Meet Mark

Let me introduce myself. My name is Mark Sisson. I’m 63 years young. I live and work in Malibu, California. In a past life I was a professional marathoner and triathlete. Now my life goal is to help 100 million people get healthy. I started this blog in 2006 to empower people to take full responsibility for their own health and enjoyment of life by investigating, discussing, and critically rethinking everything we’ve assumed to be true about health and wellness...

Tell Me More
Stay Connected
January 30 2008

The Definitive Guide to Cholesterol

By Mark Sisson
109 Comments

That makes it easy.

With all the talk of fighting, battling, combating and beating cholesterol into submission, you’d think it had a black plastic body suit and James Earl Jones’ voice. Big Pharma has, dutifully created quite an arsenal for our supposed defense, and the medical community has been a willing faction, delivering the rhetoric that would incite us all to pick up arms. Now if only we could put down the Big Macs. And the Ding Dongs, HoHos, Twinkies and…you get the point.

Preposterous.

But the insidious rogue, that menacing villain isn’t to be found at the helm of the Death Star. Turns out, there is an enemy within and it’s not even cholesterol. Before you fall to your knees, rip your shirt and gnash your teeth, you might want to consider news you don’t hear often enough: the much aligned compound in question is absolutely essential to your physical, psychological and cognitive functioning.

Yes, the message these days seems to be that no number is too low when it comes to cholesterol (except HDL but we’ll get to that later). I’d like to offer a deeper look into the issue, user-friendly enough but more complex and contentious than you’ll get from the commercial sound bytes telling you to talk to your doctor about blah, blah, blah. Consider it one of MDA’s definitive guides that we’re happy to serve up for our gregarious and always thoughtful community.

Excuse me, have you met cholesterol?

(10R,13R)-10,13-dimethyl-17-(6-methylheptan-2-yl)-2,3,4,7,8,9,11,12,14,15,16,17-dodecahydro-1H-cyclopenta[a]phenanthren-3-ol

Cholesterol is a waxy, charming lipid gracing every cell’s membrane and our blood plasma. Its jobs, which are many, include insulating neurons, building and maintaining cellular membranes, metabolizing fat soluble vitamins, producing bile, and kick-starting the body’s synthesis of many hormones, including the sex hormones. Cool stuff actually.

Given all the work cholesterol has to do, the liver is careful to ensure the body always has enough, producing some 1000-1400 milligrams of it each day. In comparison, the 300 milligram recommended limit for dietary cholesterol (your tax dollars at work in the USDA) is a drop in the bucket. And get this: our livers come with feedback mechanisms (at no additional cost) that regulate cholesterol production in response to our dietary intake. When we eat more, it makes less, and vice-versa. Imagine that!

(Interesting note: While animal products like meat, eggs and dairy, are far and away the primary source of dietary cholesterol, plants contain trace amounts of cholesterol and cholesterol-like substances called phytosterols, which may help lower blood or “serum” cholesterol. Not that that matters, as we shall soon see.

So, what’s with all the acronyms on my cholesterol profile, you ask. Let’s take a look. First, there are high density lipoproteins (HDL). (Lipoproteins are spherical fat particles with water-soluble proteins around their exterior. They transport cholesterol). HDL: everybody loves this guy. He has the popular job of transferring cholesterol from the body’s tissues back to the liver. It’s basically the end of the line with this route, and the liver then excretes it through bile. HDL is the one to naturally help get rid of excess cholesterol when the body’s done with it, hence his universal popularity. Some cholesterologists (just made that up) even refer to him as Nature’s garbage truck.

Next, there are low density lipoproteins, LDL. LDL is a lipoprotein and delivery man as well. He has the disgraced job of transporting cholesterol after production from the liver to the body’s tissues. Remember, this is an important job! That cholesterol has a honey-do list a mile long.

Ironically, it turns out that it’s not the cholesterol part of the LDL or HDL moiety that is dangerous, but the actual lipoprotein part. Unfortunately, once medicine had found a way to differentiate between the amount of HDL and LDL in a cost-effective blood test, it was the cholesterol part that got the short end of the deal.

The latest research into LDL shows that there are actually sub-categories of this cholesterol transporter and that some are more dangerous than others. The larger, more billowy LDL particles are now thought to have little or no significant role in heart disease. On the other hand, the smaller, dense LDL particles are the ones believed to be most involved in the process of inflammation that begins the atherosclerosis cascade. And wouldn’t you know it, but it’s a diet high in simple carbs that most readily promotes the formation of these small LDL particles! Unfortunately, this important distinction is probably something your doctor knows very little about, yet it’s the number of small particle LDL that might be the most important reading in any cholesterol test. So a total cholesterol of, say, 230 or even 250 might not be dangerous at all if your HDL is high and your small particle LDL is low.

Before we move on, let’s give brief mention to triglycerides. Triglycerides are essentially the form that fat takes as it travels to the body’s tissues through the bloodstream. The relationship between triglycerides and cholesterol is more of an association. A high triglyceride level, which is unequivocally fueled by a high carb diet, is very often a marker for other problems in the body, particularly insulin resistance (and accompanying risk of diabetes) as well as inflammation (with its risk of heart disease). High levels are often seen with low HDL cholesterol. Once again, the high carb diet wreaks havoc.

The Rise of Cholesterol Panic

Cholesterol free zone looks to have a mascot.

Heart disease took off in the early part of the twentieth century, and doctors frantically searched for the cause throughout the next several decades. Tests in the fifties initially showed an association between early death by heart disease and fat deposits and lesions along artery walls. Because cholesterol was found to be present in those deposits (of course it would!) and because researchers had previously associated familial hypercholesterolaemia (hereditary high blood cholesterol) with heart disease, they concluded that cholesterol must be the culprit. In fact, what happens is that in response to an inflammatory situation, the body uses cholesterol as a “band-aid” to temporarily cover any lesions in the arterial wall. In the event the inflammation is resolved, the band-aid goes away and repair takes place. No harm, no foul. Unfortunately, in most cases, the inflammation proceeds, the cholesterol plaque is eventually acted on by macrophages and is oxidized to a point at which it takes up more space in the artery, slows arterial flow and eventually can break loose to form a clot. And all this time the cholesterol was just trying to be the good guy! Blaming cholesterol for all this is like blaming a cut finger on all the band-aids you have lying around your house.

Death from heart disease, according to the CDC, has declined over 50% since its peak in the 1950s. The success is attributed to a number of factors, including a decrease in smoking and better diagnosis and treatment of high blood pressure. Included in the list of factors was the opportunity for public education regarding the scientific findings/theories related to cholesterol; however, measures (including CDC estimates) of dietary saturated fat intake show that intake has generally stayed the same or risen.

But the dietary cholesterol message stuck.

Big Pharma To The Rescue!
Early drugs that “battled” high cholesterol prevented its absorption in the digestive tract. The side effects on the digestive system were unpleasant enough and the results modest enough that the drugs never garnered much support from either side of the prescription pad. Enter statins. Statins inhibited the natural production of cholesterol. Side effects were not as immediately noticeable or uncomfortable, and the results were quite good (at least at lowering cholesterol). (The recently beleaguered Vytorin and Zetia combined statin actions with a substance that reduces absorption of dietary cholesterol, preventing your body from trying to compensate for the lower natural cholesterol production.)

But what about the body’s natural impetus to produce a given and necessary amount of cholesterol? What happens to the parts of the body that need the cholesterol? What about the liver’s regulating mechanism? What happens when you mess with evolution? Exactly. Those are the sorts of questions that get thrown aside when you’re riding Big Pharma’s cholesterol hobby horse.

What Are the Problems With This (“Lipid”) Model?

Million Dollar Question

Oh, boy. There’s the million dollar question.

First off, let’s go back to the evolutionary question. As a naturally self-regulating system, the body will react if it doesn’t have enough cholesterol (yes, the body’s definition of enough and not Merck’s). If there’s not enough cholesterol, the alarm goes off, strobe lights flash and the body goes into crisis mode. Corticoid hormones coordinate a redistribution of cholesterol, a triage of sorts in which cholesterol is rationed among the many areas of the body that need it. Nonetheless, the body is now working under hardship conditions.

Adequate cholesterol isn’t available for the body’s repair system, for the uptake of serotonin, for the full initiation of Vitamin D and hormone production and their regulation of blood sugar and inflammation, etc., etc. What does your logic tell you here? Yup, nothing is running the way it should.

Let me also add that everyone’s cholesterol profile is going to be different, no matter what. And I acknowledge that a very small percentage of people out there genuinely have *true* hereditary high blood cholesterol, familial hypercholesterolemia, a metabolic condition with impaired or even lack of ability to metabolize cholesterol. This condition can have serious health consequences. By the way, this condition, in its heterozygous form affects at most 1 in 500 people. Total serum cholesterol in these folks is in the 400 mg/dl range (as opposed to the 200 recommended). The homozygous form affects about 1 in 250,000. You likely don’t know anyone in this category because their disorder almost always ends their lives at a very young age.

I mention familial hypercholesterolemia because I want to distinguish it from the claim made by Big Pharma ads that you may have higher cholesterol because people in your family did, and – can you believe it – their company is here to help. Duh! Everyone’s family influences cholesterol profiles. It’s, in small part, genetic. No big worry there. Just because you come from a family with “elevated” cholesterol doesn’t mean you have the familial hypercholesterolemia metabolic disorder. You can pretty much bet a whole lot o’ money on the likelihood that your cholesterol profile – good or bad – has more to do with learned behaviors like diet and exercise. “Elevated” cholesterol doesn’t equate with metabolic disorder.

Officer, You Got the Wrong Guy!
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Sound and reliable medical research hasn’t proven that lowering (or low) cholesterol in and of itself reduces risk of death from heart disease across a population. Yes, there is always that single isolated guy who throws off the curve, but he (or she) is a statistical anomaly and doesn’t negate the legitimacy of the model. For instance, the Japanese people of Okinawa are among the healthiest in the world. Their heart disease rate is extremely low, but they tend to have “elevated” cholesterol levels.

The fact is, half of all first time heart attack sufferers have a perfectly “normal” cholesterol profile. What does this tell you? There must be some other piece here behind the “other half” and, I would solidly argue, behind the first half. Cholesterol is a red herring.

It all boils down to inflammation. Inflammation is the number one factor in heart disease. This is an accepted fact now, but it still gets little attention and no real prevention or treatment. Think about it: you have your cholesterol levels checked every five years or more if your profile is “problematic.” When do you have biomarkers for inflammation checked? Unless you’ve had a heart attack or been diagnosed with a serious medical condition, probably never.

Fighting inflammation near and far...

Inflammation. What is it caused by? Not fat, but carbohydrates. Yes, sugars and processed carbs are highest on the list of perpetrators here, but grains and starches as a whole contribute to the problem. LDL rises directly not with the amount of saturated fat you eat but with rising levels of inflammation caused by carbs and trans fats.

Oxidation. Furthermore, nearly every study suggests that LDL is only a true threat when it’s oxidized. What oxidizes it? Free radicals. We’re talking trans fats primarily, that beast of an additive found in countless food products (as opposed to foods). What counteracts free radicals (because we all naturally have some in us)? Anti-oxidants: veggies and fruits, of course, as well as nuts, olive oil, etc. Consider also a broad-based multi-antioxidant supplement containing those nutrients shown to decrease oxidation.

Back to the red herring issue. Substantially “elevated” cholesterol, low HDL or high LDL might be reason to give you pause, but not for the reason you might think. The number can tell you that something is amiss, but they’re a symptom of the larger concern rather than the main issue itself. Cholesterol profile can be impacted by other conditions such as hypothyroidism, untreated diabetes or pre-diabetes, pregnancy (surprise!), lactation, stress, liver conditions, heart disease (symptom, not cause of), etc. Talk to your doctor about what your numbers mean in the grand scheme of your health. And see if you can get a read on other markers, like C-reactive protein (an inflammatory indicator) and those small particle LDL numbers.

How to Maintain True Heart Health

Better use two hands...

Now that we’ve conquered the cholesterol frenzy (because the frenzy itself is the real threat), let’s get to the genuine issue of maintaining heart health. Maintaining heart health is about keeping inflammation at bay. As we say here at MDA, that means an anti-inflammatory diet (with exercise), and primal nutrition fits the bill: copious amounts and variety of veggies, fruits, good quality meats, healthy fats and proteins.

Also, plenty of omega-3 fatty acids, particularly fish oil, will thin the blood and help prevent clotting, which along with atherosclerosis (inflammation related), is a serious set up for heart disease and stroke. Fish oil also happens to generally lower triglycerides and increase “good” HDL.

Read up in our MDA archives for additional info on inflammation and healthy living. Thanks for tuning in.

sugar freak, mac vegetarian, Sean Munson, maxgiani, mammabrarian, aussiegall Flickr Photos (CC)

Further Reading:

The Definitive Guide to Insulin, Blood Sugar and Type 2 Diabetes

Vytorin: Big Blow for Big Pharma

PharmaLot: Who Needs Those Cholesterol Pills Anyway?

Sponsor note:
This post was brought to you by the Damage Control Master Formula, independently proven as the most comprehensive high-potency antioxidant multivitamin available anywhere. With the highest antioxidant per dollar value and a complete anti-aging, stress, and cognition profile, the Master Formula is truly the only multivitamin supplement you will ever need. Toss out the drawers full of dozens of different supplements with questionable potency and efficacy and experience the proven Damage Control difference!

Prefer listening to reading? Get an audio recording of this blog post, and subscribe to the Primal Blueprint Podcast on iTunes for instant access to all past, present and future episodes here.

[tags]cholesterol, HDL, LDL, inflammation, free radicals, oxidation, co Q10, fish oil, triglycerides, fat[/tags]

Subscribe to the Newsletter

If you'd like to add an avatar to all of your comments click here!

109 thoughts on “The Definitive Guide to Cholesterol”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Very interesting article, and fun to read.

