My progress, saturated fat, cholesterol, and the long term

ldl
blood
science
fat
cholesterol

(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #1

Hey guys,

TL;DR: I’m a 37 year old Aussie living in NY who’s super happy on keto. I’m eating delicious food, get satiated quickly, and I’m slowly losing my last few pounds. But: I am planning to try switching out some of my saturates for monounsaturated fats as I consider what this lifestyle will look like for me in the long term. Heresy!

So I was waiting until most of my latest results came back to do this post, and now I’ve got them. I’ve been on LCHF since July 2016, and keto for 2-3 months now. I was 93.5kg at the start, and quickly dropped to 83.5kg within 3 months. I plateaued for 9 months or so, and since going keto I’ve dropped another 3-4kg in the last couple of months.

About a month ago, I got blood test results back for the first time in a while: HbA1c of 4.8 (though this wasn’t unexpected, I’ve happily had no sign of IR before, even though I’m convinced I was probably on the way), fasting glucose 87, great liver (AST/ALT) results (I’d had fatty liver seen via ultrasound before and elevated liver enzyme results), and the following lipid panel:

As you can see, elevated cholesterol, great trigs, meh HDL, good VLDL, but borderline high LDL that had TRIPLED since October of last year. That worried me, and I am totally unconvinced by the ketoers who claim that LDL is irrelevant.

I wanted an advanced lipid panel. My GP here in NYC wouldn’t give me one, and referred me to a cardiologist. I thought this was overkill, but 2 weeks later when my appointment came, I was happy I’d have a chance to challenge him and discuss the keto lifestyle with him.

I spent an hour with the cardiologist. Lovely guy, not opposed to low carb, but rather insistent that there’s plenty of science to show that meat products/sat fat elevate CVD risk, and insufficient evidence to show that LCHF diets are safe in the long term when it comes to CVD.

I thought I’d have to talk him into doing a calcium score, but he was very keen to have me do it. I’ve scheduled it for 2 weeks from now. In the meantime, we did C-reactive protein and an advanced lipid panel (NMR).

CRP came back 0.99, which is nice and low. It had been 2.2 last October after just a few months on LCHF.

Here are my NMR results:

I don’t need to tell you that these results are mixed. On the one hand, my small dense LDL are relatively low, but I don’t fit neatly into Pattern A or Pattern B when it comes to the distribution of particle sizes. HDL not brilliant still. And to add to the confusion, the cardiologist noted that there’s not much data on NMR results anyway, so it’s hard to tell much from the test anyway.

We fully expect my calcium score to come back a zero. I haven’t been low carb long enough for it to affect my arteries really one way or the other.

I’ll see my cardiologist in a couple of weeks after the calcium score comes back. In the meantime, we had a chat just before the weekend, and he was perfectly amenable to me continuing LCHF for some years. I’m relatively young and as long as the calcium score comes back ok, I’m low risk and so he sees no need to be overly cautious in a conventional sense. I’m happy on keto, so he’s happy to see me continue on it.

However: it is becoming increasingly clear to me that one of the likely causes of my LDL tripling – and perhaps of my less than stellar overall cholesterol and HDL results – may be saturated fats. Specifically red meat consumption, lots of butter and cream.

I know. This is heresy. Then again, Peter Attia has made exactly this point: that SFA consumption may not be uniformly safe across the entire population.

So here we are: I’m very happy, most of the markers are good, but I am rather unconvinced by the ketoers who deny LDL is an issue and who maintain that you can eat as much SFA as you like without consequence. Show me the science. I am a healthy 37 year old man who should not be seeing his LDL triple within a year.

We are not anti-science. I got into this because I was convinced by the science. We are not conspiracy theorists who believe the entire medical establishment is brainwashed. I have a very intelligent, open-minded cardiologist (not to mention another exceptionally well-regarded genius in the medical profession with whom I’m in touch) telling me my cholesterol is something to be concerned about, and is something that might be addressed by switching out some meat and dairy for more fish and monounsaturates.

Now again, I am not opposed to running the experiment for longer, and I’ll be talking to the cardiologist about the benefits and dangers of simply continuing eating creamy sauces and loads of beef fat for another year or more. But I think that in order to continue this lifestyle in the long term, I need to consider now the balance of fats and whether keto (as opposed to simply low carb non-ketogenic) is more suitable for me as a lifestyle.

Would be fascinated to hear your thoughts.

P.S. Interestingly, of his own volition, the cardiologist brought up intermittent fasting (IF) as another thing I should consider doing. Amazing!


(Siobhan) #2

Hi @gabe I believe I commented on another post/comment of yours, so I won’t repeat myself on that note. I think it is important to note that the guy Attia mentioned had high CRP as well as other possible markers, while yours are normal. This is important, as modified LDL is one of the big factors of heart disease, and CRP actually binds to modified LDL.
I am curious if you would be willing to try out the Feldman Protocol (in which you fast/eat low cal for 3 days and get a blood test, and then eat very high cal high saturated fat for 3 days and get another blood test) if you have access - or just the latter part, if you can. This would definitely help you pinpoint if you’re having an adverse reaction to saturated fat if CRP went up, for example.
As I said previously, LDL isn’t a very good marker for heart disease considering the majority of people (in the study I linked earlier) had very low cholesterol, and in both men and women higher total cholesterol resulted in over all lower all-cause mortality.

I would also say the calcium score would be a good indicator on how you’re doing, as it’s one of the best tests to actually catch the disease in the act.
I can understand being concerned though, and agree the science is worth scrutinizing especially when it applies to your own health! Hopefully some others will comment and you can get a wide range of opinions on the topic.
I’ll leave my comment at that, this time :wink:


(Ben) #3

Here’s something I think is on-topic for you Gabe:


(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #4

@siobhan I would be prepared to try the Feldman Protocol, but I’m guessing insurance wouldn’t cover it. I’ll talk to my PCP doctor about it next week; it’ll be my first time with him but he’s apparently quite good and into preventative medicine.

The trouble I have with all this is that I want to believe SFAs aren’t a problem, but doctors/biochemists who I like and respect seem to be concerned about it. Some of these people are deeply well-informed about the intricacies of the science, and they are still concerned about my cholesterol numbers.

I am still trying to figure out how to proceed. I read your post in the other thread siobhan. And I read that article, @BantingBen - very good. It doesn’t solve, however, the looming issue: that people I respect are telling me to watch my LDL – if not in the short-term, then at least in the medium.


(Ben) #5

How about this then:

High LDL-C is inversely associated with mortality in most people

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/6/e010401


(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #6

Nah. That doesn’t look like a peer-reviewed journal to me.


#7

Hi, @gabe, I’m not sure which of @BantingBen’s links you’re referring to, but the first one is co-authored by Robert Lustig. Peer reviewed or not, he’s as legit as you get in these types of circles.

As for the second one, that’s the British Medical Journal and the foonotes say it was “externally peer reviewed.”


(Siobhan) #8

Unfortunately, people we like and respect can be (and often are) wrong. The important thing to consider is the science - not the people. Which, luckily, is exactly what you’re looking for!

You also have to consider that we, as in everyone studying and learning about it, still don’t understand everything that’s going on. I come across many cases of studies - recent ones - outright saying “We don’t know why it works this way” and I don’t find it uncommon, either.

To be honest this is still a developing science, so we have to make educated guesses and work with what we have.
So we know… there are people like you who, despite having high LDL and particle count, are completely medically healthy by all other known markers like CRP, CAC, fasting insulin, etc
We also know that LDL in itself is not even correlative as a symptom for athersclerosis, and that healthy LDL does not cause foam cell formation - the precursor to atherosclerosis.
We know that as an n=1 @daveketo despite having astronomical LDL and particle count has a 0 CAC score and shining results for other tests of plaque development after 3 years of keto. An abnormality? Possibly, but we also know he can manipulate his cholesterol scores through diet and exercise and they fluctuate day by day. We also know his data can be reproduced by other people which is important because it tells us that there are multiple factors involved for LDL and particle count regulation.

So, if those are big question marks and not clear for whether theyre reliable markers then what are?
High fasting insulin. Insulin Resistance. High HBA1C. High CRP. CAC is also a good marker for disease progression/existence - a 0 gives you a 15 year “warranty” iirc.

LDL is flat out unreliable, and if it does go down via lots and lots of fat consumption - and CRP stays the same - that tells you youre likely a hyper responder (a ? in the system for now) and if all other reliable markers are okay that says there is some other mechanism going on that we don’t understand… yet.

