Thanks so much for posting your doc's response! I have blood work due next month and am emailing my doc to see if I can have a VAP or NMR to check particle size. I stopped the statin months ago and know that my total cholesterol and LDL will surely increase, so I'd like some ammunition to keep him from a having panic attack over my numbers. In my heart I know I'm good, but it would be nice to see some numbers to prove it.
Bless you for sharing.
Thank you John! And thanks everybody who posted in this thread, now I know I can demand either VAP or NMR next time I talk to my doctor. :-)
Because my cholesterol was "high" in August 2010, my primary physician wanted me to do them again in 6 months. We were a little late in getting to them, but here are the results for April 2011:
Total Cholesterol: 260 - "Still Bad", and much worse since August.
Triglycerides: 38 - down a little and still "good".
HDL: 82 - much higher, which is still "good"
LDL: 170 - Even higher, and still "bad"
Chol/HDLC Ratio: 3.2 - lower and still "good"
Below are my previous results. So, I am inching ever higher with my cholesterol. My LDL density test that I took last year showed that mine were the large, fluffy kind. However, my physicians response is that my overall cholesterol numbers are high, therefore, it is still a problem. I can't figure out why it keeps going higher. I guess in my case, low carb and high cholesterol/saturated fat diet equals high cholesterol. Keep in mind, I am now 40 years old, 5'9", 150 pounds, resting heart rate of 60, BP 107/68, and I feel better than ever. I guess that's what really matters. Any thoughts?
My readings from July 2009 which were pretty consistent on my CW diet:
Total Cholesterol: 145
Chol/HDLC Ratio: 2.5
All of these are well within the "good" ranges.
This is from April 2010, about 6 weeks into Primal Blueprint:
Total Cholesterol: 217 "Now Bad"
LDL: 143 "Now Bad"
Chol/HDLC Ratio: 3
Here are my results from end of August 2010, almost 6 months into PB:
Total Cholesterol: 228 - "Still Bad", but not really changed much since April.
Triglycerides: 46 - relatively unchanged and still "good".
HDL: 61 - a little lower, but still "good"
LDL: 158 - Even higher, and "bad"
Chol/HDLC Ratio: 3.7 - "good"
Last edited by john_e_turner_ii; 04-20-2011 at 05:06 AM.
Am I reading this wrong, or have your numbers got worse on the paleo diet? I really don't know what any of them mean.
This makes me rethink my recent conversion to the "saturated fats aren't bad for you camp", although the reading everyone presented me with was very convincing...
Last edited by captaineight; 04-19-2011 at 02:55 PM.
Nope, you are reading it correctly. Those are my results that just came in the mail today. Yes, they have gotten progressively worse.
Your triglycerides and HDL are great.
It looks like the only numbers that are "bad" are LDL and total - but you know your LDL is the benign kind. Time to change doctors?
Actually, my doctor knows my diet and understands my feelings on it. He won't push me to change anything or take statins. However, he must follow medical standard and make those recommendations. I trust he is doing what he thinks is right.
Are you joking?
Originally Posted by DianeThePurple
You really distrust medical science so much that even when it comes to your own health you'd recommend "changing doctors" rather than accepting the fact that his numbers have become progressively worse on this diet?
John: out of curiosity, do you have a high saturated fat intake in your diet, and what was your saturated fat intake like before on your CW diet?
I will be posting my blood tests shortly. Hopefully someone can help me understand them.
My saturated fat intake on my CW diet was very low. I ate only chicken breast, lean meats, rarely eggs or just egg whites, little to no pork, etc. I ate a lot of whole grains, veggies and fruits. I consumed low fat dairy and cheeses. So yes, this was a dramatic change for me, with the only negative being my lab results. Otherwise, my joints feel much better, no gut issues including acid reflux or heart burn and my BP actually improved from what were already really good numbers.
So does that mean your saturated fat intake did jump considerably?
Would you be open to substituting a considerable amount of your saturated fats for unsaturated fats (nuts, avocados, oily fish, etc.) for a couple of months and then getting another blood test? Just for the sake of experimentation (not to mention your own health)?
Personally I was almost convinced regarding the "healthiness" of saturated fats. I've seen a few things recently, your lab results being one of them, that have made me take a double take. I'm really sitting on the fence on this one, and personally I think I'm going to err on the side of caution and aim for mostly unsaturated fats.
I realise that this is mainstream medically accepted science I'm talking about, and that doesn't go down too well around here, but it might be worth a try. Maybe those doctors actually know a thing or two?