First of all, it's very difficult to prove a negative.
Second, I always thought that the specious connection was between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol, not necessarily the latter with heart disease.
1) The link between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol.
2) The link between cholesterol and heart disease risk.
The former exists because research has shown that a large number of people don't seem to see an increase in blood cholesterol when they increase their dietary cholesterol, as I mentioned in the article.
The latter exists because people with seemingly healthy cholesterol levels, still develop heart disease, which has led to looking for alternative risk indications e.g. number of cholesterol particles vs total amount of cholesterol - the theory being that smaller, denser cholesterol particles may carry less total cholesterol but are more likely to cause plaque build up in the arteries.
A few years ago I saw a story on BBC suggesting a despairing outlook for people of the Indian subcontinent origin (Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi - IPB); it was titled "Asian heart disease gene found". It reported that a significant percentage of IPBs have a gene that regardless of lifestyle and/or dietary choices, will kill them rather early [1]. I have not read the actual, grim study.
For non UK audience: Asian == UK term for people of the Indian subcontinent origin
I wasn't aware of this specific gene mutation but research has shown empirically that Indian men are at greater risk of premature heart disease than the average person (one UK study states up to 50% more) even when they were born and grew up in the West.
Comments
First of all, it's very difficult to prove a negative.
Second, I always thought that the specious connection was between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol, not necessarily the latter with heart disease.
Any comments/elaborations?
I think there are two issues:
1) The link between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol.
2) The link between cholesterol and heart disease risk.
The former exists because research has shown that a large number of people don't seem to see an increase in blood cholesterol when they increase their dietary cholesterol, as I mentioned in the article.
The latter exists because people with seemingly healthy cholesterol levels, still develop heart disease, which has led to looking for alternative risk indications e.g. number of cholesterol particles vs total amount of cholesterol - the theory being that smaller, denser cholesterol particles may carry less total cholesterol but are more likely to cause plaque build up in the arteries.
A few years ago I saw a story on BBC suggesting a despairing outlook for people of the Indian subcontinent origin (Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi - IPB); it was titled "Asian heart disease gene found". It reported that a significant percentage of IPBs have a gene that regardless of lifestyle and/or dietary choices, will kill them rather early [1]. I have not read the actual, grim study.
For non UK audience: Asian == UK term for people of the Indian subcontinent origin
[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7833753.stm
I wasn't aware of this specific gene mutation but research has shown empirically that Indian men are at greater risk of premature heart disease than the average person (one UK study states up to 50% more) even when they were born and grew up in the West.