    As you pointed out heterozygous Familial hypercholesterolemia affects about 0.2% of the US population. For these people it is important to known it is genetic. It will affect treatment and it also means the issue is with you for life (or as long as you have your genome). And then there is sex, if you have FH confirmed by a genetic test then any children you have will have a least a 50% chance of having it. And don’t forget your siblings and parents, same gene pool.

    John

  2. Pretty comprehensive. It surprised me to find out heart disease has decreased by 50% since the 1950’s.

    1. I would argue that that statistic is misleading. I’m a fan of MDA and doing Primal myself, but the actual stat was “Death from heart disease, according to the CDC, has declined over 50% since its peak in the 1950s.”

      Part of the reason death from heart disease has dropped is that bypass surgeries and other post-heart-attack procedures have become commonplace. The statistic alone doesn’t tell the whole story (though this also does not negate anything in the article).

      In fact, I would suggest that it’s rather upsetting that we’ve gotten so good at fixing heart disease that CW is blind to its causes in the first place. Grok on!

  3. John O,

    There’s a distinction to be made here: heart disease hasn’t decreased, only deaths from heart disease. We’re getting better at keeping sick people alive through advanced (and extremely expensive) medical technology.

  4. Well not only is lowering cholesterol not necessarily going to decrease heart disease, lowering it too much increase vulnerability to colorectal cancer:

    http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2008/01/colorectal-cancer-and-cholesterol.html

    “Surprisingly, a strong association between increased LDL levels and decreased risk of colorectal cancer was identified. The explanation for this finding is unclear.”

    That’s it.

    That’s the total discussion of their most statistically significant finding. Possibly their most biologically significant finding.

    The lowest quartile for men had LDL-C below 100mg/dl, women below 110mg/dl. Those were the ones most likely to get bowel cancer. I think it’s worth pointing out that the average cardiologist would consider an LDL-C of 100mg/dl or above as a peracute statin deficiency. That lowest quartile is where your cardiologist wants you to be.

  5. Mark, this is why we all love your blog so much. This was a terrific read that is absolutely correct. Great job.

  6. Excellent post!

    Unfortunately, too heterozygous Familial hypercholesterolemia isn’t the only “hereditary” form of hypercholesterolemia today according to the medical establishment. There are something like 5 types now….if you’re HDL is low it’s one type, if it’s high LDL it’s another…and of course all are treated with statins!!

    There’s been a lot of discussion in the medical world about the “disappointing” results of the recent study indicating lower LDL may not always be good. This is good!!

    1. The funny thing about familial hypercholesterolemia is that in a Dutch study, they found that vascular problems were independent of cholesterol. Yet no one would ever publish an article about that little detail. There’s tons of stuff out there against the cholesterol myth, like lower cholesterol is actually more dangerous than high by far, and that low cholesterol can cause serious depression and heighten the risk of hemorrhagic stroke.

  7. Funny how cholesterol helps to keep the brain active in older people…and then come statins and lower cholesterol… and then a huge rise in alzheimers…anyone? anyone?

    1. After people ask doctors about why they should stay on statins, they say “oh, they also have anti-inflammatory effets” go figure. All studies done usually use arginine (a friggen amino acid? Sure it creates nitric oxide and all but come on) as a reference point to test statins’ anti-inflammatory process.

  8. Wow, very comprehensive you guys! Thank you for parsing all that for me. I feel like I really learned something today. But now my brain hurts and I’m going to bed:)

    1. “But now my brain hurts and I’m going to bed”

      Uh-oh, sounds like you need more cholesterol and Omega-3s… 😉

  9. Nice summary. With high cholesterol and extremely high triglycerides, I’ve been on Lopid for years mainly to protect my pancreas. No health issues other than these symptoms. And then muscle soreness at the gym finally got my GP’s attention that statin side-effects may be something to watch. Finally we get to fish and flax seed oil, reducing carbs, etc. Family history confirms it’s genetic, with lifespans into the 80’s with stroke over heart failure. Dispensing nutrition and exercise prescriptions need at the least same emphasis in western medicine as big pharma.

  10. Hi Wayne,

    Lifespans into the 80s? that’s pretty darn good. In the US average lifespan for a male is a shade over 72 years. Maybe you have Japanes ancestry, Japanese men are the longest lived at 76 and a bit. Why? Probably a combination of many things, public health access, genetics, diet, environment, treatment of elderly, etc. Before I get off topic I will say that family history is one piece of the puzzle and is not necessarily your predetermined destiny.

    John

  11. Hmm, I have a question. when they talk about inflammation, what are they talking about exactly? So, let’s say I am somewhat active, but keep getting little inflammatory problems (like twisted ankle, sore muscles and joints after working out etc). Will that sort of thing ultimately end up affecting my heart health?

  12. Hi Raj,

    That’s an excellent question. Inflammation is often mentioned and not often explained. Getting bruises and twisting your ankle isn’t what he’s talking about here. He’s talking about systemic inflammation.

    My limited understanding is that the word, in this context, refers to the presence of certain harmful biological markers. Things like C-reactive protein and interleukin-18. These are cell stress molecules that are a sign of damage.

    So it’s not inflammation in the sense of “tissue swelling” necessarily; the term has expanded.

  13. Very great article – thank you. When I tried to talk with my doctor about statins and asked about the inflamation thing he said “statins reduce inflammation”. I hadn’t heard that – have you a comment about this? thanks!

  14. Mark, excellent, readable overview on an important topic.

    I’m an MD, and have been concerned about the possibilities you noted: decreasing the serum cholesterol levels impairing the other beneficial cholesterol functions (neural, regenerative, sex hormones, etc). Especially when cholesterols are driven way down, in folks considered at high cardiovascular risk.

    Are you aware of any studies that actually show impairment or negative outcomes, however?

  15. Really enjoyed the read! We’re starting to get a better understanding of cholesterol and its role in heart disease. I’ll bookmark your blog and I’ll be back.

    Thanks

  16. John O.:
    That’s life expectancy at birth. It takes into account people dying very young of accidents and homicides and wars and suicides and goodness knows what else. Your life expectancy as a man at this moment is probably not 72. For example, according to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2005 a 65 year old woman could expect to live another 20 years.

    1. The theory is sound and spotprued. The goal was to put out the information in an easy to read and understand way without all the medical and scientific jargon. It has worked for me and others.Thanks for checking it out

  17. Completely agree about the drugs. Our healthcare system is going down the wrong road by encouraging people to treat everything with drugs and by using drugs as the first line of defense rather than as a last resort.

  18. over 10,000 people a year die from prescribed medications, i was diagnoed high choleterol, have kept it better by exercise and whole grain bread, not much red meat, turkey chicken instead, just had bout with intestinal blockage
    cleared with distilled water, fruits,
    chicken noodle soup. cons also causes high blood pressure. now i am back to 116 over 67 with a 55 heartbeat. i found the article very good thank you. i am going to start a website on natural health, be 70 in five months,
    don’t like that 72 age for death reference lol. i weigh 142 and i am 5ft 10.

