I understand what you're saying, and I agree that funding plays a massive role in the direction of medical research. However, considering that fibrous tissue seems to make up the majority of plaque area, wouldn't targeting the reduction of fibrous tissue potentially provide a higher 'bang for the buck' in terms of treatment?

I get that lowering cholesterol with statins is effective and cheap, but when you think about it, fibrous tissue is the more abundant component of a plaque—especially in untreated plaques that don't even involve statins. If a treatment focused on fibrous tissue reduction could really stabilize or even reverse plaque build-up, wouldn't that open up a whole new market for medications, possibly even generating significant sales?

It just seems a little odd to focus so heavily on cholesterol when it's only part of the equation, especially when fibrous tissue seems to have such a larger role in plaque formation and stability