Marks Daily Apple
Serving up health and fitness insights (daily, of course) with a side of irreverence.
30 Jan

The Definitive Guide to Cholesterol

That makes it easy.

With all the talk of fighting, battling, combating and beating cholesterol into submission, you’d think it had a black plastic body suit and James Earl Jones’ voice. Big Pharma has, dutifully created quite an arsenal for our supposed defense, and the medical community has been a willing faction, delivering the rhetoric that would incite us all to pick up arms. Now if only we could put down the Big Macs. And the Ding Dongs, HoHos, Twinkies and…you get the point.

Preposterous.

But the insidious rogue, that menacing villain isn’t to be found at the helm of the Death Star. Turns out, there is an enemy within and it’s not even cholesterol. Before you fall to your knees, rip your shirt and gnash your teeth, you might want to consider news you don’t hear often enough: the much aligned compound in question is absolutely essential to your physical, psychological and cognitive functioning.

Yes, the message these days seems to be that no number is too low when it comes to cholesterol (except HDL but we’ll get to that later). I’d like to offer a deeper look into the issue, user-friendly enough but more complex and contentious than you’ll get from the commercial sound bytes telling you to talk to your doctor about blah, blah, blah. Consider it one of MDA’s definitive guides that we’re happy to serve up for our gregarious and always thoughtful community.

Excuse me, have you met cholesterol?

(10R,13R)-10,13-dimethyl-17-(6-methylheptan-2-yl)-2,3,4,7,8,9,11,12,14,15,16,17-dodecahydro-1H-cyclopenta[a]phenanthren-3-ol

Cholesterol is a waxy, charming lipid gracing every cell’s membrane and our blood plasma. Its jobs, which are many, include insulating neurons, building and maintaining cellular membranes, metabolizing fat soluble vitamins, producing bile, and kick-starting the body’s synthesis of many hormones, including the sex hormones. Cool stuff actually.

Given all the work cholesterol has to do, the liver is careful to ensure the body always has enough, producing some 1000-1400 milligrams of it each day. In comparison, the 300 milligram recommended limit for dietary cholesterol (your tax dollars at work in the USDA) is a drop in the bucket. And get this: our livers come with feedback mechanisms (at no additional cost) that regulate cholesterol production in response to our dietary intake. When we eat more, it makes less, and vice-versa. Imagine that!

(Interesting note: While animal products like meat, eggs and dairy, are far and away the primary source of dietary cholesterol, plants contain trace amounts of cholesterol and cholesterol-like substances called phytosterols, which may help lower blood or “serum” cholesterol. Not that that matters, as we shall soon see.

So, what’s with all the acronyms on my cholesterol profile, you ask. Let’s take a look. First, there are high density lipoproteins (HDL). (Lipoproteins are spherical fat particles with water-soluble proteins around their exterior. They transport cholesterol). HDL: everybody loves this guy. He has the popular job of transferring cholesterol from the body’s tissues back to the liver. It’s basically the end of the line with this route, and the liver then excretes it through bile. HDL is the one to naturally help get rid of excess cholesterol when the body’s done with it, hence his universal popularity. Some cholesterologists (just made that up) even refer to him as Nature’s garbage truck.

Next, there are low density lipoproteins, LDL. LDL is a lipoprotein and delivery man as well. He has the disgraced job of transporting cholesterol after production from the liver to the body’s tissues. Remember, this is an important job! That cholesterol has a honey-do list a mile long.

Ironically, it turns out that it’s not the cholesterol part of the LDL or HDL moiety that is dangerous, but the actual lipoprotein part. Unfortunately, once medicine had found a way to differentiate between the amount of HDL and LDL in a cost-effective blood test, it was the cholesterol part that got the short end of the deal.

The latest research into LDL shows that there are actually sub-categories of this cholesterol transporter and that some are more dangerous than others. The larger, more billowy LDL particles are now thought to have little or no significant role in heart disease. On the other hand, the smaller, dense LDL particles are the ones believed to be most involved in the process of inflammation that begins the atherosclerosis cascade. And wouldn’t you know it, but it’s a diet high in simple carbs that most readily promotes the formation of these small LDL particles! Unfortunately, this important distinction is probably something your doctor knows very little about, yet it’s the number of small particle LDL that might be the most important reading in any cholesterol test. So a total cholesterol of, say, 230 or even 250 might not be dangerous at all if your HDL is high and your small particle LDL is low.

