And you're offering nothing to back up your claim. Literally everything written in the article is backed up by sources such as New York Times, which in turn quotes experts in the field.

- Is it not true that the existence of a link between high cholesterol and heart disease is only a hypotheses that originated in the 1950s, not a scientifically proven fact?

- Is it not true that the FDA generally has not required drug companies to prove that cholesterol medicines (such as statins) actually reduce heart attacks before approval?

- Is it not true that lowering cholesterol by different means (i.e., other than statins) is not beneficial, and does that not mean cholesterol is not the villain it is made out to be?

- Is it not true that the only large clinical trial funded by the government (rather than drug companies) found no statistically significant benefit at all?

What exactly are you saying is wrong?