Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 60

Thread: My total cholesterol went from 146 to 217 in 4 months! page

  1. #1
    en2ec's Avatar
    en2ec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    189

    My total cholesterol went from 146 to 217 in 4 months!

    Primal Fuel
    OK. I just had a simple quick cholesterol test today at a health fair at work. I realize that it is total cholesterol, which doesn't mean much at all (and probably not very accurate). Nevertheless, it is alarming that in 4 months, it went from 146 to 217.

    4 months ago, my LDL was 92, and my HDL was 54. I started primal about 5.5 months ago.

    Granted, I've been eating dark chocolate, drinkng red wine, and exercising in the interest of trying to raise my HDL. But I don't think that I could have raised it by 71 points in 4 months!

    Should I go get a full lipid test now? Should I be alarmed?

  2. #2
    MeatSleepRepeat's Avatar
    MeatSleepRepeat is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    121
    I went primal and had my blood work done 4 months later.
    total cholesterol 205.
    LDL 99
    HDL 96
    Triglicerides 48

    I'm not alarmed with that, and neither was my physician. But, I'm not a doctor...

  3. #3
    Daydreamer's Avatar
    Daydreamer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    371
    It is not alarming at all. Mark posted some studies which show that it's better to have a cholesterol reading between 200 and 240 to prevent all kinds of mortality causes.

    Your sexual hormones probably had a boost, too, because of that.
    It's protective and it's nothing to worry about as long as your HDL is high and your trig down.
    Young self-caring Paleo-eater from France.
    (So please forgive the strange way I tend to express myself in your beautiful language )

  4. #4
    Artbuc's Avatar
    Artbuc is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    545
    Many folks say TC is not a good predictor of CVD. The main focus seems to be LDL-P which requires special testing, preferably NMR. However, top lipidologists like Thomas Dayspring and Tara Dall say non-HDL is an excellent surrogate for LDL-P and should be <150 for moderate risk patients and <100 for higher risk patients. If you believe them, having your TC shoot up without a corresponding increase in HDL-C could mean big trouble.

  5. #5
    en2ec's Avatar
    en2ec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    189
    Thanks everyone for the comments. I think that it is probably OK. I recall now Mark saying that TC between 200 and 240 is beneficial. Neverthelss, I think that I'll go for a more detailed test to make sure that my HDL has at least gone up in proportion to LDL. In any case, I've been curious if my efforts to increase HDL are working.

    MeatSleepRepeat: I'd be totally happy if my HDL and LDL were more or less 1 to 1 like you have.

    The test I had today also included triglycerides, but it could only confirm they were less than 70. So even if my LDL has gone up, hopefully it isn't the more dangerous kind.

  6. #6
    sbhikes's Avatar
    sbhikes is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    9,522
    Actually, your lower cholesterol number sounds too low, like outside the realm of health. I think there's actually higher mortality for people with very low cholesterol compared to people with higher cholesterol.
    Female, 5'3", 49, Starting weight: 163lbs. Current weight: 135 (more or less).
    Starting squat: 45lbs. Current squat: 180 x 2. Current Deadlift: 230 x 2

  7. #7
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by sbhikes View Post
    Actually, your lower cholesterol number sounds too low, like outside the realm of health. I think there's actually higher mortality for people with very low cholesterol compared to people with higher cholesterol.
    But what if your TC is low but the ratios are ideal?

  8. #8
    sbhikes's Avatar
    sbhikes is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    9,522
    Well, I'm not an expert. It's something I read somewhere. But here's a perspective that suggests maybe it's not so bad. Cholesterol: Can It Go Too Low?
    Female, 5'3", 49, Starting weight: 163lbs. Current weight: 135 (more or less).
    Starting squat: 45lbs. Current squat: 180 x 2. Current Deadlift: 230 x 2

  9. #9
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by sbhikes View Post
    Well, I'm not an expert. It's something I read somewhere. But here's a perspective that suggests maybe it's not so bad. Cholesterol: Can It Go Too Low?
    In either case, are we NOT supposed to look at TC because it doesn't matter?

  10. #10
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,731
    Quote Originally Posted by KathyH View Post
    In either case, are we NOT supposed to look at TC because it doesn't matter?
    It only matters in the extreme ranges.....in those cases it may be indicative of an underlying pathology or genetic predisposition (rarely).

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •