How close do ketone levels inversly reflect triglyceride levels?

#1

I can easily measure ketones at home. But I need a lab test to check on trigs.
Trigs have been declining over three tests in the last four months. But ketones have not really come up much. Still not exceeding 0.5 on a regular basis.
With diligent low carb intake I am seeing the trigs declining, but not the ketones increasing as much as I would expect.

Am I impatiently parsing things too finely? Or is there a reasonable inverse correlation between triglycerides and ketones that just takes time to show up?

(Bob M) #2

I don’t think they are related at all. My trigs have gotten to a relatively low level, and have been at that level for years (though trigs are variable), while my ketones have gone down and down. Could get 1-3 mmol/l blood ketones or higher 4-5 years ago; I stopped taking them when I was getting 0.1-0.2 every morning, no matter what I did.

#3

Thanks. This perspective helps.

(Joey) #4

As @ctviggen notes, there is no meaningful inverse relationship between the two. Yes, if you’re not eating carbs, your body will produce ketones - but after an adjustment period, no more than needed. More than that would be wasteful.

Elevated trigs are dangerous to your health. Western SAD diet leaves us with dangerous levels. Less is better.

BTW, how are you feeling?

Congrats on your excellent results! :vulcan_salute:

#5

And if you’re measuring ketones with urine strips, all it shows you is what your body didn’t use for the day. Maybe it’s been burning most of them. My first two months I only got over .5 two separate days, to a 1.5. But when I became fat adapted, in my third month, now I’m generating 2s and 4s. And some days pop back down to .5.

Your body is healing organs and muscles and repairing inner damage, and will be doing that for a while. It’s really busy and I bet it’s burning most of the ketones you make.

(Allie) #6

Mine were off the charts last time I had them checked (2020) and definitely no SAD here :woman_shrugging:t3:

(Bob M) #7

Do you drink coffee? Even decaf?

There are also folks who have high trigs, but the vast majority lower their trigs. Always, there’s an exception.

(Joey) #8

Interesting … Mind if I ask: Was that the only out of whack result on that lipid panel? How was your HDL on the same blood draw?

(Allie) #9

Actually I misremembered, it’s cholesterol that was off the scale… I’ve not had any checks done since.

image
image.png730Ă—809 15.9 KB

(Joey) #10

Boy, I’ll say you misremembered! :wink: Your Trig/HDL ratio is awesome… the envy of every human lab rat. Congratulations on solid lipid health. :+1:

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #11

I agree with Joey. Your ratio of triglycerides to HDL is 0.53, which means that your cardiovascular risk is minimal, and your LDL sizes fall into the healthy Pattern A. In fact, if I am reading the LDL value correctly, the only reason it is considered high is because the statin manufacturers lowered the “healthy” level from something around 8.3 to something around 7.2 (again, assuming I’ve got the translation correct).

#12

You do not state what your goal is. Trigs are delining, this is good. Weight loss?

(Bob M) #13

I agree with Joey and PaulL: you have an admirable trig/HDL ratio. The lowest mine ever gets is just about 1. My trigs get fairly low, but I still have “low” HDL (mid 50s in US units).

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #14

I believe that 1.0 in U.S. measurements is equivalent to around 0.45 in European measurements. So you are doing well, regardless.