Before we move on, let’s give brief mention to triglycerides. Triglycerides are essentially the form that fat takes as it travels to the body’s tissues through the bloodstream. The relationship between triglycerides and cholesterol is more of an association. A high triglyceride level, which is unequivocally fueled by a high carb diet, is very often a marker for other problems in the body, particularly insulin resistance (and accompanying risk of diabetes) as well as inflammation (with its risk of heart disease). High levels are often seen with low HDL cholesterol. Once again, the high carb diet wreaks havoc.

The Rise of Cholesterol Panic

Cholesterol free zone looks to have a mascot.

Heart disease took off in the early part of the twentieth century, and doctors frantically searched for the cause throughout the next several decades. Tests in the fifties initially showed an association between early death by heart disease and fat deposits and lesions along artery walls. Because cholesterol was found to be present in those deposits (of course it would!) and because researchers had previously associated familial hypercholesterolaemia (hereditary high blood cholesterol) with heart disease, they concluded that cholesterol must be the culprit. In fact, what happens is that in response to an inflammatory situation, the body uses cholesterol as a “band-aid” to temporarily cover any lesions in the arterial wall. In the event the inflammation is resolved, the band-aid goes away and repair takes place. No harm, no foul. Unfortunately, in most cases, the inflammation proceeds, the cholesterol plaque is eventually acted on by macrophages and is oxidized to a point at which it takes up more space in the artery, slows arterial flow and eventually can break loose to form a clot. And all this time the cholesterol was just trying to be the good guy! Blaming cholesterol for all this is like blaming a cut finger on all the band-aids you have lying around your house.

Death from heart disease, according to the CDC, has declined over 50% since its peak in the 1950s. The success is attributed to a number of factors, including a decrease in smoking and better diagnosis and treatment of high blood pressure. Included in the list of factors was the opportunity for public education regarding the scientific findings/theories related to cholesterol; however, measures (including CDC estimates) of dietary saturated fat intake show that intake has generally stayed the same or risen.

But the dietary cholesterol message stuck.

Big Pharma To The Rescue!
Early drugs that “battled” high cholesterol prevented its absorption in the digestive tract. The side effects on the digestive system were unpleasant enough and the results modest enough that the drugs never garnered much support from either side of the prescription pad. Enter statins. Statins inhibited the natural production of cholesterol. Side effects were not as immediately noticeable or uncomfortable, and the results were quite good (at least at lowering cholesterol). (The recently beleaguered Vytorin and Zetia combined statin actions with a substance that reduces absorption of dietary cholesterol, preventing your body from trying to compensate for the lower natural cholesterol production.)

But what about the body’s natural impetus to produce a given and necessary amount of cholesterol? What happens to the parts of the body that need the cholesterol? What about the liver’s regulating mechanism? What happens when you mess with evolution? Exactly. Those are the sorts of questions that get thrown aside when you’re riding Big Pharma’s cholesterol hobby horse.

What Are the Problems With This (“Lipid”) Model?

Million Dollar Question

Oh, boy. There’s the million dollar question.

First off, let’s go back to the evolutionary question. As a naturally self-regulating system, the body will react if it doesn’t have enough cholesterol (yes, the body’s definition of enough and not Merck’s). If there’s not enough cholesterol, the alarm goes off, strobe lights flash and the body goes into crisis mode. Corticoid hormones coordinate a redistribution of cholesterol, a triage of sorts in which cholesterol is rationed among the many areas of the body that need it. Nonetheless, the body is now working under hardship conditions.

Adequate cholesterol isn’t available for the body’s repair system, for the uptake of serotonin, for the full initiation of Vitamin D and hormone production and their regulation of blood sugar and inflammation, etc., etc. What does your logic tell you here? Yup, nothing is running the way it should.

Let me also add that everyone’s cholesterol profile is going to be different, no matter what. And I acknowledge that a very small percentage of people out there genuinely have *true* hereditary high blood cholesterol, familial hypercholesterolemia, a metabolic condition with impaired or even lack of ability to metabolize cholesterol. This condition can have serious health consequences. By the way, this condition, in its heterozygous form affects at most 1 in 500 people. Total serum cholesterol in these folks is in the 400 mg/dl range (as opposed to the 200 recommended). The homozygous form affects about 1 in 250,000. You likely don’t know anyone in this category because their disorder almost always ends their lives at a very young age.