  19. I’m still a little confused.

    as someone who wants to both gain weight and eat low carb, i eat 4 eggs a day.

    is it logical to say that as the liver produces 1400mg of cholesterol, and each egg contains 200mg, that you can safely eat 7 eggs a day?

    In your recent weight gain post you recommend a dozen eggs a day…how come that is safe and healthy?

    Is there a limit to how much dietary cholesteral should be consumed, and is there a direct link between dietary cholesteral and indicators of bad health?

    1. Cholesterol absorption is non-linear at as dietary cholesterol increases. The absorption pathway becomes saturated and a lower relative amount actually gets absorbed as the amount eaten increases. What’s not absorbed passes through in the end (pun intended).

    2. Low intake of dietary cholesterol causes more cholesterol to be produced.

      High intake of dietary cholesterol causes less cholesterol to be produced.

      (If you want, you can ask Uffe Ravnskov or get his book, it’s truth)

  20. Google searches show numerous references that dietary cholesterol increases blood cholesterol, and increased blood cholesterol has been proven to increase the risk of heart disease.

    You seem to be saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease, but inflammation is? Is that to say that there is no limit on cholesterol s long as you keep inflammation at bay?

    very confusing and feels like I am gambling with my health by eating contrary to ‘common knowledge’

    1. I recommend in addition to reason more of Mark’s blog to take a look at “Good Calories, Bad Calories” by Gary Taubes which gives further details as well as an explanation of how the lipid hypothesis became “common knowledge” despite being erroneous.

  21. Mark,

    Can you clarify the following:

    “Triglycerides are essentially the form that fat takes as it travels to the body’s tissues through the bloodstream … A high triglyceride level, which is unequivocally fueled by a high carb diet…”.

    Wouldn’t a high fat diet contribute to a high triglyceride be attributed to a high fat diet as well? I am a little confused.

    1. Mark,

      That’s false. Case in point is myself.

      I changed the way I ate years ago after patching things together through my own research. At the time my TG fairly high. My other blood markers were approaching the medical establishments marks of ‘high cholesterol’. I also have a family history of heart disease and high cholesterol.

      Fast forward 6 or 7 years. My last lab test showed extremely low cholesterol levels. In fact my TG’s were 33. Nobody would have believed me had I not had the lab papers in my hand.

      One of the surest ways to lower TG is, in fact, through an all natural high fat diet.

  22. Alex, there actually IS no evidence that cholesterol causes heart disease!

    Here is the first in a series of videos that explains it all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPPYaVcXo1I

    The whole cholesterol = heart disease theory is based on unsound evidence!

    As for dietary cholesterol, it has little or no effect on blood levels of the average person. There are some that are sensitive, but most of us, at most, will see a very slight change (2-5 points maybe) with a higher level of dietary cholesterol!

    Also, read these articles about the original Framingham Heart study:
    http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cardiovascular-disease/framingham-follies/
    and
    http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cardiovascular-disease/framingham-flip-flop/

    Often cited, but no real evidence of a correlation or a danger of eating sat fats
    This is one of my favorite quotes:
    “For example, in Framingham, Mass, the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person’s serum cholesterol.”
    This is from the then Director of the study!

  23. Someone please help me on this typical argument I get caught in:

    “If you eat a big juicy steak (even grass fed), it has so much cholesterol it will kill your arteries.”

    I try to respond “But blood cholesterol and dietary cholesterol are not the same.”

    Am I correct?

    1. Yes. That is a very simplistic argument. It’s even joked about: “Call your cardiologist before you eat KFC’s Double-Down sandwich! They took out the bread!”

      But, the body first processes all the food you take in. It’s not like the fat and cholesterol that you eat immediately goes directly to the blood stream.

  24. Hey Mark,

    I’ve been on the primal diet for about 4 months and I’ve lost30 pounds.

    Ive been super happy with the results.
    However at my last physical I had got my bloodwork taken and found out that my cholesterol levels were worse than my last test about a year ago 30 pounds heavier!
    My ldl’s were significantly higher.(94 to 166)
    My HDL’s were significantly lower.(73 to 51)
    The only thing that improve was my tryglicerides (160 down to 78).

    I feel I have been following the plan.
    Do you have any ideas on what could have possibly gone wrong?

    1. Not to worry – most of your lipid markers will read high (and often VERY high) while losing weight quickly. When you keep your serum insulin levels low and are in ketosis for an extended period of time your fat stores are releasing tons of FFAs, as they should. When your weight levels off you should see levels normalize quickly. I went through the same situation recently – lost 80 lbs (from 272 to 182 at 6′, 2″) in about 9 months. Doc was super concerned about cholesterol and trig levels and wanted to statinize me after about 30 lbs of loss. I respectfully declined, kept on losing and feeling great, and have maintained the same weight for about 6 months now. Last test results came back two weeks ago with trigs at 48 and cholesterol levels perfect. When I told the doc it was all to be expected based on how the body liberates FFAs from fat stores and that it was a good thing I didn’t go on a statin (at age 28 mind you!) he said it could’ve only helped! Very frustrating.

      I asked for his email address so I could keep him abreast of the latest research on lipids and he said no thanks. The only thing worse than a doctor that doesn’t know what he’s doing is one that’s unwilling to learn. 🙁

      1. Thank you so much for sharing this story. This happened to me EXACTLY today (same age and after 30lbs of loss) and at first I allowed myself to be ashamed or felt like I had made some kind of mistake.

        1. SO SO GLAD to see this cuz I just had a blood work screening thing after about 30-35# loss and was lectured how paleo is not healthy, I need this drug and that and whatnot and it really put me thru hell because even though I was losing, it really tripped me up into doubting what I was doing. But the reasoning here makes sense, especially seeing others who lost about the same amount of weight and had the same issues with these tests. Phrew.

  25. Mark,
    I have the EXACT same question as Rob… I have been eating primal for 3 months(lost 22 lbs so far and am doing Crossfit). my data are as follows:
    2007 2010
    Total 234 274
    LDL 135 202
    Trig 225 97

    I have asked for a blood test to directly test LDL particle size, but doesn’t sound like that is possible though the system I am in. Thoughts on how to bring down the LDL primally(I have read Dr. Eades’ take –don’t get me wrong- i am not looking for crazy low, but getting it down to the 130 range?)? what would grock do?

    1. I understand that the research linking cholesterol to heart disease is flawe, however numbers like this still represent significant deviation from average.
      Ibelieve there is some optimal range and if going significantly above that we are getting to the unknown zone. I had LDL of 200 after 1 year on primal eating (gaining weight not loosing) si I adjusted my butter and coconut oil intake got to 100 6 months later.

    2. If you are still following this, my LDL went way up and the doc was panicked of course. I got the VLDL breakdown (very low density lipoprotein) and my VLDL was very low so little risk. Triglycerides super low. HLD healthy. Of course he recommended statins. For the record if this is my family level that is good as there is no history of heart disease at all in my family.

