Duck

This is even more interesting according to our almighty Chatgpt overlords - Wright signed with Philly on May 1st. At that time he had no CLUE he could potentially come back to college...


| Date | Event | What it meant for Wright |
| ----------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **June 23, 2026** | NCAA adopts new **five-years-within-five-years** eligibility rule | **2022 class excluded**; Wright appeared finished with college eligibility |
| **July 8, 2026** | *Wisne v. NCAA* class action filed in Colorado | First major federal challenge to the new rule; Wright was **not yet relying on this case personally** |
| **July 31, 2026** | Colorado judge grants preliminary injunction in *Wisne* and certifies nationwide Class of 2022 | **First major court ruling creating a potential fifth year for Wright's class** |
| **Aug. 1–10** | Colorado court's transfer-portal window | Covered 2022 athletes could explore returning |
| **Aug. 10/11** | NCAA asks for stay; Wright is still with Philadelphia | Wright is already deep into his NFL opportunity |
| **Aug. 11** | Wright acquired by Cleveland after Philadelphia waiver | Still an NFL player |
| **Aug. 19** | Louisiana judge issues TRO specifically protecting 33 athletes, including Wright | **This is the first court order that clearly gave Wright himself a protected path back to college** |
| **Aug. 20** | Wright enters transfer portal | He begins exercising that new opportunity |
| **Aug. 21** | Tenth Circuit stays the Colorado *Wisne* injunction | Nationwide federal protection is temporarily pulled back, but **Louisiana TRO remains** |
| **Aug. 23** | Wright agrees to return to LSU after Cleveland waiver | His college comeback becomes concrete |
| **Aug. 25-ish** | SEC adopts rule barring former professionals from returning | Creates the separate LSU/SEC fight |

apoB or LDL-p is what matters these are measures of the number of particles (lipoproteins). LDL-C is the measure (or calculation) of the total cholesterol.

On average these things generally align; however, the issue is for 3 people with the exact same LDL-C (High):

Person 1 very large lipoproteins (apoB count would be lower)
Person 2 average lipoprotein size (apoB count average)
Person 3 very small lipoproteins (apoB count much higher)

For those three people the "guidelines" all say statin to lower LDL-C. Person 3 is at significantly greater risk and standard of care may not lower their cholesterol levels enough if treating to an LDL-C level. Person 3 has MORE/SMALLER apoB particles, which are more atherogenic and more likely to cause plaques in the arterial walls. Person 2 is average & guidelines are probably fine. Person 1 may not even be at risk.

LDL-C isn't wrong - apoB is just a better measurement, because it incorporates particle size. Also price of apoB tests are negligible (US is way behind Europe on this -- LDL-p tests is very expensive, relative to others).

quote:

---

Why does the number of apoB particles matter? Meaning what is the mechanism by which they cause heart disease?

---

ApoB is measuring the size of the particles per above. Smaller particles more easily cause plaques in your arterial walls. Plaques then can rupture and you can die. This is not an opinion, it is a known progression of disease that is the leading cause of death in the USA.

What does Repatha run a month? Be great when PSK9 inhibitors get cheaper...

See above for risk related to LDL. Risk of events are most highly related to LDL levels (not going to get into particle size).

Trigs do matter, but they matter a lot less than LDL. Trigs are also highly variable based on your diet. Not eating crap will significantly reduce trigs. LDL, while it may improve from diet, not nearly as much as Trigs.

quote:

---

Damn, it was 15 minutes late for picking up his smoothie!

---

It was melted!

So Speights is 3rd string even if healthy?

Study from 2013

Found the above saying it doesn't really matter, but the study was with women's basketball players and super small sample.

Been using Vital Performance Protein powder (which in general I like) -- just realized it is 20% Whey & 80% Casein.

Are there any actual downsides to this vs. a higher percentage of Whey protein?

What say the experts on this board?

TIA

Problem with your comparison, not that it is necessarily wrong, is Guice/Fournette played full collegiate careers and had a couple games comparable to Collins. They also played on much better teams.

Good post. My point is that it is a significant factor in how serious you should evaluate statins or how serious you should try to course correct.

We are all going to die sometime and of something, but family history can help show where you are most at risk of dieing. At that point it is your decision to try to take corrective action to reduce that risk as best you can or just accept it. There isn't a right/wrong. The point I was trying to make is given the circumstances, it seems like atherosclerosis is a significant risk for him (not OP, but Doug-H).

If the only risk factor was high cholesterol and not all three of: high cholesterol, overweight, & significant family history at a young age. I could understand the anti-statin sentiment and would entirely agree with it.

I am by no means a huge statin guy, but this guy has two brothers with MASSIVE heart attacks before they turned 40. Dementia when he is 80+(even if it is a real risk) is the least of his worries.