Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cholesterol - A Primer (Attempt 2)

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

  • Thank you so much for this post. Im very new to the primal blueprint an I've been learning so much. Im so excited to get to know you all an share my journey with you. Ive had a hard time getting used to fat as a friend in my diet.

    Comment


    • Thank you so much for this post. Im very new to the primal blueprint an I've been learning so much. Im so excited to get to know you all an share my journey with you. Ive had a hard time getting used to fat as a friend in my diet.

      Comment


      • Concerned about Cholestrol levels

        I feel great since start Primal Blueprint but after I got my labs, Im really concerned that this is a good thing. Can anyone help explain


        12/27/2013 3/28/2014
        CHOL 213 265
        TRIG 237 310
        HDL 49 56
        LDL 107 126

        Comment


        • Just got back from my physical and did some math. Feeling pretty good about the results.
          2013 results
          Total-227
          LDL-146
          HDL-50
          Tri-156

          Ratio's
          Total/HDL 4.54
          Tri/HDL 3.12
          LDL/HDL 2.92

          2014
          Total -243
          LDL -161
          HDL -66
          Tri -78

          Ratio's
          Total/HDL 3.68
          Tri/HDL 1.18
          LDL/HDL 2.43

          Doc was curious of the numbers since I've lost 16lbs since last year and said I may wanna talk to my primary
          Care doc but he didn't appear to worried but did mention statins which I told him i was against which he seemed
          To feel the same.

          From what I've read and this article I think things are looking way better then a year ago and Ratios are defiantly
          a improvement. I about 80 percent paleo/primal and do enjoy some junk food on occasion and a decent amount of adult beverages....

          Comment


          • Pattern A is "large and fluffy" and non-atherosclerotic, like a cotton ball.


            This if straight up false. If people think that their high LdL is ok because it's mostly large and fluffy then they have a false sense of confidence.

            I would recommend you read Peter Attia's Straight dope on cholesterol.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Forgotmylastusername View Post
              I would recommend you read Peter Attia's Straight dope on cholesterol.
              I totally disagree with Peter and his pal Dayspring as the evidence both cite in support of their views are quite frankly, pathetic. I suggest to read the comments by "Hasan Hanachi" on Attia's posts. IMO particle number is just another fad pushed without much evidence that it is casually related to anything. I'd also be very skeptical of Dayspring as I've seen him pushing unproven drugs and was part of an extremely misleading paper - Ezetimibe therapy: mechanism of action and clinical update. The studies in this paper when interpreted correctly, actually provides evidence AGAINST lowering cholesterol. It illustrates nicely the type of flawed reasoning that keeps the lipid hypothesis alive.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by rdelozier123 View Post
                I feel great since start Primal Blueprint but after I got my labs, Im really concerned that this is a good thing. Can anyone help explain


                12/27/2013 3/28/2014
                CHOL 213 265
                TRIG 237 310
                HDL 49 56
                LDL 107 126
                Are you sure you've got the numbers in the right fields? Something seems off for sure.

                If you enter the (total, trigs and hdl - all of which are measured) into this calculator which then calculates your ldl using 2 different calculations (one of which is commonly used in threes lab tests and is thrown out by trigs below 100) you'll see that neither of the LDL results produced match with your results.

                http://homepages.slingshot.co.nz/~geoff36/LDL_mg.htm

                I don't think I've ever seen anyone post trigs that high on here before...
                If you're interested in my (very) occasional updates on how I'm working out and what I'm eating click here.

                Originally posted by tfarny
                If you are new to the PB - please ignore ALL of this stuff, until you've read the book, or at least http://www.marksdailyapple.com/primal-blueprint-101/