I mention familial hypercholesterolemia because I want to distinguish it from the claim made by Big Pharma ads that you may have higher cholesterol because people in your family did, and – can you believe it – their company is here to help. Duh! Everyone’s family influences cholesterol profiles. It’s, in small part, genetic. No big worry there. Just because you come from a family with “elevated” cholesterol doesn’t mean you have the familial hypercholesterolemia metabolic disorder. You can pretty much bet a whole lot o’ money on the likelihood that your cholesterol profile – good or bad – has more to do with learned behaviors like diet and exercise. “Elevated” cholesterol doesn’t equate with metabolic disorder.

Officer, You Got the Wrong Guy!
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Sound and reliable medical research hasn’t proven that lowering (or low) cholesterol in and of itself reduces risk of death from heart disease across a population. Yes, there is always that single isolated guy who throws off the curve, but he (or she) is a statistical anomaly and doesn’t negate the legitimacy of the model. For instance, the Japanese people of Okinawa are among the healthiest in the world. Their heart disease rate is extremely low, but they tend to have “elevated” cholesterol levels.

The fact is, half of all first time heart attack sufferers have a perfectly “normal” cholesterol profile. What does this tell you? There must be some other piece here behind the “other half” and, I would solidly argue, behind the first half. Cholesterol is a red herring.

It all boils down to inflammation. Inflammation is the number one factor in heart disease. This is an accepted fact now, but it still gets little attention and no real prevention or treatment. Think about it: you have your cholesterol levels checked every five years or more if your profile is “problematic.” When do you have biomarkers for inflammation checked? Unless you’ve had a heart attack or been diagnosed with a serious medical condition, probably never.

Fighting inflammation near and far...

Inflammation. What is it caused by? Not fat, but carbohydrates. Yes, sugars and processed carbs are highest on the list of perpetrators here, but grains and starches as a whole contribute to the problem. LDL rises directly not with the amount of saturated fat you eat but with rising levels of inflammation caused by carbs and trans fats.

Oxidation. Furthermore, nearly every study suggests that LDL is only a true threat when it’s oxidized. What oxidizes it? Free radicals. We’re talking trans fats primarily, that beast of an additive found in countless food products (as opposed to foods). What counteracts free radicals (because we all naturally have some in us)? Anti-oxidants: veggies and fruits, of course, as well as nuts, olive oil, etc. Consider also a broad-based multi-antioxidant supplement containing those nutrients shown to decrease oxidation.

Back to the red herring issue. Substantially “elevated” cholesterol, low HDL or high LDL might be reason to give you pause, but not for the reason you might think. The number can tell you that something is amiss, but they’re a symptom of the larger concern rather than the main issue itself. Cholesterol profile can be impacted by other conditions such as hypothyroidism, untreated diabetes or pre-diabetes, pregnancy (surprise!), lactation, stress, liver conditions, heart disease (symptom, not cause of), etc. Talk to your doctor about what your numbers mean in the grand scheme of your health. And see if you can get a read on other markers, like C-reactive protein (an inflammatory indicator) and those small particle LDL numbers.

How to Maintain True Heart Health

Better use two hands...

Now that we’ve conquered the cholesterol frenzy (because the frenzy itself is the real threat), let’s get to the genuine issue of maintaining heart health. Maintaining heart health is about keeping inflammation at bay. As we say here at MDA, that means an anti-inflammatory diet (with exercise), and primal nutrition fits the bill: copious amounts and variety of veggies, fruits, good quality meats, healthy fats and proteins.

Also, plenty of omega-3 fatty acids, particularly fish oil, will thin the blood and help prevent clotting, which along with atherosclerosis (inflammation related), is a serious set up for heart disease and stroke. Fish oil also happens to generally lower triglycerides and increase “good” HDL.

Read up in our MDA archives for additional info on inflammation and healthy living. Thanks for tuning in.

sugar freak, mac vegetarian, Sean Munson, maxgiani, mammabrarian, aussiegall Flickr Photos (CC)

Further Reading:

The Definitive Guide to Insulin, Blood Sugar and Type 2 Diabetes

Vytorin: Big Blow for Big Pharma

PharmaLot: Who Needs Those Cholesterol Pills Anyway?

Sponsor note:
This post was brought to you by the Damage Control Master Formula, independently proven as the most comprehensive high-potency antioxidant multivitamin available anywhere. With the highest antioxidant per dollar value and a complete anti-aging, stress, and cognition profile, the Master Formula is truly the only multivitamin supplement you will ever need. Toss out the drawers full of dozens of different supplements with questionable potency and efficacy and experience the proven Damage Control difference!

