I'm calling for a do over. Re-test just to be sure its accurate.
I'm calling for a do over. Re-test just to be sure its accurate.
This was from an instant-read machine (~5 minutes to results), which they say are comparable to the labs. Not sure if I believe that, and I'll be getting a physical soon at my doctor so I'll wait for that bloodwork to come back. He's going to freak when he sees that trigs number though ...
I second the redo. Something is very strange. I eat like you descibed everyday and have for years now. I'm 40, male, 167 lbs. My trigs are in the low 50s (multiple tests over time and all fasted) and my HDL is more than double yours. I would have bet money that it was a fructose or very rapid weight loss issue. If not that nor a liver issue, I smell a bad test.
Wow, I would venture to say many of us LCHF folks have these types of bizarre conversations with docs over panels. Thanks for the story; gives me some ideas for when I discuss with my doc.
[QUOTE=rmbrich;1156108]I am not losing weight (I don't think!). I have fluctuated between 175-178 for the past 9 months or so.
My carb intake is low. Example meals past few days:
Lunch: Salad w/ roasted chicken and roasted veggies
Dinner: Taco salad (lettuce, steak, cheese, sour cream, salsa, guac)
Breakfast: Smoothie (apple, banana, spinach, pear, greek yogurt)
Lunch: Leftover taco salad
Snack: Smoked oysters in olive oil
Dinner: Almond-crust pizza (cheese, pepperoni, roasted red pepper)
Lunch: Leftover pizza
Dinner: Crock-pot chili (beef, tomatoes, spices)
My HDL has always been low. I know exercise is the best way to get this up, but I also want to avoid the "30 minutes of cardio every day" that my doctor recommends.[/QUOTE]
Your carbohydrate intake is basically zero. That's probably why your blood numbers aren't good.
The thing that strikes me is the fasting blood glucose of 94. Your fasting BG should be around 75. You are likely very insulin resistant from your lack of carbohydrate. If I were you, I'd do a huge diet overall.
1.) You eat A LOT of unsaturated fat. I see chicken, olive oil, shellfish and almonds (baked almond meal is toxic). If you eat lots of eggs, fish, poultry, pork and liquid vegetable oils like olive oil and nuts, your saturated:unsaturated ratio is probably pretty bad. I would limit poultry and pork and get my fat from ruminants (beef, lamb) and only cook with butter, ghee or coconut oil. Dairy is still fine thanks to the wonderful fatty acid profile. I'd definitely ditch the almond meal. Throw that nasty garbage away.
2.) I eat more carbohydrate than fat. I suggest you do as well. Carbohydrate (specifically sugar) stores in tissues as mostly as saturated fat with the remainder as omega-9 monounsaturated fat. Fat stores as whatever you consume for the most part, so if you eat lots of nuts, poultry, eggs, fish and liquid vegetable oils, you probably have unsaturated fatty tissues. That's not a good thing, and it's another reason why I do not support high fat/low carb diets in general. [B]For your height and weight, I can almost guarantee you're doing a lot more harm than good. Your body is likely catabolizing lean tissue constantly to get the 200g of glucose you need to survive daily. Get it through food, not skeletal tissue. A lower to moderate fat diet that is moderate to high in carbohydrate and protein would almost certainly suit you better.[/B] I like 30% fat, 30% protein, 40% carbohydrate for your height/weight. If you lift weights often, 20% fat, 40% protein, 40% carbohydrate may see the best results on body composition but if you're not a lifter that may be too little fat for you.
3.) You're insulin resistant because you never eat carbohydrate. Sugar and starch make you insulin sensitive, fat makes you resistant (specifically polyunsaturated fat, which you eat lots of). My starchy and sugary diet loaded with 5 lbs of potatoes, 3 large plantains, 3 lbs of apples and various other fruits a week with leaner red meats and eggs has me sitting pretty in the 74-79 range all day every day while fasting. My blood glucose has improved substantially after removing fats for sugars and starches (I used to sit in the mid 80's, now I'm mid 70's).
I would remove the poultry, pork and fish for leaner red meats. I'd replace the fat with lots of fruit if you're sedentary and half fruit half starch if you're active. I do starch post-workout and fruit at pretty much all other times. I rarely consume nuts and all the fats I use to cook with are solid at room temperature. I really only stock coconut oil, ghee (that I render myself from unsalted Kerrygold) and unrefined cocoa butter at my house. The only other oil you'll find is extra virgin olive oil, which I always "fridge test" and use sparingly.
