Biomass Bob

I'm a biomass in a lab. With Wifi access. (A psych working with autistic people). Bluesky = BiomassBob

[Tellit Likeitis @Tellit007]

The lead author of NATURE-CT just weighed in on KETO-CTA. Unprompted. In Dave Feldman's own thread.

Ron Karlsberg MD FACP FAHA FACC, lead author of NATURE-CT, confirmed that plaque progression rates in the keto group were much higher than the rates his study found in the untreated low-risk cohort.

He also noted that any comparison using the original KETO-CTA data is no longer valid, given the retraction.

His figures. His words. His study.

NATURE-CT followed 205 low-risk patients for five years at LDL-C averaging 111 mg/dL. Median non-calcified plaque volume nearly doubled.

Karlsberg's conclusion: keto is likely harmful to arteries for most people. Close lipid monitoring and careful risk assessment are essential.

The person best positioned to compare the two studies just did. In public. To the man who funded the other one.

Choose wisely my friends.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@abefromanofchi @Acyn Karl would be a much better president

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@JamesRuport @ElieJarrougeMD Me too. Even before I went vegan. Just ate lean meats and fiber.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@d_foubert You're living proof eating meat doesn't improve brain health.

[Andrew Flatt @andrew_flatt]

Resistance exercise with Valsava maneuver = acute rise in aortic stiffness

Resistance exercise without Valsalva maneuver = unchanged aortic stiffness

Supports notion that heavy lifting (Valsalva unavoidable, BP spikes) increases resting aortic stiffness. Countered with cardio.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@CBSNews What a fucking idiot.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@timpjohansson @JeetyJeeterson Uh, no.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@MattBMartin @Brady_H And then have them all race.

[Brady Holmer @Brady_H]

This’ll live rent-free in my head for a week.

[🐊ZK For Tre🐊 @ZKForTre]

My phd was 50% about modulating the HPA axis.

This is bullshit.

Bikman once again demonstrating he doesn’t understand basic physiology (despite the fact he teaching endocrinology at the university level).

And RP is helpful to acid test him.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@LORWEN108 Narrator: It's always about the calories.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@jguzz419 @adammocklerr *Who is also a child rapist. And regular rapist too, as found by a court of law.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@jguzz419 @adammocklerr Pure child rape supporter.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@jguzz419 @adammocklerr You're a child rapist supporting douche.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@Jklunden Because they're clearly fake?

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@RonFilipkowski There are posts like this, in which he uses commas correctly, that makes one wonder who's actually providing him with the post. It's crazy, yet not as chaotic as his spoken word.

[Andrew Scott @ScottAppliedSci]

“Half of heart-attack patients have normal cholesterol!”

This is a favourite anti-LDL slogan.

It sounds devastating.

Unless you know basic high school statistics!

If someone says it, they just announced they are embarrassingly out of their depth.

Here's exactly why 🧵

[Tellit Likeitis @Tellit007]

The "professor" seems rather confused. Let's help him on his journey towards scientific literacy, shall we?

Three different things. Treated as one.
LDL is a particle. LDL-C is the cholesterol carried inside it. ApoB is the protein that sits on the surface of every atherogenic particle, one per particle, without exception.

When someone says raised LDL is not a concern, they need to specify which measurement they mean and which population they are describing. @Drlipid to the rescue.

LDL-C can be high because particles are large and cholesterol-rich. ApoB can be high because there are simply more particles. A person can have normal LDL-C and elevated ApoB at the same time. That person is not protected. Their lipid panel just does not show it.

The anti-statin community has spent years arguing about "LDL" while conflating all three measurements interchangeably. It lets them cite one study where the outcome did not match LDL-C and imply the entire causal chain is broken.

It is not broken. The measurement was imprecise.

ApoB counts the particles. LDL-C estimates the cholesterol mass inside some of them. When they disagree, ApoB wins. The UK Biobank found this in 293,000 people. The Sniderman EHJ 2024 analysis is not subtle about it.

Remarkable.

Knowing the difference is not scientific literacy. It is the minimum requirement for having the argument.

[Biomass Bob @SentientBlobBob]

@Matthew1595111 @bowtiedbrazil Not sure what that means?