Prefer listening to reading? Get an audio recording of this blog post, and subscribe to the Primal Blueprint Podcast on iTunes for instant access to all past, present and future episodes here.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

You want comments? We got comments:

Imagine you’re George Clooney. Take a moment to admire your grooming and wit. Okay, now imagine someone walks up to you and asks, “What’s your name?” You say, “I’m George Clooney.” Or maybe you say, “I’m the Clooninator!” You don’t say “I’m George of George Clooney Sells Movies Blog” and you certainly don’t say, “I’m Clooney Weight Loss Plan”. So while spam is technically meat, it ain’t anywhere near Primal. Please nickname yourself something your friends would call you.

  1. I also echo Alex’s concerns. Anyone???

    Lulabelle wrote on July 24th, 2009
  2. Mark,

    Can you clarify the following:

    “Triglycerides are essentially the form that fat takes as it travels to the body’s tissues through the bloodstream … A high triglyceride level, which is unequivocally fueled by a high carb diet…”.

    Wouldn’t a high fat diet contribute to a high triglyceride be attributed to a high fat diet as well? I am a little confused.

    Ryan Denner wrote on July 24th, 2009
    • Mark,

      That’s false. Case in point is myself.

      I changed the way I ate years ago after patching things together through my own research. At the time my TG fairly high. My other blood markers were approaching the medical establishments marks of ‘high cholesterol’. I also have a family history of heart disease and high cholesterol.

      Fast forward 6 or 7 years. My last lab test showed extremely low cholesterol levels. In fact my TG’s were 33. Nobody would have believed me had I not had the lab papers in my hand.

      One of the surest ways to lower TG is, in fact, through an all natural high fat diet.

      Curtis wrote on March 15th, 2011
  3. Alex, there actually IS no evidence that cholesterol causes heart disease!

    Here is the first in a series of videos that explains it all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPPYaVcXo1I

    The whole cholesterol = heart disease theory is based on unsound evidence!

    As for dietary cholesterol, it has little or no effect on blood levels of the average person. There are some that are sensitive, but most of us, at most, will see a very slight change (2-5 points maybe) with a higher level of dietary cholesterol!

    Also, read these articles about the original Framingham Heart study:
    http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cardiovascular-disease/framingham-follies/
    and
    http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cardiovascular-disease/framingham-flip-flop/

    Often cited, but no real evidence of a correlation or a danger of eating sat fats
    This is one of my favorite quotes:
    “For example, in Framingham, Mass, the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol.”
    This is from the then Director of the study!

    Alcinda Moore wrote on July 25th, 2009
  4. Someone please help me on this typical argument I get caught in:

    “If you eat a big juicy steak (even grass fed), it has so much cholesterol it will kill your arteries.”

    I try to respond “But blood cholesterol and dietary cholesterol are not the same.”

    Am I correct?

    Daniel Merk wrote on December 23rd, 2009
    • Yes. That is a very simplistic argument. It’s even joked about: “Call your cardiologist before you eat KFC’s Double-Down sandwich! They took out the bread!”

      But, the body first processes all the food you take in. It’s not like the fat and cholesterol that you eat immediately goes directly to the blood stream.

      Todd Lloyd, DC wrote on February 1st, 2013
  5. Hey Mark,

    I’ve been on the primal diet for about 4 months and I’ve lost30 pounds.

    Ive been super happy with the results.
    However at my last physical I had got my bloodwork taken and found out that my cholesterol levels were worse than my last test about a year ago 30 pounds heavier!
    My ldl’s were significantly higher.(94 to 166)
    My HDL’s were significantly lower.(73 to 51)
    The only thing that improve was my tryglicerides (160 down to 78).

    I feel I have been following the plan.
    Do you have any ideas on what could have possibly gone wrong?

    rob wrote on March 16th, 2010
    • Not to worry – most of your lipid markers will read high (and often VERY high) while losing weight quickly. When you keep your serum insulin levels low and are in ketosis for an extended period of time your fat stores are releasing tons of FFAs, as they should. When your weight levels off you should see levels normalize quickly. I went through the same situation recently – lost 80 lbs (from 272 to 182 at 6′, 2″) in about 9 months. Doc was super concerned about cholesterol and trig levels and wanted to statinize me after about 30 lbs of loss. I respectfully declined, kept on losing and feeling great, and have maintained the same weight for about 6 months now. Last test results came back two weeks ago with trigs at 48 and cholesterol levels perfect. When I told the doc it was all to be expected based on how the body liberates FFAs from fat stores and that it was a good thing I didn’t go on a statin (at age 28 mind you!) he said it could’ve only helped! Very frustrating.

