Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Yet another cholesterol thread

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by jjmattpa View Post
    Holy heck.....I've been a pretty strict Primal guy for a year and a half. About a month ago I started experiencing light headedness on a consistent basis......still am. Went to the doctor, took my blood for a lipid panel and my total cholesterol is at 328!!!!!! I am freaked out. I've always been a pretty good to very good health. I liked the results of primal eating but now what do I do? My Triglycerides are at 119, HDL at 56 and my LDL is at 248. Chol to HDL ratio is 5.9. The other medical finding is that my blood pressure is low.....90/60 kind of readings. I'm fearful I am ruining my health with this high fat low carb diet. Can anyone convince me otherwise? Does anyone think that the lightheadedness maybe due to my arteries being affected by the high cholesterol levels? I'm feeling a bit of a fool right now....I was so pro primal. John
    Lightheadedness.... you should get your thyroid checked. Are you eating very low carb? Do you eat any sea vegetables or iodized salt?

    Comment


    • #17
      Yes very low carb. broccoli, zucchini, cauliflower primarily. regular table salt. Would 328 scare you regarding heart?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by jjmattpa View Post
        Yes very low carb. broccoli, zucchini, cauliflower primarily. regular table salt. Would 328 scare you regarding heart?
        My 296 makes me a bit nervous. Ideally, I would want to be around 220. Based on mortality data, that seems to be the place to be: http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2011/06...isease-part-i/

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by jammies View Post
          What were your numbers before going paleo? And when was your last test? It has been reported that cholesterol will go up during weight loss. So you may want to retest.

          I would push hard for the correct diagnosis on the FH. Taking statins has not really been shown to extend the lifespan of people who have never had a heart attack. The possible exception to that would be people with FH. So it may be important to know.

          Also, you could look at a few other things that can cause very high cholesterol. Certain vitamin deficiencies, drinking unfiltered coffee....I think there's a list out there somewhere - you could just check.
          Jammies, I just found my old test results, from 05/2012:
          TC: 209
          HDL: 43
          LDL: 146
          TG: 102

          I started eating low carb Paleo on 05/2013.

          Sent from my cm_tenderloin using Tapatalk

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by howardroark View Post
            Jammies, I just found my old test results, from 05/2012:
            TC: 209
            HDL: 43
            LDL: 146
            TG: 102

            I started eating low carb Paleo on 05/2013.

            Sent from my cm_tenderloin using Tapatalk
            Well, your new numbers indicate better health and less disease risk than these do, with the great HDL:TG ratio. But you still need to get the particle counts by size to know the whole picture, and a CRP level if possible. A higher total LDL-C doesn't mean anything good or bad by itself. The mortality correlation data in the link posted above does not mean causation. I would recommend reading one of the several good books out on cholesterol myths and more recent science. Either "Cholesterol Clarity" by Jimmy Moore, or "The Great Cholesterol Myth" cowritten by Steven Sinatra if you prefer one actually by a cardiologist. Moore's book has the most cutting edge data as the book is more recent.
            Last edited by NewOldGuy; 10-17-2013, 09:21 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by jjmattpa View Post
              Yes very low carb. broccoli, zucchini, cauliflower primarily. regular table salt. Would 328 scare you regarding heart?
              No. But you need to understand why your blood pressure is so low. After all, it's causing real symptoms

              Sent from mobile
              Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.

              Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by NewOldGuy View Post
                Well, your new numbers indicate better health and less disease risk than these do, with the great HDL:TG ratio. But you still need to get the particle counts by size to know the whole picture, and a CRP level if possible. A higher total LDL-C doesn't mean anything good or bad by itself. The mortality correlation data in the link posted above does not mean causation. I would recommend reading one of the several good books out on cholesterol myths and more recent science. Either "Cholesterol Clarity" by Jimmy Moore, or "The Great Cholesterol Myth" cowritten by Steven Sinatra if you prefer one actually by a cardiologist. Moore's book has the most cutting edge data as the book is more recent.
                I'll definitely check those books out. And like I said, I will buy an NMR out of pocket, probably in about a month or so. That should give us a better picture of the particle sizes/counts. Do you have any studies that show the HDL:TG ratio as being a good indicator of CVD risk? I thought the LDL-P was the best indicator for risk.

                Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by howardroark View Post
                  I'll definitely check those books out. And like I said, I will buy an NMR out of pocket, probably in about a month or so. That should give us a better picture of the particle sizes/counts. Do you have any studies that show the HDL:TG ratio as being a good indicator of CVD risk? I thought the LDL-P was the best indicator for risk.

                  Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
                  When you have high HDL relative to TG, ideally more than 1:1 (as yours is now) that indicates good insulin sensitivity and almost always means that your LDL is mostly the large type A particles, the harmless kind. That will also be reflected in a lower particle count because you have more of the large transport particles. You have enough HDL to keep the type B stuff cleaned out. And lower TG also means lower type B LDL.

                  The ratio is usually referred to as the triglyceride to HDL ratio (not the other way around), and it's now considered one of the best predictors of MI risk. People with TG lower than HDL don't have heart attacks. You can find lots of stuff on Google, even from conservative sources like the American Heart Association. The two books I mentioned will give more, and I think Mark even talks about it in Primal Blueprint.
                  Last edited by NewOldGuy; 10-21-2013, 06:18 AM. Reason: sig

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by NewOldGuy View Post
                    When you have high HDL relative to TG, ideally more than 1:1 (as yours is now) that indicates good insulin sensitivity and almost always means that your LDL is mostly the large type A particles, the harmless kind. That will also be reflected in a lower particle count because you have more of the large transport particles. You have enough HDL to keep the type B stuff cleaned out. And lower TG also means lower type B LDL.

