Lifestyle section in this article contained a biased link to a widely discredited but very popular in yellow journalism and paleo fad diet circles meta analysis which claims to contradict scientific consensus on saturated fat I added the rebuttal and noted the current scientific consensus the lipid hypothesis which contains a controversy section with the same meta analysis and rebuttal neither the controversial meta analysis NOR the refutation really belong on this page OR that one but if the meta analysis link is going to be here the refutation needs to be as well If you doubt the scientific consensus the page on the Saturated fat and cardiovascular disease controversy is already well written and covers the controversy well Any rejection of scientific and medical consensus should really be kept there rather than spread across Wikipedia Cholesterol skepticism not unlike the similar anti vaccination position is not credible and poses a public health risk when it results in misinformation I also clarified the point about Cholesterol regarding hyper responders and included a link if anybody has a better link or can go into more detail for readers that might be good People shouldn t be getting health advice from wikipedia to begin with but this page still needs to contain responsible information As with vaccines listen to your doctor and you ll do fine