      I asked for his email address so I could keep him abreast of the latest research on lipids and he said no thanks. The only thing worse than a doctor that doesn’t know what he’s doing is one that’s unwilling to learn. :-(

      PaleoJames wrote on March 5th, 2012
      • Thank you so much for sharing this story. This happened to me EXACTLY today (same age and after 30lbs of loss) and at first I allowed myself to be ashamed or felt like I had made some kind of mistake.

        Brad wrote on June 22nd, 2012
        • SO SO GLAD to see this cuz I just had a blood work screening thing after about 30-35# loss and was lectured how paleo is not healthy, I need this drug and that and whatnot and it really put me thru hell because even though I was losing, it really tripped me up into doubting what I was doing. But the reasoning here makes sense, especially seeing others who lost about the same amount of weight and had the same issues with these tests. Phrew.

          Jacqui wrote on July 18th, 2012
  6. Mark,
    I have the EXACT same question as Rob… I have been eating primal for 3 months(lost 22 lbs so far and am doing Crossfit). my data are as follows:
    2007 2010
    Total 234 274
    LDL 135 202
    Trig 225 97

    I have asked for a blood test to directly test LDL particle size, but doesn’t sound like that is possible though the system I am in. Thoughts on how to bring down the LDL primally(I have read Dr. Eades’ take –don’t get me wrong- i am not looking for crazy low, but getting it down to the 130 range?)? what would grock do?

    M.S. wrote on March 18th, 2010
    • I understand that the research linking cholesterol to heart disease is flawe, however numbers like this still represent significant deviation from average.
      Ibelieve there is some optimal range and if going significantly above that we are getting to the unknown zone. I had LDL of 200 after 1 year on primal eating (gaining weight not loosing) si I adjusted my butter and coconut oil intake got to 100 6 months later.

      Martin wrote on January 4th, 2013
    • If you are still following this, my LDL went way up and the doc was panicked of course. I got the VLDL breakdown (very low density lipoprotein) and my VLDL was very low so little risk. Triglycerides super low. HLD healthy. Of course he recommended statins. For the record if this is my family level that is good as there is no history of heart disease at all in my family.

      Liz wrote on October 9th, 2015
  7. apparently saturated fat raises BOTH HDL and LDL, polyunsaturated fat LOWERS both (but may have links to inflammation and cancer), and monunsaturated lowers HDL and increases HDL – the perfect solution.

    perhaps the ratio between hdl and ldl is more important than the absolute numbers – if they have both

    In rob’s example:the ratio did get worse, which seems worrying. Maybe sub out some saturated fat and polyunsaturated fats for monounsaturated fats?

    alex wrote on March 19th, 2010
    • Fish oil is part of the PUFA family..I’ve been supplementing with it for a little over a year.
      Is this something that should possibly be changed?

      rob wrote on March 21st, 2010
  8. Excellent read. Love these definite guides as it truly tells the true tale among topics that people just simply do not understand.

    Thanks Mark!

    Todd wrote on March 25th, 2010
  9. Peer-Reviewed Science

    Mark.

    As a strength trainer, I think this is the best site I’ve seen that focuses on proper exercise and a dietary practice that makes sense.

    Since inflammation appears the culprit in cholesterol problems (and many other problems) I would like to suggest a single link where only peer-reviewed studies that support the inflammation hypothesis (in all its forms) be listed.

    Perhaps you have this here already and I have not found it yet. The peer reviewed studies provide suitable ammo to address the many professionals I train (including MDs) who are still tethered to antiquated dietary beliefs, that nonetheless, have “papers” to provide support by Big Pharma.

    In just 2 months, my own results, following guidelines much as you recommend, have produced much lower LDL, Total Cholesterol, and Triglycerides (all now in good ranges)–while maintaining my bodyweight at 195lbs such that my MD is surprised when I told him I swapped out many carbs for protein and fats. Indeed, if this keeps up, I will remove the 10MG of LIPITOR I have used for years.