  26. apparently saturated fat raises BOTH HDL and LDL, polyunsaturated fat LOWERS both (but may have links to inflammation and cancer), and monunsaturated lowers HDL and increases HDL – the perfect solution.

    perhaps the ratio between hdl and ldl is more important than the absolute numbers – if they have both

    In rob’s example:the ratio did get worse, which seems worrying. Maybe sub out some saturated fat and polyunsaturated fats for monounsaturated fats?

    1. Fish oil is part of the PUFA family..I’ve been supplementing with it for a little over a year.
      Is this something that should possibly be changed?

  27. Excellent read. Love these definite guides as it truly tells the true tale among topics that people just simply do not understand.

    Thanks Mark!

  28. Peer-Reviewed Science

    Mark.

    As a strength trainer, I think this is the best site I’ve seen that focuses on proper exercise and a dietary practice that makes sense.

    Since inflammation appears the culprit in cholesterol problems (and many other problems) I would like to suggest a single link where only peer-reviewed studies that support the inflammation hypothesis (in all its forms) be listed.

    Perhaps you have this here already and I have not found it yet. The peer reviewed studies provide suitable ammo to address the many professionals I train (including MDs) who are still tethered to antiquated dietary beliefs, that nonetheless, have “papers” to provide support by Big Pharma.

    In just 2 months, my own results, following guidelines much as you recommend, have produced much lower LDL, Total Cholesterol, and Triglycerides (all now in good ranges)–while maintaining my bodyweight at 195lbs such that my MD is surprised when I told him I swapped out many carbs for protein and fats. Indeed, if this keeps up, I will remove the 10MG of LIPITOR I have used for years.

    But peer-reviewed work speaks more powerfully to many professionals. Peter Beck, above, who is an MD, also seeks peer-science, likely for the same reasons. This can only help…

    Thanks,

    Roy

  29. I’ve often heard the line, repeated above, that dietary changs have only a minimal (5%-10%) impact on blood cholesterol levels, despite the evidence of many people, including myself. After switching to a Paleo diet for about 3-4 months prior to a recent fasting blood cholesterol measurement I went from a Total of around 160 to a toatl of 231. HDL went up to 87 and TriG’s were super low at 27, so I know I have nothing to worry about, but just wanted to point out that dietary changes can have huge impacts on blood cholesterol.

  30. I just got blood work done:
    total:206
    tri: 53
    HDL: 54
    LDL: 136

    My doctor want says this is a bad place to be and I need to lower my LDL to below l20. All my other numbers on the list of acronyms are in the normal range. Any thoughts or comments? Or can I tell my doc where to go next we meet. I really like to tell people to where to go when they try to tell me how to live or what to do. (Prior military)

  31. @hunter: Your doctor is…well…nuts.

    Triglycerides under 100? HDL and TG about the same?

    With TG of 53, nearly ALL of your LDL is going to be the large, fluffy, healthy type.

    If your doctor is so adamant about your LDL, have him test for LDL fractions. It could be educational for him when they all come back as Pattern A (the good stuff).

    People would kill for your lipid profile…

  32. Thanks for clearing that up. I was really upset after leaving the doctors office that day. He made it seem like I was about to have a stroke during the check up and I am only 25.

  33. I’ve been on the PB for 80 days, before these were my lipid levels:

    Cholesterol: 241
    HDL: 49
    LDL: 177
    Tryglyceride: 75
    Weight: 194 pounds

    And in the latest results:

    Cholesterol: 385
    HDL: 66
    LDL: 307
    Tryglyceride: 64
    Weight: 175 pounds

    The 385 + 307 numbers freaked me out. I’ve been eating losts of bacon (uncured) (probably half a pound a day) + coconut oil + 6-8 eggs (grass fed) daily + grass feed beef hamburgers (2 – 3 daily) + lots of vegetables (Kale, broccoli, asparagus…)

    I’m thinking about cutting a bit in those fats (mainly bacon and Coconut oil)…

    Thoughts anyone?
    Thanks,

    Andres

    1. has anyone gotten back to you on this? i’m having the same kind of problem. i just had blood work done and my Dr says i have high blood pressure too. i don’t have old test results to compare with, but as of now…

      HDL- 85
      LDL- 155
      Cholesterol- 250

      she told me my cholesterol should be under 200 and that i need to stop eating as much fatty foods. the article above said that “230 or even 250 might not be dangerous at all if your HDL is high and your small particle LDL is low”. i don’t know if i fall into that category. i want to fix any problems that i might have before it’s too late. Can anyone give me advice or point me in the right direction?

      Thanks,

      Jess

      PS, I’ve been primal for about 3 months.

      1. Hey Jess,

        Did you get a reply on this one? I just got my bloodwork done and my doc said everything looks great, except my cholesterol it was 240. I told her about being PRIMAL and that is what I have been doing for about 5 months now…and she specifically said I need to cut back on red meat and bacon! I have been eating TONS of bacon… but I thought that was ok? I am confused, because I thought I was doing everything right…

        Thanks,
        Alisha

        1. Doctors are still on the “red meat is evil” phase, when you know, red meat can help with hypertension, is lower in dietary cholesterol than chicken ounce-for-ounce, and even when grainfed, have just as much “healthy fats” as “bad ones.” Not to mention that CLA (the true “trans fat” is a possible anti-cancer treatment) is also pretty high even in grainfed.

          Interesting note on “healthy” versus “non-healthy” fats:
          When compared to normal tissue, according to research done by Anthony Colpo, the scientists saw that 50% of the plaque was polyunsaturated, 30% monounsaturated, and 20% saturated. A bit backwards isn’t it?

          And if you get your bacon orgnic, that’s even less to worry about. The low-fat craze won’t end any time soon until anyone has the balls to say “uh, we got it backwards… Sorry for the billions dead… MY BAD”

  34. I’ve been studying diet and cholesterol for several years now and I’ve learned quite a bit about how I react to different diets.

    On a SHAD (standard American healthy diet) with lots of cardio, fruit, grains, and vegetables, my cholesterol rarely went above 200. However, my HDL constantly hovered around 30. I have a very strong history of both heart attack and stroke in my family with every man having either a stroke or heart attack before the age of 50, so I thought I was genetically screwed. I accepted the fat-heart disease hypothesis.

    I then made every attempt to reduce my cholesterol as low as possible by eating “right” and taking niacin. Keeping saturated fat to an absolute minimum and eating a lot of fruits, I dropped my total to 97. At that time, I had visited a cardiologist to get evaluated before I had my first heart attack. He was thrilled at my numbers, especially my LDL at 46!

    Shortly after that I read GCBC and started to move toward a lower carb diet. It took me six months to get my fat intake above 60% and carbs below 10%. A lipid panel showed my HDL increased to 71! My cardiologist still wanted me on a statin because my LDL was elevated at 84! I pointed out that there’s never been a study showing that lowering LDL decreased heart disease and he reluctantly agreed. At that point I fired him.

    Six months ago I gave up any type of artificial sweetener, and a weird thing happened to my taste buds. I started reacting to sweets with aversion. Anything sweeter than a berry was unpleasant. Although I never considered moving to Paleo, I made a decision a couple of months ago to not eat anything that could only be produced in an modern industrial process. That rules out any processed food and vegetable oil (except olive oil).

