Everyone
We know that the total cholesterol link to heart disease has been debunked. Then why is it if you do the Framingham CHD Risk Score on the web, it has total cholesterol as one of the factors, and when you increase the total cholesterol it increased your risk of an event or death???
Is it just total web bollox and it can be ignored?
Cheers
Alec
I am going to bump this to see if anyone bites. No luck last time! Maybe everyone thought it was a truly dumb question! 
Can’t answer the question but I had fun playing around with it. I don’t know if being female makes a difference but when I plugged in various numbers the lower risk involved lower pressure and higher hdl, even with insane total cholesterol numbers. Wonder why LDL was not included.
I am not expert , but since no one replied in a month, I will try.
If you driving fast, the possibility of having accident is higher than if you were driving at a more controlled speed.
The risk will go up if you have a bad tire.
the risk will go even higher if you are drunk.
So each factor will increase the risk.
If the high cholesterol only present without other risk factors, there is small chance for heart disease.
https://proteinpower.com/drmike/2006/09/26/framingham-follies/
This is all I could find.
That’s a good find, thank you. Some good insight in there that I think support the notion that the website calculator is just making it up. But I just don’t understand how they get away with that. It is clear that if you increase the cholesterol number in the calculator that it results in a higher risk level of CHD as the result in the calculator. Yet no correlation has been found in the Framingham study between total cholesterol and CHD. So where do they get the data from in the calculator?
They are representing that this calculator is driven by results from this massive and long study (which buys BIG credibility), and yet it seems they are just making it up?? It just doesn’t feel right… are they really just making it up??
Cheers
A
The current version was published in 2008. So, it’s apparently the thinking from ten years ago.
But yes, I see your point. It’s the same thing as when the problem with sugar was known, but swept under the carpet.
Regina, I was about to buy that, and then thought: but they’ve never found a correlation, have they? That is what Zoe and Nina and Gary and all the other deep researchers of this stuff have found. So were they just making it up 10 years ago?
The more I think about it, the more horrified I am.
You got me wanting to get to the bottom of it. But again, it’s probably “hidden science.” Will let you know if I come up with more.
Regina
I am also not going to let this go. One reason is that I have seen doctors in tv documentaries using this very same calculator to advise patients. So the medical community clearly believe this is backed by science.
But if we (and they) find it is just made up numbers???
I just feel I have been lied to my whole life by the people who I am supposed to trust the most: the medical community.
In a 1992 editorial published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, Dr. William Castelli, a former director of the Framingham Heart study, stated:
“In Framingham, Mass., the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol. The opposite of what… Keys et al would predict…We found that the people who ate the most cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories, weighed the least and were the most physically active.”
Would love to read the whole thing!
Indeed. It seems like almost everything we have been told about health and nutrition is partially or completely wrong. What if fields that we consider as “science” are utterly corrupt?
Can you imagine the entire medical industry suddenly having to turn around and say "Gosh, we were wrong, and actually harming, not helping, our patients? Don’t see that happening anytime soon.
In the fields of drugs and nutrition it is starting to look this way to me. They are beginning to look like a bunch of bankers.
And in refusing to do so, they are knowingly completely undermining their hypocratic oath.
The longer they hold out the more people like me will lose faith in them. I have incredible immense indescribable respect for Tim Noakes and what he did in changing his mind. He had everything to lose. And gained everything because he was bold and ethical. And they put him on trial. Oh my…
There are always a few standouts like that, but they are few and far between.