Help me keep my wife off Lipitor page 3

[Neckhammer]

Cholesterol is such a wacky number that I see manipulating ....or even testing it to be a waste of energy. It has almost no correlative value, and certainly not causative value. Your cholesterol is EXACTLY what it needs to be based on your current lifestyle and circumstances. The only caveat to this may be hard wired genetic familial hypercholestorolemia. Otherwise, it is meaningless and you should just concentrate on eating a low carb primal diet.

[Artbuc]

Bonz, your posts prompted me to reread Attia plus some other stuff. Don't know how I missed it before, but statins do reduce LDL-P. Somehow I got the idea that statins reduce only LDL-C.

[BONZ]

He does seem to imply that statins lower LDL-P along with LDL-C in patients whose P and C numbers are concordant (both indicate high risk for CVD), but he's less clear on whether this is the case when those numbers are discordant (i.e. "normal" LDL-C indicators in patients who have metabolic syndrome or diebeties whose high LDL-P (>1300 mmol/L) go unnoticed). I can assume this is because statins are never prescribed because those patients go undiagnosed.

[RitaRose]

Cholesterol is such a wacky number that I see manipulating ....or even testing it to be a waste of energy. It has almost no correlative value, and certainly not causative value. Your cholesterol is EXACTLY what it needs to be based on your current lifestyle and circumstances. The only caveat to this may be hard wired genetic familial hypercholestorolemia. Otherwise, it is meaningless and you should just concentrate on eating a low carb primal diet.

This ^

And familial hypercholesterolemia is pretty damn rare.

[Artbuc]

He does seem to imply that statins lower LDL-P along with LDL-C in patients whose P and C numbers are concordant (both indicate high risk for CVD), but he's less clear on whether this is the case when those numbers are discordant (i.e. "normal" LDL-C indicators in patients who have metabolic syndrome or diebeties whose high LDL-P (>1300 mmol/L) go unnoticed). I can assume this is because statins are never prescribed because those patients go undiagnosed.

So, I guess Attia must be a big supporter of statins if they reduce LDL-P which is the primary marker for CVD? I'll have to go through his blogs and see what he says about statins.

[BONZ]

Cholesterol is such a wacky number that I see manipulating ....or even testing it to be a waste of energy. It has almost no correlative value, and certainly not causative value. Your cholesterol is EXACTLY what it needs to be based on your current lifestyle and circumstances. The only caveat to this may be hard wired genetic familial hypercholestorolemia. Otherwise, it is meaningless and you should just concentrate on eating a low carb primal diet.

I'm highly inclined to agree with you..... Seems to me the human body itself is the best regulatory agent you have and tends to let you know when you're giving it the wrong inputs.

[DeeDub]

From Part IV of the Attia presentation (which is really interesting, thanks for the tip):

Empirically, we know that the most successful pharmacologic interventions demonstrated to reduce coronary artery disease are those that reduce LDL-P and thus delivery of sterols to the artery.

EDIT: Came across this paper, which suggests that a combination of HDL-C and Tri measurements are a suitable proxy for LDL-P measurement.

http://www.theheart.org/article/767865.do

"At any given LDL-C level, if you have two people and one has increased LDL-P while the other has normal LDL-P, the one with the increased LDL-P is at greater risk of CAD, and this tends to coincide with people who have metabolic dyslipidemia [which usually includes low HDL-C levels and high triglycerides]," he said.

"Recognition that patients with low HDL-C and/or high triglycerides often have elevated numbers of LDL-P without having elevated LDL-C may enable their LDL-related CAD risk to be managed more effectively," the authors write.