    I eat around 3500 calories a day (2750 are fat) and lift weights for 4 hours a week and walk my dogs about 3 hours a week. I walk around my office at work and everybody has sweets and processed carbs sitting around. I’m the weirdo that refuses to eat that stuff. Oh well

    1. *insert YO DAWG WE HEARD joke that I can’t be arsed to think of here*

      Anyway, I eat about 80% fat and 15-20% protein (carbs are in there still) on most days, I don’t even bother getting my cholesterol checked, my CRP is hovering around .7 (1 mg/dl is seen as “the upper limit”), I eat all naturally raised meats, so it actually makes it harder to get the fat. But I commend you on not taking the USDA’s foiled attempt to make you sick and eat about 16 ounces of rice a day.

      I’m trying to stay off anything that will lower my lipids. I honestly don’t care about lipids anymore, I’m not worried about insulin and leptin concerns that would oxidize LDL in my body… I am only concerned about: Getting enough exercise (not a problem), homocysteine, and C-reactive Protein. Anything else to me is a waste of time, imo.

  35. Just got my blood work done.

    Total: 225 (considered High)
    Tryglycerides: 96
    HDL: 72
    VLDL: 19
    LDL: 134 (considered High)
    LDL/HDL Ratio: 1.9

    What do you all think?

  36. Can someone please answer Alex’s questions, asked on July 15th, 2009.
    I’m worried about that too

  37. “You seem to be saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease, but inflammation is? Is that to say that there is no limit on cholesterol as long as you keep inflammation at bay?

    very confusing and feels like I am gambling with my health by eating
    contrary to ‘common knowledge’” ^

    1. Our current “common knowledge” is created by advertisers to sell processed foods, degraded meats, fruits and vegetables, and medicines. Not so good, huh? The idea here is to find comfort in the foods human beings ate safely and productively for millenia and to determine whether or not your genetics enable you to tolerate some of the things that came along in the last few thousand years. So you’re really returning to common knowledge, not flouting it.

  38. Thanks Mary. What’s worrying me is I’m trying to put on a little weight, but how can I do it without worsening my cholesterol. E.g. the 12 eggs on the other post. My cholesterol’s borderline high already, but wouldn’t eating all those eggs make it even worse? I read through this page and the posts, and it’s the posts where people’s bad levels of cholesterol went Up that worry me, because how would you ignore That? I know cholesterol is beneficial for different things, but too much of anything, esp HDL isn’t good!

    1. Every day for breakfast I have a four-egg omelet that has coconut oil, bacon, cheese, and sun-dried tomatoes (& occasionally freezer-dried blueberries- don’t laugh until you’ve tried it.)

      My total cholesterol is under 160. I’m trying to increase mine to 180.

  39. Thanks Ed. What’s your cholesterol like? I’d still love to gain muscle /weight without going too far in the wrong direction. Should I just go crazy on the fats? Does anyone have meal ideas for a healthy weight gain? I’m 128 lbs (female), trying to gain a little weight

    1. I’m a bit of a geek, so I already had a spreadsheet with food values from the USDA National Nutrient Database. With that spreadsheet and a set of scales, I was able to determine how much fat (& which types), protein and carbohydrates I ate.

      I pretty much eat the same breakfast, lunch and snacks everyday, so I decided to change my diet slowly. This was important for me because adding fat to my diet allowed my body to handle the additional load intestinally.

      Gaining weight has never been my goal (just the opposite). I can provide advice on unhealthy ways to gain weight, so I can’t help you there.

  40. Have you read Anthony Colpo’s “The Great Cholesterol Con?”

    Not to mention the simple fact that 75% of people who have heart attacks have normal cholesterol. The lipoid hypothesis used 7 countries when there were 22 countries with data available. Also, if you look at MONICA, the fact you can keep the cholesterol myth alive is just astonishing, as there is little-to-no correlation between deaths and cholesterol.

    Other good reads were Dwight Lundell’s “The Great Cholesterol Lie” and Uffe Ravnskov’s “Fat and Cholesterol are good for you.”

    I haven’t believed the cholesterol myth for quite some time, nor the “Metabolic Syndrome” or “Syndrome X.” There was also a post in the Colombo Herald where I read they were going to put statins in our fast food! What in the world? And also they recommended kids as young as 6 have statins, sure, money is definitely not a factor.

  41. I’m not buying the whole ‘anti-oxidant’
    hype. The ant-oxidants found in plants are FOR THE PLANTS! Cancer, tumors, bacteria,fungals, and whatever other bad guys are anaerobic by nature, not aerobic. Anaerobic=no oxygen, aerobic=oxygen. So why would you take
    “anti” oxidants?

  42. Well, looks like I’m not alone in this. 🙂
    After about 2 months in a non-radical Primal lifestyle:
    # Fasting Glucose = 86 [mg/dL]
    # Blood Pressure: 90 / 50 [mmHg]
    # Total Cholesterol = 275 [mg/dL]
    # HDL = 56 [mg/dL]
    # LDL = 210 [mg/dL]
    # Triglycerides = below 90 [mg/dL] (too low for the chemist’s machine to get right)

    Now, I’ve stumbled upon a very interesting article that clarifies that the most telling indicator of CVD risk is actually TG/HDL. If you’re below 2.0, you’re ok.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2664115/

    Assuming a TG count anywhere between 70 and 90, this yields for me:
    # Trigl./HDL = 1.25 ~ 1.60

    So, although the doctors in my family are scared about my LDL=210, I’m ok with it because I know that I have a pretty low Trigliceride level and a relatively good HDL. Plus, the blood pressure is pretty low. And, of course, I’ve become pretty leaner and stronger too.

    The reason I speculate a 70 < TG < 90 is because I had TG=73 a couple of years ago when doing Paleo (without sat fat). And now that I'm doing Primal with lots of sat fat and very little carbs, I expect to see the TG drop even lower.

    So, Mark and all the guys and gals here, what do you have to comment on this study I linked up?

  43. Mark, There has been substantial evidence that saturated anima fat promotes arterial disease. Even so-called grass fed beef. There was a man who was on the Atkins diet who sued Dr. Atkins when he developed heart disease after 1 year on his high fat animal diet. For that reason I do not eat red meat, instead I eat lean turkey breast which I boil in hot water to reduce the fat even more. I do think your understanding of the correct diet for the human specie is right on the money.. However, too many carbs can easily sabotage this diet. Grok was, after all ,on a very low carb diet with only seasonal fruit as his main carb. Please respond, thank you

    1. I just ate a big steak, a bunch of kale wilted in cocunut oil with some whole cream dripped over it.

      Everyone (mostly coworkers)comments on my physical improvement as I am obviously leaner, more muscular and strongerthan severalmonths ago. Then they don’t believe me despite my improved lipidprofile over last year before transitioning to primal.

      Then they gawk when we go out to eat and I get a 16 ounce pork chop T bone and put butter on top! .