    But peer-reviewed work speaks more powerfully to many professionals. Peter Beck, above, who is an MD, also seeks peer-science, likely for the same reasons. This can only help…

    Thanks,

    Roy

    Roy wrote on April 11th, 2010
  10. I’ve often heard the line, repeated above, that dietary changs have only a minimal (5%-10%) impact on blood cholesterol levels, despite the evidence of many people, including myself. After switching to a Paleo diet for about 3-4 months prior to a recent fasting blood cholesterol measurement I went from a Total of around 160 to a toatl of 231. HDL went up to 87 and TriG’s were super low at 27, so I know I have nothing to worry about, but just wanted to point out that dietary changes can have huge impacts on blood cholesterol.

    Mike wrote on April 29th, 2010
  11. I just got blood work done:
    total:206
    tri: 53
    HDL: 54
    LDL: 136

    My doctor want says this is a bad place to be and I need to lower my LDL to below l20. All my other numbers on the list of acronyms are in the normal range. Any thoughts or comments? Or can I tell my doc where to go next we meet. I really like to tell people to where to go when they try to tell me how to live or what to do. (Prior military)

    hunter wrote on May 22nd, 2010
  12. @hunter: Your doctor is…well…nuts.

    Triglycerides under 100? HDL and TG about the same?

    With TG of 53, nearly ALL of your LDL is going to be the large, fluffy, healthy type.

    If your doctor is so adamant about your LDL, have him test for LDL fractions. It could be educational for him when they all come back as Pattern A (the good stuff).

    People would kill for your lipid profile…

    Charles wrote on May 22nd, 2010
  13. Thanks for clearing that up. I was really upset after leaving the doctors office that day. He made it seem like I was about to have a stroke during the check up and I am only 25.

    hunter wrote on May 27th, 2010
  14. I’ve been on the PB for 80 days, before these were my lipid levels:

    Cholesterol: 241
    HDL: 49
    LDL: 177
    Tryglyceride: 75
    Weight: 194 pounds

    And in the latest results:

    Cholesterol: 385
    HDL: 66
    LDL: 307
    Tryglyceride: 64
    Weight: 175 pounds

    The 385 + 307 numbers freaked me out. I’ve been eating losts of bacon (uncured) (probably half a pound a day) + coconut oil + 6-8 eggs (grass fed) daily + grass feed beef hamburgers (2 – 3 daily) + lots of vegetables (Kale, broccoli, asparagus…)

    I’m thinking about cutting a bit in those fats (mainly bacon and Coconut oil)…

    Thoughts anyone?
    Thanks,

    Andres

    Andres wrote on June 10th, 2010
    • has anyone gotten back to you on this? i’m having the same kind of problem. i just had blood work done and my Dr says i have high blood pressure too. i don’t have old test results to compare with, but as of now…

      HDL- 85
      LDL- 155
      Cholesterol- 250

      she told me my cholesterol should be under 200 and that i need to stop eating as much fatty foods. the article above said that “230 or even 250 might not be dangerous at all if your HDL is high and your small particle LDL is low”. i don’t know if i fall into that category. i want to fix any problems that i might have before it’s too late. Can anyone give me advice or point me in the right direction?

      Thanks,

      Jess

      PS, I’ve been primal for about 3 months.

      Jessica wrote on October 7th, 2010
      • Hey Jess,

        Did you get a reply on this one? I just got my bloodwork done and my doc said everything looks great, except my cholesterol it was 240. I told her about being PRIMAL and that is what I have been doing for about 5 months now…and she specifically said I need to cut back on red meat and bacon! I have been eating TONS of bacon… but I thought that was ok? I am confused, because I thought I was doing everything right…

        Thanks,
        Alisha

        Alisha wrote on November 17th, 2010
        • Doctors are still on the “red meat is evil” phase, when you know, red meat can help with hypertension, is lower in dietary cholesterol than chicken ounce-for-ounce, and even when grainfed, have just as much “healthy fats” as “bad ones.” Not to mention that CLA (the true “trans fat” is a possible anti-cancer treatment) is also pretty high even in grainfed.

          Interesting note on “healthy” versus “non-healthy” fats:
          When compared to normal tissue, according to research done by Anthony Colpo, the scientists saw that 50% of the plaque was polyunsaturated, 30% monounsaturated, and 20% saturated. A bit backwards isn’t it?

