving this channel for good, and telling YT to never recommend it to me again, for good measure. This is not something I would do on the basis of errors; it is something I do when I have strong reasons to suspect intentional and deliberate deception. And what convinces me of the deceiving intent is the ridiculous speed of delivery, leaving not even a millisecond between phrases for one to think; forcing one to repeatedly pause the video and replay parts. I'm glad about the fighting the statins deception/genocide, however; and it makes me wonder why this channel fights one deception (statins) while supporting another deception ("saturated fats are bad"); I don't frankly understand the motivation.

EDIT2: Listened to the rest of the video and it gets trashier and trashier, starting to defend statins ... Bye!