      Thanks Mark for helping shatter a myth.

    2. Charles, please don’t come in here and rant about “substantial evidence” that you don’t bother to provide links for. It’s rude.
      Also, I hope you enjoy that boiled turkey breast. Yes, indeed, that just sounds yummy! You know, even if Mark and the hundreds of thousands of paleo/primal eaters in the world, not to mention the millions of ancestors throughout history turned, out to be wrong, I’m OK with it. I’d rather die young, happy, and well fed than live to be a 100 eating the disgusting crap you just described.

  44. Of course, what is so scary about all this cholesterol con is now the ‘scientists’ are using teleoanalysis to prove that cholesterol causes heart disease. Teleoanalysis “provides the answer to studies that would be obtained from studies that have not been done and often, for ethical and financial reasons, could never be done.” Law and Wald – Combining data from different types of study. So this means that you can prove things you know to be true despite there being no studies done. Awesome.

  45. I just had my results having eaten high fats, higher proteins, low carb for a year and a half or more, and my total cholesterol is *very* high. 433 in American money. Any thoughts, anyone? Here are the numbers;

    Total 433
    HDL 73.5 (rounded up)
    Tri 50.3 (rounded up)

    That means my Tri/HDL ratio is very low (0.68), but I must have loads of LDL going on.

    1. I’m in the same boat, after almost two years being primal, my numbers are extremely similar to yours. I feel great, and I’m stronger than ever, the problem is that last month I left my 8-5 job to start my own company, and I could not get any insurance company to insure me (so I’m under the expensive COBRA)… Rats!…

      1. Interesting. Sorry about the insurance thing, but good to hear you feel well.

        In my case, I wonder whether the cholesterol is elevated because there’s some sort of healing going on, or whether I do just eat too much for me at the moment. My results were marked “severe hypercholesterolaemia in the range associated with FH (familial hypercholesterolaemia)..but noted “normal trigylcerides, TSH and glucose”, so as to underscore for my GP it’s not being down to issues with diabetes or thyroid, I would think.

  46. I’m in the same boat guys. I got blood work done last week & my Dr called me very concerned by the results. It actually scared the heck out of me. He wanted me on Crestor the next day for a least a month. I’ve been full paleo/primal for the last 18 months & he spooked me so much, that I don’t know what to do.

    Total Cholesterol 471
    HDL 66
    LDL 391
    VDL 14
    TRG 68
    Chol/HDL Risk Ratio 7.1

    I’ve been having chest discomfort of and on for the last few weeks. Even moreso after my Doctors message. I feel completely torn. I stopped eating whole eggs immediately & switched back to egg whites out of shear fear. Can anyone please help shed some light on this & help me, my family feel more at ease. Thank you-JC

  47. I have been following this discussion with great interest. I am not a doctor, and I don’t think you will get a doctor or Mark to comment on the cholesterol numbers reported here. But I say that if you have total cholesterol in the 300 and 400 range, you are in trouble, and are either doing something wrong or this is not for you. No Grok ever ate a steak with butter, or butter for that matter. They were all lactose intollerant. And they never ate coconut oil, olive oil or any other kind of oil. These are all refined foods that strip one element from its dietary context. How many olives do you have to eat to get 2 tablespoons of olive oil? Not that a Grok ever ate an olive, because you can’t eat them off the tree.

    I think its a huge mistake to conflate the low-carb thinking with paleo. Low-carb accepts many western diet precepts (e.g. refined oils and factory meat) that paleo does not.

    I drove my total cholesterol from 214 to 141 in 8 mos. on grass fed buffalo and beef and fish no more than twice a week, oat bran and berries for breakfast everyday, zero dairy, very little sugar, and otherwise cooked whole grains and tons of vegetables and beans (almost every meal). Basically, I tried to zero out saturated fat from sources other than fish and meat, and boost fiber to 50 – 60 grams per day. It was easy, but it’s only the starting point. I think paleo may offer the long term solution and I am going to work this to see what effect it has on my physiology. One of these days I will post my food logs.

    Don’t trick yourself into thinking you can survive with blood chemistry that far out of whack. This is supposed to solve the western diet problems, and if it is not, don’t stick with what you’re doing.

    I hope this isn’t seen as negative, it’s not meant to be, but some commenters are reporting serious health concerns, and they should not be glossed over or ignored.

    1. fyi … low cholesterol (generally defined as less than 160, more likely less than 180) is not good for you. Increases risk of hemorraghaic stroke, vitamin d deficiency , problems with hormone production, etc etc. you might try letting your cholesterol go back up a bit.

      Here’s an article from aha (1995 no less!) to back up what i’m saying. you can google cholesterol deficiency too: http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/92/9/2365.full

      1. “We observed a significant risk of cancer, noncardiovascular noncancer, and all-cause mortality in men whose TC levels changed to low (<180 mg/dL) from the middle (180 to 239 mg/dL) level at baseline. The above finding for cancer mortality agrees with results from the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial,4 in which participants who died of cancer experienced within 1 year of death a fall from baseline in serum cholesterol level that was 22.7 mg/dL (0.59 mmol/L) greater than that of surviving participants of the same randomization group and smoking status. These results also support longitudinal data published by Pekkanen et al57 from the Seven Countries Study in which a decline in TC also tended to be associated with death caused by cancer among the older cohort. A decreasing TC also was associated with elevated overall mortality and cardiovascular mortality in both men and women in the 30-year follow-up of the Framingham Study.58"

        http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/92/9/2396.full

        Not trying to scare you, just better that you hear it now than later, since a doctor will NEVER point this out to you.

        1. I don’t know what to make of that correlation. Borrowing from another blog, the following was reported:

          Numbers for males:

          Hadza 114
          Kalahari San (Bushmen) 130
          Congo Pygmies 101
          Australian aborigines 146
          Canadian eskimos 141

          Eaton SB, Konner M, Shostak M. Stone agers in the fast lane: chronic degenerative diseases in evolutionary perspective. Am J Med. 1988 Apr;84(4):739-49.

          Obviously, these are lower than 170. I think its tough to draw conclusions (for oneself, it appears impossible on a scientific basis) except perhaps that the SAD is problematic regardless how your cholesterol reacts.

        2. 1) Using sick and/or dying people to try to establish a baseline for healthy people is fallacious.

          2) I think that the subjects’ TCs fell due their oncoming cancers, not that the drop in TC caused their cancer deaths.

    2. Having been put on statins and egg-whites only with white meat occasionally, for some 10 years, my LDL came down from approx 200 to 86 last year. I thought it’s the time to try out whether I was one of the minority who was a hyper-responder to dietary chol, with 1 whole egg daily and red meat occasionally. Turns out I was, for LDL went to 175 in a year, TC to 250, and HDL only marginally from 44 to 49.

      I now feel the urge to try out the theory that it’s inflammation that should be monitored, not chol. Have found CRP is -ve, and if homocysteine is also low, I’ll feel free to carry on with the modified diet.

      However, at what stage should one think that the blood chemistry is “…blood chemistry is (too) far out of whack…”. Should it be at TC of 300, and LDL of 200, or what? Would appreciate views and guidance.

