The War on Health: Debunking the Cholesterol Lie

So, prior to Statins, which was prior to 1987, the normal total cholesterol level used to be 300 – which I believe must be big news for someone who might have been told that a cholesterol level of 210 is too high. But, what happened is that big pharma moved the goalpost on what a normal level of cholesterol was the same time that statins entered the market. But, some will say that correlation does not equal causation, and so let’s address this change in cholesterol philosophy since 1987 – looking at the misleading dichotomy between bad and good cholesterol, as well as the link between Statins, Cholesterol, and Heart Disease.
HOW BIG PHARMA MOVED THE GOALPOST ON WHAT IS CONSIDERED BAD CHOLESTEROL
And now onto our main discussion, and we ought to start by asking what the discourse or common consensus on cholesterol was before Statins entered the market, which was prior to 1987. Well, prior to statins, the normal total cholesterol level used to be 300. HOWEVER, big pharma moved the goalpost.
THE QUESTIONABLE DICHOTOMY BETWEEN “GOOD” AND “BAD” CHOLESTEROL
Part of how big pharma moved the goalpost on cholesterol, in order to create a market for statins, is that there was a questionable dichotomy created between good and bad cholesterol. More specifically, cholesterol is generally described as a waxy substance essential for building cell membranes and producing hormones. Cholesterol travels through the bloodstream in particles called lipoproteins, primarily as low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL). LDL, often called “bad cholesterol,” carries cholesterol to cells and arteries, where it can form plaques, narrowing the arteries and increasing the risk of heart attack and stroke. For decades, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol has been commonly referred to as “bad cholesterol” due to its association with increased risks of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), such as heart attacks and strokes. Conversely, HDL, known as “good cholesterol,” transports cholesterol from the arteries to the liver for elimination.
Numerous doctors challenge the notion that low-density lipoprotein (or LDL) is purely harmful. They primarily make the argument that there’s no such thing as bad cholesterol, and that “all mammals have LDL— and that the LDL performs many functions. When oxidized, they could be considered ‘bad,’ but this may only reflect general oxidative stress. In fact, the presence of oxidized LDL might indicate underlying issues rather than being the problem itself.
HOWEVER, numerous studies have challenged this claim, including even a recent study involving more than 4 million people across China, which suggests that LDL may not be as harmful as previously thought—at least, not for everyone. Research led by Dr Liang Chen and colleagues reveals a more nuanced picture. They found that while high LDL levels are linked to increased mortality in some groups, they do not pose the same risk for others. In addition, they found that the relationship between LDL and mortality varies significantly based on an individual’s cardiovascular disease risk and overall health status.
These findings suggest two things: first, the medical industry ought to reconsider the one-size-fits-all approach to cholesterol; and rather opt for more personalised treatment strategies. But secondly, these studies are exposing the fact that the dichotomy between bad and good cholesterol is not well evidenced, and is highly misleading.
THE CHOLESTEROL MYTH IS CRUMBLING: THE LINK BETWEEN STATINS, CHOLESTEROL, & HEART DISEASE
However, the status quo reports that the cholesterol myth is crumbling, as many people discover that the “go-to” drugs for cholesterol are linked to over 350 adverse effects, including declining brain function (including dementia).
But, the discussion of Statins is not just about side effects – rather, it is about a profound set of underreported health risks. In fact, a database of 561 studies reveals the alarming truth about statins: they harm the body and mind. For instance, a study discovered that Statins, while they are widely used for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia and coronary heart disease and for the prevention of stroke, they have actually resulted in various adverse effects, most commonly affecting muscle and ranging from myalgia to rhabdo-myolysis. These adverse effects are said to be due to a coenzyme Q(10) deficiency because inhibition of cholesterol biosynthesis also inhibits the synthesis of CoQ(10).
In addition, Statins, which are one of history’s most commonly prescribed drugs, have shaped Western society’s approach to treating heart disease. Akira Endo, a Japanese-born biochemist, is said to have discovered statins from mould. His research garnered the attention of pharmaceutical companies, aiming to find a compound that could effectively lower cholesterol—the assumed cause of heart disease. Merck (THE pharmaceutical company) ultimately obtained samples of the drug and was “astonished at the potency,” Mr. Endo said in his review, spurring the pharmaceutical company to develop its own statin. Then, in 1987, the FDA approved Merck’s lovastatin, the first commercial statin. But, when you look at the history of statins before big pharma moved the goalpost on what was considered bad cholesterol, you realise that the scientific theory behind statins and even the subsequent studies pointed to significant harm.
But, even after considering the concerning history of Statins, questions have begun (especially in the status quo) to accumulate about this so-called wonder drug. More specifically, questions around statins have ironically related to the link between Statins, Cholesterol, and Heart Disease.