I have this nagging suspicion you take fish oil. If you do - STOP. I hope I'm wrong. You should get a thyroid test done - T3, T4, TSH, rT3. NOT JUST TSH. I have a feeling you're borderline hypothyroid from your cholesterol, blood glucose numbers and diet low in carbs and high in unsaturates.
EDIT - I am not anti-egg, poultry, pork or fish. However, for you, I'd limit them until the numbers correct. The biggest exception I see are eggs. I wouldn't tell you to stop buying eggs, but I'd quit the poultry, pork and fish for awhile.
[QUOTE=ChocoTaco369;1157192]You're insulin resistant because you never eat carbohydrate. Sugar and starch make you insulin sensitive...[/QUOTE]
T2D just need to eat more carbs?
I find the idea of insulin sensitivity being directly correlated to carbohydrate consumption a specious assertion.
[QUOTE=Finnegans Wake;1157244]T2D just need to eat more carbs?
I find the idea of insulin sensitivity being directly correlated to carbohydrate consumption a specious assertion.[/QUOTE]
Yes, and a lot less fat. Especially oxidized, rancid fat from heated nut meals.
Your body is going to burn the fuel you give it in the greatest quantity. How do you expect his body to metabolize glucose efficiently when he never consumes carbohydrate? It's stuck in an endless loop of fat oxidation. He probably has terrible CO2 numbers because his mitochondria are so tired from burning such an inefficient source of fuel all the time. Fat isn't a good energy source compared to glucose. Fat's most efficient function is sticking to your ribcage.
The OP is at a solid weight because his calories are under control, but blood numbers show a clear problem. In my opinion, he is clearly insulin resistant with that terrible fasting BG number and since his body is working overtime trying to desperately get the glucose his brain needs to function, it is dumping huge quantities of fat into his bloodstream to fuel the rest of his body. Because fat is so inefficient, it is dumping A LOT of fat just to get his body to function and because his brain is so glucose starved, there is none left to fuel his muscles, so fat has to compensate.
I smell high levels of lactate in the bloodstream!
I'm not saying we should not avoid PUFAs and oxidized fats. I'm just saying that the assertion that one fixes insulin resistance by eating more carbs is inherntly flawed.
[quote]How do you expect his body to metabolize glucose efficiently when he never consumes carbohydrate? [/quote]
Insulin resistance involves a bit more than the efficient metabolism of glucose. It's not all about shuttling energy to cells, it also comprises fat storage and cell damage (esp. to the endothelium).
You can't have it both ways, Choco. Someone with insulin resistance needs to lose weight and to fix their insulin metabolism. You say that the only way to lose weight is via caloric deficit; so, fine. But if one achieves that through a HF macro, and loses weight, then insulin sensitivity returns. You cannot choose when to promote certain macros. The oft-used metaphor of the key and lock has the lock mechanism (cell) distorted and unreceptive to the key (insulin) because of overweight; when the weight is lost, the receptivity returns.
In the meantime, if a person has a messed up insulin sensitivity, shoveling carbs in will just exacerbate the problem because the insulin will be trying to send that to the cells, and the cells will refuse delivery; where to go? To adipose tissue, and on the cycle continues.
[QUOTE=Finnegans Wake;1157291]I'm not saying we should not avoid PUFAs and oxidized fats. I'm just saying that the assertion that one fixes insulin resistance by eating more carbs is inherntly flawed.[/quote]
There is more than one type of insulin resistance.
There is metabolic syndrome - which is caused by PUFA, not carbohydrate. This is the blood sugar issues diabetics have.
Then there is physiological insulin resistance, which is simply your body's natural response to a high fat/low carb diet. When you consume lots of fat and no carbohydrate, your body is forced to become more efficient at burning fat (and it has to because it is a less efficient source of energy). Since your ability to oxidize fat increases, your ability to oxidize sugar decreases. This results in high fasting blood glucose.
I'm hoping the OP fits into #2, which judging by his height and weight, he probably does. This is simply fixed by eating carbs at the expense of fat so you start burning glucose preferentially again - [B]like you're supposed to[/B].
[QUOTE=Finnegans Wake;1157291]Insulin resistance involves a bit more than the efficient metabolism of glucose. It's not all about shuttling energy to cells, it also comprises fat storage and cell damage (esp. to the endothelium).
You can't have it both ways, Choco.[/quote]
Yes you can because you're not realizing there are many causes of insulin resistance, and not all are indicators of some severe disease. You don't need to have an improperly functioning metabolism to be insulin resistant because metabolic syndrome is not the only time insulin resistance may plague you. The OP probably doesn't have metabolic syndrome but is almost certainly insulin resistant.
thank you for the back and forth on this Finnegans Wake and ChocoTaco. Lots to learn.