About this project

Not medical advice. This site maps published research to help you understand the evidence and the disagreement around cholesterol. It does not diagnose, treat, or recommend treatment, and it is not a substitute for a conversation with a qualified clinician about your own situation.

CholesterolResearch is a transparent, evidence-mapped knowledge base on cholesterol, LDL, statins, and cardiovascular risk. The goal is to let a motivated non-specialist see what the body of research actually says, where there is genuine consensus and genuine dispute, and which evidence each position rests on - and to make their own informed decision in conversation with a clinician.

It currently maps 15 claims,36 verified studies, and8 people, and it is growing.

How it is built

• The spine is the claim - a single, precisely-scoped question. A study never gets a blanket "pro" or "anti" label; it contributes evidence to the specific claims it speaks to.
• Every citation is verified against a primary source(PubMed / DOI) before it is entered, with a verbatim quote and a locator. During the seed build this process already caught a retracted paper and kept its data out of the corpus.
• Evidence is weighted with a GRADE-lite tiering rubric - design is the starting point, not the answer.
• Every claim argues both a mainstream and a skeptic steelman, and carries a clearly-labelled bottom line that must survive its own skeptic steelman.
• Conflicts of interest are surfaced for everyone - pharmaceutical funding and book/supplement/clinic income alike.

The full editorial standard is in themethodology. The data model, search protocol, coverage matrix, and search log live in the project repository.

Known limitations

• Classifications are expert-informed editorial judgments, not a peer-reviewed meta-analysis. They can be wrong; the versioning and correction process exists for exactly that reason.
• The corpus is systematic within a declared scope, not exhaustive of all literature.
• The seed set of people is currently weighted toward skeptics; the mainstream scientific case is carried by the studies and the EAS guideline, and a stronger mainstream lipidology voice is a documented next addition.