I need the groups help for my spouse lipid results

(Robin) #21

Hmmm….I never thought of it that way.

(Geoffrey) #22

I learned that statins are worthless if you’ve never had a heart attack and only very minimal if you have, so I quit taking them.
I’ve also learned that there are no causation studies that show high LDL’s cause heart attacks. Along with that there have been studies that show that the majority of all heart attacks are in people with low LDL’s.
We have been fed a lot of lies over the years and it has created a huge fear in people.
Doctors don’t treat the illness, only the symptoms and the illness is generally a result of poor nutrition. But then again, doctors don’t understand what true nutrition is.

(Barbara M) #23

He definitely won’t take a statin.

He further researched the specific drug and dose recommended. Finding it had previously been recalled.

He has a few wtf moments asking me why any provider would recommend a recalled drug and why docs don’t have nutritional education.

I don’t believe anyone has the exact answer to explain it. Many have taken a good attempt and I’ve watched a bunch of videos of that . One of the favorite discussed the statin 'absolute risk vs relative risk’s in showing any improvement.

(Peter - Don't Fear the Fat ) #24

Good question
They have about one day on it probably (UK) … General practitioner here just like to link a health issue with a drug and in other cases will refer you to a specialist like a dietician or nutrition, and in my experience they just peddle the same (out of date) old crap.

(John Bradshaw) #25

My old endocrinology Professor, in the late 70’s early 80’s, when statins were just starting to gain popularity, said there was as much correlation between cholesterol and heart disease as there was between your age and the number of telegraph poles in your street!! He knew what the drug companies were doing.

(Doug) #26

:smile: Ha! That’s great.

(Central Florida Bob ) #27

Didja ever notice that they hardly ever talk about the studies that show people who survive longer into old age are associated with higher LDL levels? I’m sure the experts must think those studies are mistakes. They’re experts! The nerve of reality to disagree with them!

The other half of the saying “correlation does not equal causation” is “lack of correlation definitely means lack of causation.” So higher LDL levels can’t possibly shorten lives.

#28

His Doc can’t “require” him to do anything. That’s his choice.

That’s simply not true in the mainstream, people take the USDA ruling years ago about dietary cholesterol no longer being a “nutrient of concern” and twist it to mean what they like, but serum levels are a different story and they’re still very much paid attention to. While it’s true the LDL by itself doesn’t tell us much, doesn’t mean anybody should be ok with off the charts levels of it either.

Says who? I’m clearly pro keto, but those people millions of years ago weren’t us, didn’t live our lives, didn’t live in the environment we live in, and most importantly, if we’re going back MILLIONS of years, they very literally weren’t the same species as us.

He’s right, eating fresh game that was in fact running around all day, not poisoned from birth and barely moving, those animals also weren’t confined and eating garbage their whole lives. Just as we weren’t the same humans that were around back then, the animals they ate aren’t what we eat now. I’m all for looking back into the past, but you gotta be realistic as well. Their food sources aren’t what we have as much as we weren’t the humans of the past, especially difference species of humans.

He should absolutely get an NMR, even if he stopped eating keto, that doesn’t equal going back to SAD either. There’s a LOT of room between those two. Does he track what he eats? If so, is he eating the super unnecessary amounts of cholesterol that many keto’rs do? We’re told by the official cholesterol guys in our space like Feldman and Cummins that it doesn’t have a huge effect on our serum levels, but I’ve got many years of labs that show that’s very much NOT the case for me, my wife’s is about the same. We’re all different. We’re still learning a lot at this point, and just because a big fluffy LDL particle may not harden into a plaque, that in no way automatically means having really high serum cholesterol is automatically not a concern just because our original reason for fearing it was because of the plaque concern. Given that it’s impossible to troubleshoot what you’re ignoring, if he’s not tracking I’d start there, even if it’s only a couple of weeks to get an idea of the averages. It could be as simple as a couple small tweaks.

My cholesterol was in the 250-280 range when I ate standard keto, I do a hybrid of CKD and TKD now, still pretty low carb by “normal” standards and the carbs I get are good ones, and around my workouts. My fat isn’t low by normal standards, but low by most keto ones. My cholesterol averages in the 130-160 range now. I still feel fine, have no issues, and my Thyroid values have improved a lot with that change, they were getting worse for years the other way. Gotta tailor what you do to how your body reacts, and not to a cookie cutter “rule” of how to do it.

#29

I totally agree with the part that so many things changed during the last millions of years, the animals aren’t the same, the soil isn’t the same, we aren’t the same, our lifestyle isn’t even similar to the people just hundreds of years ago etc. And anyway, maybe my ancient anchestors just survived somehow and I can do better at some points…? While there happened negative changes, we got better at certain things, see supplements (that I don’t take, actually but it’s not the point).

It’s good it’s not a problem, at least for the healthy among us :slight_smile: As I can’t avoid eating very high cholesterol, my woe would get much less healthy if I changed that, I would feel it immediately. But a healthy body should manage the levels just fine.
But of course, if someone consider it important, make a bloodwork (or what is what people do to figure these things out, I have exactly zero experience with it) and change their woe is possible. I just fail to see the problem with eating a lot of cholesterol in my own case.

Cookie cutter rules are stupid, indeed. It may be fine as a starting point for someone not knowing their body well enough yet but people really overdo it and imagine we all need the same. We don’t.

(B Creighton) #31

Obviously, he is fat adapted, so gets most of his energy from burning fats. This requires fat transport in LDL particles, which requires the liver to make them. That infers a bit higher LDL level. By itself, I wouldn’t worry about it. However, I recently brought up the subject of oxLDL in a thread. I do test for that, and wish to keep my oxLDL level lower than 100. I believe modern science is implicating oxLDL in heart disease rather than just LDL. oxLDL stands for oxidized LDL, and there are modern blood tests for it. I would request that tested. Again, if it is lower than 100, I believe the risk of heart disease is far reduced. I think others have suggested getting a CAC test. That is definitely more relevant than plain LDL levels.

#32

Did your cholesterol go down just from adding carbs and removing fats? Or did you change up the types of fats you were eating as well?

And also curious if your cholesterol went down only after you lost your excess fat or while you were still losing it. I have read that during fat loss, cholesterol can temporarily be higher.

#33

Yes, always the same fats. The only fats I’ve ever avoided was trans fats, which these days it’s basically impossible to get anyways.

While I was still losing it, it was definitely my intake doing it. But it’s true as we’re losing if in large amounts you can see it on cholesterol tests, usually the trigs that jump up. At times my doc has actually asked if I’m avoiding fat and to get it up a little, on one test my total came back at 110. Was still losing fat then too!