          And if you get your bacon orgnic, that’s even less to worry about. The low-fat craze won’t end any time soon until anyone has the balls to say “uh, we got it backwards… Sorry for the billions dead… MY BAD”

          Jay wrote on January 13th, 2011
    • Melissa wrote on December 12th, 2010
  15. I’ve been studying diet and cholesterol for several years now and I’ve learned quite a bit about how I react to different diets.

    On a SHAD (standard American healthy diet) with lots of cardio, fruit, grains, and vegetables, my cholesterol rarely went above 200. However, my HDL constantly hovered around 30. I have a very strong history of both heart attack and stroke in my family with every man having either a stroke or heart attack before the age of 50, so I thought I was genetically screwed. I accepted the fat-heart disease hypothesis.

    I then made every attempt to reduce my cholesterol as low as possible by eating “right” and taking niacin. Keeping saturated fat to an absolute minimum and eating a lot of fruits, I dropped my total to 97. At that time, I had visited a cardiologist to get evaluated before I had my first heart attack. He was thrilled at my numbers, especially my LDL at 46!

    Shortly after that I read GCBC and started to move toward a lower carb diet. It took me six months to get my fat intake above 60% and carbs below 10%. A lipid panel showed my HDL increased to 71! My cardiologist still wanted me on a statin because my LDL was elevated at 84! I pointed out that there’s never been a study showing that lowering LDL decreased heart disease and he reluctantly agreed. At that point I fired him.

    Six months ago I gave up any type of artificial sweetener, and a weird thing happened to my taste buds. I started reacting to sweets with aversion. Anything sweeter than a berry was unpleasant. Although I never considered moving to Paleo, I made a decision a couple of months ago to not eat anything that could only be produced in an modern industrial process. That rules out any processed food and vegetable oil (except olive oil).

    I eat around 3500 calories a day (2750 are fat) and lift weights for 4 hours a week and walk my dogs about 3 hours a week. I walk around my office at work and everybody has sweets and processed carbs sitting around. I’m the weirdo that refuses to eat that stuff. Oh well

    Ed Terry wrote on July 3rd, 2010
    • *insert YO DAWG WE HEARD joke that I can’t be arsed to think of here*

      Anyway, I eat about 80% fat and 15-20% protein (carbs are in there still) on most days, I don’t even bother getting my cholesterol checked, my CRP is hovering around .7 (1 mg/dl is seen as “the upper limit”), I eat all naturally raised meats, so it actually makes it harder to get the fat. But I commend you on not taking the USDA’s foiled attempt to make you sick and eat about 16 ounces of rice a day.

      I’m trying to stay off anything that will lower my lipids. I honestly don’t care about lipids anymore, I’m not worried about insulin and leptin concerns that would oxidize LDL in my body… I am only concerned about: Getting enough exercise (not a problem), homocysteine, and C-reactive Protein. Anything else to me is a waste of time, imo.

      Jay wrote on January 13th, 2011
  16. Grok doesn’t do blood tests!

    Nourished Mom wrote on August 13th, 2010
    • Sorry, I meant, Grok doesn’t get lab tests done!

      Nourished Mom wrote on August 13th, 2010
  17. Just got my blood work done.

    Total: 225 (considered High)
    Tryglycerides: 96
    HDL: 72
    VLDL: 19
    LDL: 134 (considered High)
    LDL/HDL Ratio: 1.9

    What do you all think?

    Alicia wrote on October 18th, 2010
  18. Can someone please answer Alex’s questions, asked on July 15th, 2009.
    I’m worried about that too

    B.B wrote on November 29th, 2010
  19. “You seem to be saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease, but inflammation is? Is that to say that there is no limit on cholesterol as long as you keep inflammation at bay?

    very confusing and feels like I am gambling with my health by eating
    contrary to ‘common knowledge’” ^

    B.B wrote on November 30th, 2010
    • Our current “common knowledge” is created by advertisers to sell processed foods, degraded meats, fruits and vegetables, and medicines. Not so good, huh? The idea here is to find comfort in the foods human beings ate safely and productively for millenia and to determine whether or not your genetics enable you to tolerate some of the things that came along in the last few thousand years. So you’re really returning to common knowledge, not flouting it.

      Mary C wrote on November 30th, 2010

Leave a Reply

If you'd like to add an avatar to all of your comments click here!

© 2016 Mark's Daily Apple

Subscribe to the Newsletter and Get a Free Copy
of Mark Sisson's Fitness eBook and more!