:V
Can it, references, etc. I am starting to get tired of someone immediately mentioning how "unreliable" wikipedia is every time it is brought up in a scholarly discussion. Yes, it sometimes is, but it's extremely easy to notice this when it is, and when it isn't, it's an extremely good starting point for finding information, due to having a quick summary/overview of the topic at hand, combined with references available should you want to explore this topic further and/or verify the information currently written in the article.
Sorry about the rant, but this is something that annoys me a lot.
As for the article, interesting, but not that remarkable. There are better, less dangerous agents available both for improving cholesterol profile (not to mention that your cholesterol profile generally won't suck if you
eat properly, but asking this of Americans is clearly asking too much of them, grumble) and for decreasing platelet aggregation. The additional effects is interesting, though, but at this point you have to wonder if the (fairly small, given how generally inconclusive most of the studies seem to be, from a casual read of the links to journal articles about the relevant studies in the references section of the article) positive effects it has on cardiovascular disease offset its very negative effects on both the liver and the brain when taken in excess, something entirely too much of the population does, as Gappy noted.
