This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

David D. Norenberg, MD
Gundersen Clinic, Ltd La Crosse, Wis

JAMA. 1986;255(21):2893-2894.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

It seems so logical, given the mass of epidemiologic data that correlates elevated cholesterol values with increased incidence of coronary disease in populations, that cholesterol must be the primary culprit and that a diet or drug that lowers cholesterol levels will a priori lower risk of death. If this is true, why haven't we been able to prove it?

The article by Hoeg et al¹ in the Jan 24/31 issue of JAMA is the position of believers. My own view of the data is more agnostic. The real question is very straightforward: does diet or drug therapy to lower lipid levels save lives? An affirmative answer remains elusive. If the diet or drug causes as many noncardiac deaths as it prevents cardiac deaths, that's no good. We need safe therapy with proved efficacy; we need a positive prospective study.

There is still no prospective intervention trial that . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?