Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Crazy High Cholesterol Reading page 2

  1. #11
    Black Timber's Avatar
    Black Timber is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    174
    Shop Now
    Apparently people with a very low TRI:HDL ratio like you have very little to worry about. It's funny how many of us are "trying" to believe that the total does not matter, but were a very happy if we fit into the CW scale! This guy can be fun to read. Conventional Cholesterol Tests are Obsolete
    Some of you may die, but that is a risk I'm willing to take.

  2. #12
    Lumifer's Avatar
    Lumifer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    116
    Welcome to the club.

    The pattern of high LDL (-C, -P) of the large and fluffy kind, high HDL, and low trigs seems to be very common among people eating low-carb. Whether this pattern is bad for you or not, nobody knows. There are people who say that LDL (-P) is all that matters (and then this pattern is bad) and there are people who say that the ratios are all that matters (and then this pattern is good). There is no clinical data to decide one way or the other.

    See e.g. http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread81825.html and many other threads like this here.

  3. #13
    jakey's Avatar
    jakey is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,294
    news flash for the "large, fluffy, bouyant is no problem" crowd, that's been shown to be bullshit. particle number is the new hot thang.

    i would say to the OP that while that's on the high side, that's not soaring to new records or anything, not even close. i wouldn't be that worried, but it's tough to say what it means without knowing what you're eating, and your family history with cholesterol.

  4. #14
    magicmerl's Avatar
    magicmerl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    3,056
    Quote Originally Posted by EatMoveSleep View Post
    Not for mmol/L : ideal is 0.9 or less as mentioned by Peril
    Yeah, I didn't account for the different scales.

    OP's 0.188 is still well below 0.9.

    Quote Originally Posted by jakey View Post
    news flash for the "large, fluffy, bouyant is no problem" crowd, that's been shown to be bullshit. particle number is the new hot thang.
    That's so last year. And not widely accepted science either.

    The reality is that it's the small oxidised LDL that is the problem. If you have a problem cycling LDL out of your system, then your oxidised LDL will hang around longer, which is bad. So high LDL is suggestive of the presence of oxidised LDL IF the cause is reduced LDL receptor function. It's not suggestive of the presence of oxidised LDL if the reason it's so high is because you're eating a truckload of it.
    Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

    Griff's cholesterol primer
    5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
    Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
    TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
    bloodorchid is always right

  5. #15
    TheyCallMeLazarus's Avatar
    TheyCallMeLazarus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northeast Kingdom, Vermont
    Posts
    994
    Here is what I want to see:

    Show a study, ANY study, that shows increased risk of heart disease or stroke, correlated with cholesterol, after patients with metabolic syndrome markers have been removed. That is all I want.

    Ex: Get 1000 people with "high cholesterol", and then eliminate everyone with trigly over a set amount, Hba1c over a certain amount, etc....guess what? They have done this....

    And you will see that once metabolic syndrome markers have been removed, there is a DECREASE in heart attack and CVA vs the general population.

    Translation: Blood panels are for determining the presence of absence or metabolic syndrome markers. There a lot of people walking around with supposed high cholesterol with HbA1c's of 4% (indicating prolonged low, non-swinging insulin levels) that are very healthy.

    When I see any peer-reviewed study that contradicts this, I will change my opinion. Until then, that is all these numbers are good for.

  6. #16
    peril's Avatar
    peril is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Sydney, NSW
    Posts
    2,679
    Quote Originally Posted by TheyCallMeLazarus View Post
    Here is what I want to see:

    Show a study, ANY study, that shows increased risk of heart disease or stroke, correlated with cholesterol, after patients with metabolic syndrome markers have been removed. That is all I want.

    Ex: Get 1000 people with "high cholesterol", and then eliminate everyone with trigly over a set amount, Hba1c over a certain amount, etc....guess what? They have done this....

    And you will see that once metabolic syndrome markers have been removed, there is a DECREASE in heart attack and CVA vs the general population.

    Translation: Blood panels are for determining the presence of absence or metabolic syndrome markers. There a lot of people walking around with supposed high cholesterol with HbA1c's of 4% (indicating prolonged low, non-swinging insulin levels) that are very healthy.

    When I see any peer-reviewed study that contradicts this, I will change my opinion. Until then, that is all these numbers are good for.
    So what are the markers for metabolic syndrome?

    I recently had a blood test. For the first time, I asked my GP to request apoB (1.15g/L) and apoA1 (2.14g/L). My understanding is that the apoB/apoA1 ratio is a fair marker of metabolic syndrome. Mine came out as 0.54 - all good. Wonder what is was when I had an MI four years ago

    Of course my GP could only focus on my high TC (7.5 mmol/L) and calculated LDL-C (4.7 mmol/L).
    Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.

    Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine

  7. #17
    TheyCallMeLazarus's Avatar
    TheyCallMeLazarus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northeast Kingdom, Vermont
    Posts
    994
    The ApoA vs B is similar to your normal LDL vs HDL numbers, however it is unique in that ApoB is giving the NUMBER of low-density throughout all forms (IDL, LDL, VLDL). For this reason, it is a much better predictor of atherosclerosis than simple LDL number.....

    With that said, I am not convinced that it alone is any indicator of metabolic syndrome....keep in mind that this is MY personal clinical opinion, and I have met other docs that disagree. For me, Met Syn is defined as this: the net cascade of effects in the blood contents, liver, and blood vessels caused by prolonged levels of high insulin/glucose toxicity.

    For me, again, just what I in particular use in practice, I rely heavily on HbA1c, triglyceride levels, and CRP (in those with already present disease). In my experience and in the studies I have read, I am not convinced that once these factors are removed, cholesterol is indeed problematic. I am always open to being proven wrong, with studies.

    Upon dissection of some of the landmark health studies that influenced Keyes (and the US gov) in the 70's, it has been well established that these markers were more indicative of disease than the ones they were intending to measure.

    I know of a few endocrinologists that use a similar criteria, and I am borrowing from their much greater knowledge in forming what I say to my own consults.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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