07-28-2010, 10:05 PM
Thanks for the response Griff, I think I maybe should look for a more informed doctor.
07-28-2010, 11:45 PM
Joan, look at your HDL! It's stellar! Your LDL is probably up because you have a lot of repair work to do if you were eating processed food and grains prior to going on this program... but even so, it's Pattern A, which is great.
If you have high HDL, you're going to have higher total cholesterol. Read the primer over again. The ratios are awesome, and the ratios are what matter. Nothing is wrong.
08-10-2010, 07:22 AM
I registered just so I could thank you for your timely post. I am off for a follow up today in a few hours. These were my lipid results after 18 months of Zero Carb.
LDL:HDL Ratio= 4.82
Tri:HDL ratio= .305 (<2 is ideal)
My Doc was pretty excited about my diet until he saw my high LDL, so he apparently needs some educating. I will keep you posted.
Thanks again for this informative post, I have it printed off ready to hand over to him.
Last edited by cavebabyj; 08-10-2010 at 07:28 AM.
08-10-2010, 10:20 AM
I have the best Doctor on the planet. Although he tried to get a VAP test, they are not available in Canada. But he was pleased enough with my lipids to not need one for himself.
He understands the calculations and after making the adjustments he knows that the ratio of 4.8 is calculated and knows they are more like 4.4.
My trig/HDL ratio is .305 (under 2 is best)
he has never seen an HDL of 82 before, so he is VERY pleased!!
PS: I didn't even have to show him my printouts. I wish everyone could be as lucky as me and have a Doctor like that. Although standard protocol asks him to offer me statins, we both know what I was going to say to that LOL
08-10-2010, 03:00 PM
First, I just want to say total kudos on an absolutely incredible post. I've read it front to back and you've really done an incredible amount of work that will benefit us all - I thank you wholeheartedly. That being said, I'd hope you don't mind if I question a few things - some of which is about what you have said, and some is about Primal in general. I thought about sending you a PM, but I thought others might benefit from (or want to weigh in on) my questions/thoughts as well.
I love the analogy of cholesterol as a fireman, and statins being the equivalent of pulling firemen from a burning building to fight the fire. I see that. However, when a building becomes unstable, sometimes it is necessary to have fewer firemen in there to fight safely. I mention this in relation to those people who have truly high numbers (over 300) who have also been doing this a while. I recognize that shortly after switching, there could be a bump. Don't get me wrong, I don't think statins are the answer. I would even say that statins are the equivalent of killing the extra firemen because there are too many in the building. A very ridiculous thought! But, I think it may be dangerous to just say that as long as the ratios are good, don't worry about the very high total. As you've acknowledged, many of our numbers are way higher than peoples living in this modern world who have always been primal (eskimos, etc.) Do you think it is dangerous to just guess that it is probably from the fact that we have much repair work to do due to the way we we lived before PB? Or the potential that we just don't get as much exercise in our societies? Shouldn't we also be trying to reach their great total cholesterol numbers? Isn't there too much conflicting information out there to just abandon ALL conventional thought around cholesterol numbers?
Though I agree quality fats are important and lead to better numbers generally - maybe those who have high numbers should possibly be trying concentrate on leaner quality fats, or something similar to bring it down. The whole idea of unlimited bacon or cream, because they have quality fat seems a bit overboard to me. I've always learned everything in moderation. In another book with similar ideas, "Neanderthin," cream is on the "do not eat" list. And he definitely pushes for the leaner cuts of quality meats. I, personally, am still new at this (2 months primal) and still early in the research phase. I love the way I feel and will never go back to conventional, but I am skeptical that Mark has created the perfect answer with PB. Maybe Neanderthin, or Paleo, some combo, or something else that has not yet been discovered is even better for at least some of us (we are all slightly different...)
I can't wait to hear the replies, so thanks for allowing me to pick your brains!
Oh - and one other kudo for you Griff - I love that you found out that "ideal" numbers for cholesterol used to be 240, but now are 200, so they could recommend putting more people on drugs. So typical!
08-13-2010, 08:20 AM
Thank you for your post Griff. I've been following MDA since the beginning of the year after someone posted a link from the main Crossfit site (been Crossfitting for several years). I took the plunge a couple of months ago, switched to a primal diet and haven't looked back.
So I had my first blood test this week and everything was fine except... elevated cholesterol. My doc said I'd need to address it with diet changes or I'd have to take meds. At the time I didn't think to grab my numbers (I've only been scouring the net for info since then), but I've just picked up a copy of my test results and, no surprise... the LDL level was calculated.
If you're interested, my numbers (36y/M), converted to US values from mmol/L, are:
Giving ratios of:
I'm assuming that's ok. Now to see if I can convince my doc, I've printed out your post along with the Iranian medical paper and a few other articles to pass to him.
08-13-2010, 08:38 PM
How do I tell how my doc calculated my last lipid panel? Does anyone use the Iranian equation instead of Friedewald's?
This was pre-primal (coming off as high-carb as you can get), I'm very interested to see how it's changed in the last year.
Last edited by animalcule; 08-13-2010 at 08:49 PM.
08-14-2010, 10:17 AM
That appears to be calculated using the Friedewald equation.
Someone from another website knocked up a very useful online calculator, which gives you both Friedewald and Iranian results for comparison when you plug your values in.
08-15-2010, 03:17 PM
Thanks! I had already downloaded the calculator actually, but wasn't sure if it was accurate for me. When I plug my numbers in, according to the Iranian equation I have LDL of only 56! That sounds so crazy low! But then I've never seen anyone report a panel like mine (using Friedewald). Low TC runs in my family.
08-16-2010, 08:55 AM
Yeah, it may not be accurate for you, apparently TC has to be over 250 for the Iranian eq to work.
Tags for this Thread