The Tandem LDLc Drop experiment is very suspect with it's home lipid panel using calculated LDLc when the TG levels are blocked out. Follow nonHDLc instead which Dave does not follow on his podcast from Houston. He also does not calculate remnants for us. I do at my blog. Data from Tandem LDLc Drop by Dave link
From Sniderman
"Indeed, Miller et al have shown that the total errors for
direct HDL-C in abnormal specimens were −19.8% to 36.3% and
for direct LDL-C −26.6% to 31.9%.4
Moreover, there is evidence that directly measured LDL-C is not a more accurate measure of cardiovascular risk than calculated LDL-C.5
What then justifies the additional cost of direct LDL-C?"
From Sniderman
"Indeed, Miller et al have shown that the total errors for
direct HDL-C in abnormal specimens were −19.8% to 36.3% and
for direct LDL-C −26.6% to 31.9%.4
Moreover, there is evidence that directly measured LDL-C is not a more accurate measure of cardiovascular risk than calculated LDL-C.5
What then justifies the additional cost of direct LDL-C?"
"In their commentary, Contois and Delatour make a good point:
the reference standard for apoB falls short of absolute perfection.3
the reference standard for apoB falls short of absolute perfection.3
If it can be improved, well and good.
But surely, the same point applies with even greater force to the measurement of
1-triglycerides,
2-high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and
3-low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C).
None are standardized and the harmonization programs in place are voluntary not mandatory. "
For full letter to editor go to: Sniderman's letter to editior link
For full letter to editor go to: Sniderman's letter to editior link
No comments:
Post a Comment