STATINS: MOST PRESCRIBED DRUG WITH DOWNPLAYED SIDE EFFECTS
For decades, statins have been heralded as reliable heroes in the battle against heart disease, which was said to be the leading cause of death globally. However, a new expert review suggests that long-term use of statins may be aiding the enemy by accelerating coronary artery calcification instead of providing protection. The review, published in Clinical Pharmacology, suggests that statins may act as “mitochondrial toxins,” impairing muscle function in the heart and blood vessels by depleting coenzyme Q10 (also known as CoQ10), which is an antioxidant that cells use for growth and maintenance. Multiple studies show that statins inhibit CoQ10 synthesis, leading many patients to supplement. Now, CoQ10 is vital for producing what is known as ATP, which is the cell’s fundamental energy carrier. Insufficient CoQ10 inhibits ATP production, resulting in an energy deficit that the review authors say “could be a major cause for heart muscle and coronary artery damage.”
The crucial question that then arises is: “Who’s behind the studies proving statins’ alleged benefits then? Well, it appears that “virtually all of the major clinical trials of statins were funded by the manufacturers—when the drugs were still on patent”! More specifically, in a 2015 investigative meta-analysis published in The Journal of American Cardiology, researchers reviewed all phase 2 and 3 clinical trials in a decade. They found that nearly 80 percent of the trials had a conflict of interest, and almost 60 percent involved more than half of the authors. Of these studies, 54 had favourable outcomes, and only 12 had unfavourable results. Nowm have a listen as a doctors outlines even more harms that result from taking statins.
So, as far as statins are concerned, the manufacturers fabricated the data! The financial ties allowed the manufacturers to design the studies and select patients most likely to benefit from and not be harmed by statin therapy. These ties also allowed the manufacturers to not compare the benefit of statin therapy to the benefit of adopting healthy lifestyle habits and to not ask prospectively about side effects. This truly exposes the deceptive works of pharmakeia (the pharmaceutical industry) shown to us in Revelation 18:23!
PATIENTS ARE SELDOM GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER THE REAL RISKS
The fact that manufacturers are using money to fabricate the results of clinical trials is a clear issue pointing to eroding ethics in the medical industry. But, one of the worst things about this, is that patients are seldom given the opportunity to consider the real risks of medical devices, processes or even medication! For instance, several drugs increase the risks of dementia, the most prominent being anti-choli-nergic drugs, anti-epileptics, oncology drugs, and sedative-hypnotic drugs. These are all common prescriptions for older people. Also, vaccines and the MANY DIVERSe side-effects they suffered, including death! In some instances, doctors communicate the seemingly worth-risking side effects to patients, that they also receive from the pharmaceutical companies. However, at times, even doctors are silent about the harms their patients are suffering since they benefit – especially when we look at chemo-theraphy. This is quite concerning considering even the history of chemotherapy.
Then there’s also the problem presented by the pharmaceutical lobby, that affects the decisions in the medical industry. In 2005, for example, a House of Commons report in the United Kingdom detailed the control and consequences of the pharmaceutical lobby: it stated that “people have been taking ineffective and harmful medicines for centuries… The industry is hugely influential, affecting every aspect of the medical world, including prescribers, patients, academics, the media, and even the institutions designed to regulate it. Its influence in Parliament is extensive… Approximately 90% of clinical drug trials and 70% of trials reported in major medical journals are conducted or commissioned by the pharmaceutical industry.” As the pharmaceutical industry does most of the research, inevitably the industry not only has a major effect on what gets researched, but also how it is researched and how results are interpreted and reported.”[86] Conflicts of interest, financial, political, and legal corruption are commonplace in the pharmaceutical industry.
This lobby is regularly responsible for health scandals, to the point that there is even an epidemic of harmful drug side effects, largely hidden. These companies could not act without the media intermediary, responsible for spreading and the proselytising of a polluted science. The COVID-19 period has shown a very high level of scientific censorship, causing many people difficulties to access relevant health information. Moreover, the pharmaceutical industries are known for their propaganda in favour of the disease. Pharmaceutical industries are known to provide inaccurate and misleading promotional information about their medicines, but also inaccurate information on diseases and disease risks, which can lead to unnecessary medication and induce side effects caused by these medicines.
As shocking as this information may seem, similar to tactics used by criminal organisations, the pharmaceutical industry pays for its influence (bribes) of doctors, academics, journals, professional and patient organisations, university departments, journalists, regulators, and politicians by distributing money or rewards to them in exchange for their approval of the company position. The progressive corruption of science by the pharmaceutical industries has become so great that it threatens the health of millions of people every year and results in the deaths of thousands. The pharmaceutical industries are, therefore, guilty of organised crime, which should be recognised as a crime against humanity – really it is a war on human health.
But, we have surely prayed, and continue to pray. They will live in our world, and we will not live in theirs. AND, when we make the agenda of the adversary plain, the veil of deception is indeed being broken – in fact, Proverbs 11:9 tells us that “…through knowledge shall the just be delivered.”