I wish this were true, but I’d propose this clarification …
My understanding of the results as presented is not that LMHRs have lower CAC scores eating carb-restricted diets than other (well-matched) cohorts (participants in the Miami study) … it’s that they are effectively no different.
Some have higher CAC scores, some do not. There’s a range that’s roughly equivalent to the range of those who do not eat keto-style diets. The CAC score distributions of the (carb-restricted) LMHRs vs non-keto Miami study subjects were statistically no different.
This does allow us to conclude that high LDL attributable to low-carb eating does not (over the timeframe studied) cause elevated CAC scores. But I believe that’s about as far as we can go.
The other thing is that there was no relationship between whatever you get from their fancy test and LDL. That is, if LDL (or ApoB or whatever is the deadly lipid-du jour) is causing atherosclerosis, then higher LDL should mean more calcified and non-calcified plaque. But that doesn’t appear to be the case.
Meaning that something else is causative.
Something I’ve always wondered. Say we find a “cause”. If there were two people, one with LDL of 250 and one with LDL of 500, and they have the exact same “level” of the “cause”, would the person with LDL of 500 have twice the atherosclerosis of the person with LDL of 250? My guess: no. But I’m not sure.
Sorry to be unclear, so thanks for the clarification.
All I really meant to say or imply was that they didn’t have any calcification–yet. We’ll see what the results are when everyone is re-checked in a year’s time.
Well, the only reason I’m suggesting otherwise (because I think you’re correct), is because of studies of Lp(a). If you have something wrong with you, people with higher Lp(a) tend to have worse outcomes. Now, Lp(a) is different from LDL, but maybe something could be said for more LDL = “better” repair, which means more atherosclerosis.
I can’t figure out how you’d ever test this, though.
not just questions either, it’s the lack of interest so many people show in nutrition, and because of that they’re health can be failing. I was with a gal lastnight helping her figure out what the pills she has piled up from her doctor as she’s sick, and all they do is give another pill which is probably to try and “fix” the previous pill’s side-effects Of course all she can do is talk to her doctor, I told her she needs to ask the questions she’s asking me, to her doctor instead
Welcome Stefana. Taking medications is always a personal choice. My personal belief is that medicines can be OK on a temp basis for pain, infections, etc, but I think our society has become far too dependent on them to manage chronic “disease.” I too plan not to take any medications on a chronic basis. A few years back I got up to about hypertensive levels, where BP medicines get considered. Rather than just rely on that, I decided to try to lose weight and change my health, which is how I fell into keto, low carb, and this forum. People here have been very inspiriing and helpful, especially for my wife.
Anyway, your labs are great from a 1970s perspective when LDL of 300 was the upper limit of normal, and before statins were invented. Trigs normally go down on low carb, which I believe all doctors would say is good. The only thing they are triggered on is the LDL of 220 as now that is considered “higher” than normal. I personally wouldn’t worry about a LDL particle test. I believe that is a red herring. For two years now I have ordered an oxLDL test, but this year Labcorp stopped offering it, and I had to get it elsewhere on my own… it was 47… about half of last year. I believe the quality of my LDL is much more important to heart disease than the quantity… you can read about studies etc on my thread in this forum here: Discussion of dietary cholesterol and cardiovascular disease
I believe the number of LDL particles is only important to the extent that means there is more LDL to potentially become oxidized on a bad/SAD diet. So, my answer was to correct my diet… and my blood pressure dropped 40+ points from before I began, my varicose vein pain has gone away as well as some of the spider veins in my foot. I would have no objections to a CAC test… maybe that would relieve their concerns, and it would give you a good baseline to measure against future possible issues. I kinda wish I had one as I believe I have reversed some CAD, but don’t have much objective evidence to prove that.
Can anyone tell me why a doctor would give a patient a statin when their total cholesterol is 179?
Their trigs are 59
Hdl 91
so I get .64 ratio
She’s 81 and even her NP told her she should take the statins, 2 kinds, because her numbers too high for “bad cholesterol” as they put it. I saw the printed out reports from the doctor, so no confusion possible. Denise
Is there another year’s worth of scans in the works? I had the sense that the study was over as far as it was designed to go. I sure hope the tracking continues.
The numbers don’t seem to matter much anymore. Every few years they are dropping the ceiling on when to prescribe statins. 300, 250, 200, 180. It just keeps dropping. The last I’ve heard was 150. There have been rumors that the powers that be are suggesting that everyone should just be on a statin as a matter of course including children. At one time there was a discussion of putting statins in our water supply like they do fluoride.
It’s totally out of control and it’s all due to big pharma and profits. Statins are a billion dollar a year money maker.
Denise… makes about as much sense as my cardiologist putting me on blood pressure lowering meds, out of sheer habit. Heart problems usually equal high blood pressure, I guess. (Mine is 80s over 50s.)
That pill took me down… literally, like to the floor.
Good grief!
That is disgusting to me to hear but I believe it, sure hadn’t heard a word about it but I wasn’t looking until I heard what the doctors were prescribing to my neighbor gal
@Geezy56 and @robintemplin thank you both, I’ll let her know I heard back on it, and she knows how things are really getting weird. It will have to be her decision whether to trust doctors or not, I pretty much do not, but sadly, none of know when we might actually need one Denise
Current official statin guidelines say it can benefit people who have LDL cholesterol (not total cholesterol) over 190. From what I learned on this forum, what matters is the HDL to Triglycerides ratio; not LDL. Being that her ratio is really good, she shouldn’t be on statins at all.
And on top of it, the minimal risk reduction (not significant) is really only demonstrated post a cardiac event, not before. So if your friend didn’t have a heart attack already then statins are pretty much useless.
It is also vert relevant if she eats a regular American diet or low carb/keto/carnivore. High cholesterol mixed with a high carb diet is very problematic.
Because studies show an extremely high correlation between the number of people taking a statin and the annual bonuses of pharmaceutical company executives.
oops, sorry @PaulL, thought that last message was to me about “tests” baseline etc. but it’s for Joey
I think so Paul, I do see her willingly taking all her scripts every day. She’s been taking a thyroid medication for 30 some years because she’s convinced she’ll die without it. I don’t tell her any different. I live around many elderly that have literally turned their very lives over to pills, and I know not to give them any advice. When they wonder why I am so active, I tell them it’s my Keto lifestyle including exercise, they sort of just change the subject. They are stuck in reasons/excuses why they “can’t”, and mostly happy with their pills.
I did feel it was a good idea to see if some of her symptoms were caused by any of the drugs. But she would worm her way out it, kind denial I guess. It’s just so sad now that I understand the possibilities of relying on nutrition for some issues we may come by. I also know that sometimes 'scripts are necessary, I just can’t see anything being takin long-term without looking for alternatives to at least try, specifically nutrition and exercise alternatives
They told me when I first got sober that sometimes we just have to step over the bodies and move on. It sounds callous, but it amounts to what you just posted: you can’t help someone who’s not interested in being helped. Unfortunately.
Of course all she can do is talk to her doctor, I told her she needs to ask the questions she’s asking me, to her doctor instead 
It’s becoming very clear isn’t it, you get a Gold Star for this 