  48. I’ve always maintained a healthy diet and have been pretty athletic. This year, at age 52, I a had a stent placed for a coronary plaque. I had chest pain while on a group training ride on my road bike ! I’m now on 40 mg Lipitor, which I freakin’ hate – my neuromuscular system has gone way down hill (many crashes on rides I used to have no difficulty with on my mountainbike) My cardiologist won’t decrease my dose because of the whole stent thing. I take coQ10 and pycnogenol. Do you have any other recommendations ?

  49. Been trying to get my head around this subject of cholesterol. I finally understand! This article is Brilliant!!! Thank you. I am emailing it to a number of ppl 🙂

  50. I’m checking back into this discussion because 4.5 months after adopting the Paleo diet, I got some blood work done and wanted to share the results. Unfortunately, this same time frame has been exceptionally sedentary, but I am just starting to ramp it back up, and am looking forward to incorporating some Mark’s idea’s into the mix.

    2/5/2010
    Weight: 200
    Total: 189
    LDL: 132
    HDL: 42
    Trig: 74

    4/17/12
    Weight: 165
    Total: 144
    LDL: 97
    HDL: 39
    Trig: 41

    So far, so good! If (and its a big if) a lower cholesterol profile means there’s less chance of CAD, then this approach to diet and nutrition appears to be the answer, at least for me. And this should keep the MD’s from trying to get me on a statin which they were threatening several years ago when my totals were over 200 and trigs around 100. Oh yea, age 50.

    The remarkable thing is the lower Trigs. It appears the critics may be correct and that sugar and refined carbs drive that (and LDL) higher, not dietary fat.

  51. I am 37yo, 155lbs, 5’11”.
    I have always lived in Italy, using a pretty diversified diet, no excesses, no sodas, and you can imagine a lot of “pasta”.
    From 2006 to 2009 I lived in the US, where I had plenty of meat-burgers-steak-porterhouse, etc etc, terrific meat.
    I took my blood test in 2009 and both my total col. and trig were pretty high.

    After I got back on track with a diversified mediterranean diet (no excess of read meat, no more than 2 eggs per week) my levels improved, and all the “ratios & indexes” are ok. My latest results are the following:
    Col ToT: 260
    HDL: 90
    LDL: 167
    trigl: 67

    I’d like to lower my LDL, but I dont know where to tackle my diet, which seems pretty good. I dont even eat pasta that often anymore, once a week at most. Not a big eater of cheese either.
    I spoke with many australian friends, and they all eat 2 eggs every day for breakfast and they are fine. I read that 20% of our Col. comes from food, and the other 80% is ereditary.

    1. Dr. Krauss, who originally discovered the subcomponents of LDL, indicated that LDL count – as derived by current lab tests/procedures – is basically a useless number. He states it would be better to pay attention to your HDL number.

      HDL counts were inversely related to the small-partical dense LDL. So, high HDL corresponds to low small-partical LDL. Low HDL corresponds to high counts of small-particle LDL.

      The interview can be found here:
      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35058886/ns/health-heart_health/t/small-ldl-particles-pose-biggest-risk/

      I haven’t read anything newer (the interview is 2010), so I’m unsure what new research he’s done.

  52. I’ve read thru these replies until my head hurts, and I’m a paramedic. I just never cared much about the finer points of cholesterol when someone is bleeding to death. My question is simple: Can eating the healthier PB diet with foods such as avocado’s, nuts and organic proteins in higher quantities (because I don’t eat carbs and I get hungry!) cause your overall cholesterol to rise? Mine did about 50 points after eating primal/lower carb for about a year. Everything else measured great but total cholesterol went to 228. I’m not worried but I am curious and I’m sure others are also. I do love avocado’s and I have been known to make a meal of them. I also eat salmon and fish very regularly.

  53. Great article! I have just recently listened to audio talks of Dr Ross Walker (Aus Cardiologist), Prof Peter Dingle (Aus Toxicologist & Author), and especially Bill Davidson (Naturopath and Chiro) who ALL subscribe to this theory. Davidson almost word for word (without the humour) describes this very phenomenon. Just to add some more advise, if your ratio of HDL:LDL is 1:5 (e.g. cholesterol level is 7 but with 2 HDL to 5 LDL) it is perfectly normal. Yet a doctor would say a level of 7 is bad. Like Seth Godin would say, BROKEN. Let’s keep the Grok health community alive.

  54. Yes! I have the same problem with my doctor, refusal to learn anything he doesn’t read in a biased medical journal. Even the great Dr. Oz is seeing the cholesterol myth exposed for what it is which I give him so much credit for his willingness to correct a wrong way of thinking.

  55. After 3 years of lowcarb/primal eating (around 185g proteins + 170g fat + 140g carbs daily for the last 8 months), my lipid profile looks like this:
    – TC 220
    – LDL 106
    – HDL 110
    – Tri 22
    Also, no more running, only walking 5 km/day and strength training 2 x 1 hour/week.
    Of course, the TC value of 220 was underlined by the doctor for being too high 😀

  56. I have been following the Primal/Paleo lifestyle now for 2 years and it has been great. Last year our work decided in order to be eligible for insurance we needed to have health screenings. My numbers in October 2013 were great 82 LDL, 82 HDL, 48 Triglycerides, and 173 total cholesterol. Went back a year later October 2014 and my results for LDL 100 and HDL 86 went up but not much. However, total cholesterol 223 and Triglycerides 184 went through the roof! my LDL and HDL ratios are fine. My question is “how in the world do my tri’s spike 136 points without changing my lifestyle? the same with my total cholesterol, a 50 point increase. I was told to reduce my red meat intake. I follow paleo/primal rarely indulging in foods high in carbs or processed sugars. Any suggestions, is there a cause for concern?

    1. There’s not enough info in your post to respond. Age, height, weight, and activity level, and diet composition (daily intake of meat/fat (quality of sources?), plant, carbs (grains and sugars), and ETOH) would help. Do you test only once a year? Could be an outlier. You might want to have it done again.

  57. My cholesterol is in the optimal range, Total: 158, LDL: 91, HDL: 61, Tri: 97 but my LP(a)-P is high risk at 177. Anyone have any suggestions to address the LP(a) issue? Thanks!

  58. If you have the bad genetics for cholesterol can you eat a high fat low carb diet and improve your cholestrol?

  59. Yes, I have been on keto, and just recently introduced carbs. I’m talking sweet potato, more vegetables, and little fruit. My blood test for work was done, and they gave me weird results in my opinion, but if they are true I may need to see a cardiologist. I had total at 124, HDL at 18, LDL < 50, Triglycerides < 50, glucose 90. It just seemed weird to me that I couldnt get a direct number from them on LDL and TG. But to have my HDL so low, as well as everything else rather low, I feel the test results may have been inaccurate. I Was 12 hours fasted and It was done from finger prick. Looking to get actual blood drawn for testing to compare the two and find out whats going on. Hope its not something to worry about. I hear low HDL can be signs of CAD.