The 1st Danish report result accepted the four most frequent mutation carriers. These carriers however made up the lesser part of this study’s result. Most were deemed “FH” solely due to passing scores and regardless of mutation status (below left), whereas the 2nd Danish report result (below right) is made up of solely verified mutation carriers. If both FCH and FH have passing scores as “FH” and if FH has relatively higher levels of LDLC, while FCH has relatively higher rates of obesity, T2DM, and METS, then one would expect to see a spikeof rates of obesity, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome in the Probable category … in inverse proportion to the severity of the FH score. And that is precisely what we see here in the 1st Report. T2DM is especially striking, given recent evidence of lower than average prevalence among the FH. FH LDLR mutation carriers have lower rates of diabetes. (It is even hypothesized that carriers are protected against diabetes.) Not so for the FCH, they are prone to diabetes. Consistently, the mutation hits in the 2nd Danish report have much lower presence of diabetes than the passing scores in the 1st Danish report. This is consistent with the fact that the FCH can pass the scoring systems (below left), if a responsible process of exclusion is not present. Note that the diabetes rate in the recommended scoring system ( below left) is twice that of the diabetes rate of the mutation carriers alone (below right).