Lowering Cholesterol Makes it Harder to Fight Viral Infections

Whether Covid 19 or the seasonal flu, people over 70, (usually those with multiple pre-existing conditions), are at the highest risk for developing complications from viral infections (including hospitalization and premature death).

The most popular drugs taken by people in their 60s, 70s, or older, are medications to lower cholesterol (usually Atorvastatin or Rosuvastatin).

I have written about how several studies have shown that half of those who suffer a heart attack have normal cholesterol (see references 1-4).

The 4th study referenced here was a review that showed that lowering cholesterol in people over 60 was associated with increased mortality from all diseases.

The reason for that is that cholesterol is vital for our health in many ways, and lowering it doesn't benefit us, rather harms us.

One of the roles of cholesterol, or more specifically lipoprotein, the apparatus that carries cholesterol and other fatty substances in the blood, is to protect us from the effects of invaders (viruses and bacteria).

Some research has shown that viruses create havoc by stimulating bacteria in the body to release toxic bi-products, known as “endotoxin”. Symptoms of viral diseases (fever, congestion, difficulty breathing, etc.), are the result of the immune system’s response to endotoxin.

It turns out that blocking the effect of endotoxin may prevent death from a viral infection.

It also turns out that a naturally-occuring substance that blocks endotoxin, is cholesterol (see reference 5).

So, lowering cholesterol levels, with drugs or otherwise, is probably not a good idea if we want to be able to successfully fight off viral infections.

Lowering cholesterol can cause many other problems as well, such as fatigue, increase blood sugar levels, contribute to depression and dementia, a decrease in the function of vital organs and an increase in the risk for cancer.

If cholesterol is important for health and is not a very useful tool to gauge your risk for a cardiovascular event (according to the studies I shared), then what might be a better way to evaluate your cardiovascular risk?

My preferred approach is to first measure these three markes:

1. High sensitivity C-Reactive Protein - tests cardiovascular inflammation & plaque deposition

2. Fibrinogen - tests blood “thickness”, the likelihood to form blood clots

3. Urine microalbumin/creatinine - evaluates the state of health of the blood vessels

These tests are easy to order and are far better predictors of risk than testing cholesterol. If they are high then it is important to dig deeper and find out why, so we know how to fix the problems they reveal.

While Cholesterol is not the only factor in supporting a robust immune response, if you want to increase your resilience to a viral infection, maybe lowering your cholesterol is not such a good idea.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References

1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4513492/

2. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19081406/

3. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.116.005333

4. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/6/e010401

5. http://haidut.me/?p=2298

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------