                    The ratio is usually referred to as the triglyceride to HDL ratio (not the other way around), and it's now considered one of the best predictors of MI risk. People with TG lower than HDL don't have heart attacks. You can find lots of stuff on Google, even from conservative sources like the American Heart Association. The two books I mentioned will give more, and I think Mark even talks about it in Primal Blueprint.
                    I did find a study related to this topic:
                    http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/96/8/2520.long

                    Pretty interesting stuff. Any other big ones?

                    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      The biggest study comparing markers of CVD was INTERHEART, which found the ApoB/ApoA1 ratio to be the best predictor. The lower the better. Much simpler and more reliable than VAP or NMR

                      Sent from mobile
                      Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.

                      Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by peril View Post
                        The biggest study comparing markers of CVD was INTERHEART, which found the ApoB/ApoA1 ratio to be the best predictor. The lower the better. Much simpler and more reliable than VAP or NMR

                        Sent from mobile
                        Some of the big conclusions of Interheart were wrong, and simply restated and reinforced the old cholesterol hypothesis (myth) of Ancel Keys. You should look further. It's a fact that just reducing LDL-C (which usually lowers that ratio you mention) has no correlation to reduced risk of heart attack, and no study has ever shown such a correlation. But raising HDL (which also lowers that ratio) is proven to reduce the risk of heart attack.
                        Last edited by NewOldGuy; 10-21-2013, 06:18 AM. Reason: sig

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by NewOldGuy View Post
                          Some of the big conclusions of Interheart were wrong, and simply restated and reinforced the old cholesterol hypothesis (myth) of Ancel Keys. You should look further. It's a fact that just reducing LDL-C (which usually lowers that ratio you mention) has no correlation to reduced risk of heart attack, and no study has ever shown such a correlation. But raising HDL (which also lowers that ratio) is proven to reduce the risk of heart attack.
                          NewOldGuy, I think peril may be onto something here:
                          Although very high plasma HDL-C and very large HDL particles are associated with increased risk in the present study, our data showed apoA-I to remain protective across the major part of its distribution. Most importantly, apoA-I did not exhibit a switch toward a positive relationship at higher levels. This may support apoA-I as an active component of HDL particles, possibly defining the atheroprotective capacity of this lipoprotein fraction. Indeed, several experimental studies have pointed to a crucial role for apoA-I in protection against atherosclerosis (22 and 23).
                          High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol, High-Density Lipoprotein Particle Size, and Apolipoprotein A-I: Significance for Cardiovascular Risk: The IDEAL and EPIC-Norfolk Studies

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by NewOldGuy View Post
                            Some of the big conclusions of Interheart were wrong, and simply restated and reinforced the old cholesterol hypothesis (myth) of Ancel Keys. You should look further. It's a fact that just reducing LDL-C (which usually lowers that ratio you mention) has no correlation to reduced risk of heart attack, and no study has ever shown such a correlation. But raising HDL (which also lowers that ratio) is proven to reduce the risk of heart attack.
                            ApoB correlates with LDL-P, not LDL-C, whether measured or calculated. I reduced my ApoB/ApoA1 ratio into the safe band while markedly increasing my LDL-C. Of course I increased my HDL-C to get there. Nothing novel there

                            Where is your evidence of fault with Interheart?

                            BTW, we're both doing the same thing. I've been drug free since early 2010, following a MI in mid 2009. Let's learn from each other. Like you, I tried high dose Niacin, getting HDL-C up to 3.2mmol/L before dropping it and letting it slide back to current 2.2mmol/L with diet alone. Lots of things to try, mistakes to make and lessons to learn
                            Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.

                            Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by peril View Post
                              ApoB correlates with LDL-P, not LDL-C, whether measured or calculated. I reduced my ApoB/ApoA1 ratio into the safe band while markedly increasing my LDL-C. Of course I increased my HDL-C to get there. Nothing novel there

                              Where is your evidence of fault with Interheart?

                              BTW, we're both doing the same thing. I've been drug free since early 2010, following a MI in mid 2009. Let's learn from each other. Like you, I tried high dose Niacin, getting HDL-C up to 3.2mmol/L before dropping it and letting it slide back to current 2.2mmol/L with diet alone. Lots of things to try, mistakes to make and lessons to learn
                              Thanks for the info, and I'll watch your threads too. I have some comments about Interheart but no time now, but it does look like the ApoB/ApoA1 is a good marker. It's not one I've tested for on myself.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by peril View Post
                                ApoB correlates with LDL-P, not LDL-C, whether measured or calculated. I reduced my ApoB/ApoA1 ratio into the safe band while markedly increasing my LDL-C. Of course I increased my HDL-C to get there. Nothing novel there

                                Where is your evidence of fault with Interheart?

                                BTW, we're both doing the same thing. I've been drug free since early 2010, following a MI in mid 2009. Let's learn from each other. Like you, I tried high dose Niacin, getting HDL-C up to 3.2mmol/L before dropping it and letting it slide back to current 2.2mmol/L with diet alone. Lots of things to try, mistakes to make and lessons to learn
                                I looked at DirectLabs and didn't see a test with both ApoB and ApoA1 measured. Do you know which tests your doctor normally orders? I would be paying out of pocket, so that's why I am looking at DirectLabs.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X