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Zahc View Post
                  I totally disagree with Peter and his pal Dayspring as the evidence both cite in support of their views are quite frankly, pathetic. I suggest to read the comments by "Hasan Hanachi" on Attia's posts. IMO particle number is just another fad pushed without much evidence that it is casually related to anything. I'd also be very skeptical of Dayspring as I've seen him pushing unproven drugs and was part of an extremely misleading paper - Ezetimibe therapy: mechanism of action and clinical update. The studies in this paper when interpreted correctly, actually provides evidence AGAINST lowering cholesterol. It illustrates nicely the type of flawed reasoning that keeps the lipid hypothesis alive.
                  Maybe not causally related, depending on how you view that term. But his knowledge and advice is a lot more helpful for people than this thread and the other advice you see that propagate complete cholesterol denialism. Can you link me to the comments you recommend on Attia's blog? He has a lot of blog posts and comments and I can't find the ones you recommended. I don't understand how you can recommend other viable treatments against CHD but oppose LDL lowering. If someone cuts out coconut oil and replaces it with olive oil and see's their LDL go from 250 to 150, how can you oppose that as a reasonable approach to reducing CHD risk?
                  Last edited by Forgotmylastusername; 04-04-2014, 02:06 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Forgotmylastusername View Post
                    Maybe not causally related, depending on how you view that term. But his knowledge and advice is a lot more helpful for people than this thread and the other advice you see that propagate complete cholesterol denialism. Can you link me to the comments you recommend on Attia's blog? He has a lot of blog posts and comments and I can't find the ones you recommended. I don't understand how you can recommend other viable treatments against CHD but oppose LDL lowering. If someone cuts out coconut oil and replaces it with olive oil and see's their LDL go from 250 to 150, how can you oppose that as a reasonable approach to reducing CHD risk?
                    The straight dope on cholesterol
                    The straight dope on cholesterol

                    Search for "Hasan" in the comment section. It is not hard to find opposing views on advanced testing - http://content.onlinejacc.org/articl...icleid=1485370

                    I oppose LDL lowering because of its very poor performance in reducing CHD death and total mortality in clinical trials.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Zahc View Post
                      The straight dope on cholesterol
                      The straight dope on cholesterol

                      Search for "Hasan" in the comment section. It is not hard to find opposing views on advanced testing - http://content.onlinejacc.org/articl...icleid=1485370

                      I oppose LDL lowering because of its very poor performance in reducing CHD death and total mortality in clinical trials.
                      Haasan seemed to have an agenda to avoid people taking statins no matter what the circumstance. I have my own queries on advanced testing as well. I think it's irrational and bias to suggest lipid lowering drugs should always be opposed. Dayspring deals with patients that are not considered the "average person", they generally have all sorts of terrible diets that they are not willing to give up. As a lipiodogist the most sensible approach would to put them on drugs that would prolong their life by decreasing the possibility they suffer a heart attack.

                      Comment


                      • I'm 61 and have had high cholesterol all my life. My sister had a stroke at the age of 28 Doctors said her cholesterol levels were very high and that all of her siblings should be tested as there are people who produce excessive cholesterol even if they did not eat it. So to go Primal is mentally very difficult. So do you feel that there is an exception for people like me? Could this way of eating be dangerous for me?

                        Comment


                        • I'm 61 and have had high cholesterol all my life. My sister had a stroke at the age of 28 Doctors said her cholesterol levels were very high and that all of her siblings should be tested as there are people who produce excessive cholesterol even if they did not eat it. So to go Primal is mentally very difficult. So do you feel that there is an exception for people like me? Could this way of eating be dangerous for me?
                          No. Cholesterol is not the problem. Cholesterol is the precursor for steroid hormones; it's essential.

                          Hypothyroidism causes high cholesterol and atherosclerosis. If you replace saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat, your cholesterol will lower but you'll suffer the harmful effects of polyunsaturated fat, which are worse. If you really want to lower your cholesterol, eat in a way that raises your thyroid hormone.

                          Or, you can do what these people did. Eat safflower oil while avoiding saturated fat and cholesterol. It didn't work out for them:
                          Use of dietary linoleic acid for secondary prevention of... [BMJ. 2013] - PubMed - NCBI
                          My opinions and some justification

                          Comment


                          • Thank you for the quick response.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Forgotmylastusername View Post
                              I think it's irrational and bias to suggest lipid lowering drugs should always be opposed. As a lipiodogist the most sensible approach would to put them on drugs that would prolong their life by decreasing the possibility they suffer a heart attack.
                              Disagree 100%.

                              Comment


                              • Thanks for this post. Appears I have a doctor who gets it. Got my physical results yesterday and my total cholesterol was high (248) but the doctor said he was not concerned because my HDL was really high and my trigs were low (68) and he said my ratios were excellent. He is a standard doctor but I guess word eventually gets around. He's actually pretty good, he even measures free t3 and free t4 instead of TSH only, like some incredibly bad doctors do (I am hypothyroid though my numbers were rocking' yesterday).

                                eta: I guess it helps that I also lost 30 pounds since the last time he saw me. Used to be 5'7 pushing 160 now at 129-130. He remarked on it and I told him how I did it.He didn't scold or preach at all, just said I did the best thing I could for my health with the weight loss.
                                Last edited by Pandme; 06-24-2014, 09:36 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X