Lots of people are basing their conclusions on symptoms (high blood pressure, high LDL partially, particle count, Lp(a) levels, etc) which only tells us something is possibly disrupting the system but not why.
It is a mistake (for people looking into this and advising others) to draw definitive conclusions from symptoms instead of root causes.

Which… is really not what you asked, huh?
Okay point being is it is complicated and we don’t fully understand how it works yet, so theres going to be a lot of very smart well respected people who are going to be wrong as we learn more about the system and how it works. That’s science.

For the time being, if it really bothers you and you arent comfortable with being unsure (understandable) switch to fish and mono saturated fat and keep an eye on other markers. If it is stressing you out it may be worth it just for the peace of mind assuming your other markers stay okay.

Sorry for the long kind of rambling post… again. It is a topic I’m very interested in but it is complicated. I completely understand if you decided to follow doctors orders until people finally get this all figured out!

I wish I could give you a better answer but the truth is we don’t know why hyper responders are hyper responders yet - that’s what me and @daveketo are curious to find out!


#9

For me personally, I am only happy consuming fat that is within the cooked product and not outside of it. I will cook eggs in butter, but I don’t need to pour what is left in the pan on top of my eggs. I fail to see the point in consuming empty calories.

Things like pork rinds I consider a treat, not a staple

I am seeking out foods like fatty fish, Shrimp, Avocado, and trying to keep red meat to no more than twice a week. I want foods that are natural, but nutrient dense. I don’t want fat as empty calories.


(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #10

I was certainly not referring to the Lustig article. The second one looks like some kind of crowdsourced peer-review process. Doesn’t look at all legit to me.


#11

Gotcha, @gabe. It’s the British Medical Journal, been around for 150+ years, and that article was peer reviewed, so it’s legit. That being said, the link posted is a PubMed literature review only, not an actual randomized controlled study, so if there’s stones to be thrown at it, that’s one that can be thrown, for what that’s worth.


(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #12

Yep well one of my respected sources just emailed me back and said he doesn’t know much about LDL. So there goes that. Now all I have is my doctors themselves, and we’re back to disputed science vs the medical mainstream.

My gut feeling is that I’ll continue doing what I’m doing and re-test in a year. I may be a hyper-responder, but right now my LDL isn’t sky high; it’s borderline high. I can live with that, I think.

@siobhan it sounds like you’ve done a lot of reading on this. Did you study this formally?


(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #13

You may be right, and I’m at work now so can’t get into it – but the link is “openbmj.” I’m guessing there’s a chance that BMJ set up an open, online platform for online peer review. My spidey sense is tingling.


(Siobhan) #14

Sounds like a plan! Be sure to keep us updated (if you are comfortable doing so) as you may present some interesting data!

Haha, no! I’m just a nerd! I met Dave at ketofest and he sparked my curiosity about the lipid system, and I’ve been studying (textbooks, studies, reviews, etc) since the bus back home from conneticut. About 3-5 hours a day, sometimes more. It’s really quite fascinating stuff and I want to share what I’ve learned with others because it could have quite the impact!
Because there is so much uncertainty I try to make sure everything I say is backed up by what I’ve read and if I speculate I try to make sure I state it is speculation.
I have been interested in the science of keto since I started a year ago though, so I’m not unused to deep diving into rather complicated and mind numbing science at least :wink:


#15

Ah, fair enough. Spidey sense is always good - skepticism is the mother of confirmation!


(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #16

Yeah I’m very interested in the science too. I’ve ordered the book Ivor recommended, “The Chemistry of Life.” Very interesting subject.


(Siobhan) #17

If you’re not too up on the basic functions (like me when I started) I would also recommend Therapeutic Lipidology (a book Peter Attia recommends in his “Straight Dope on Cholesterol” series), and I also read “Clinical Lipidology” after that (a textbook). Read everything with a critical eye. “Sure they say it’s this, but could it also be something else? What do the actual mechanisms show it is actually doing?” And of course if you come up with any ideas be sure to try and prove or disprove the idea, not just prove! Definitely PM me if you come across anything interesting in general, I love this stuff!

I’m sure you will be confused a lot if you’re anything like me, but the more I have learned about it the more I have found what a truly complex and yet efficient system it is. So many mysteries, too.
Have fun on your studies!!!


(Michael Wallace Ellwood) #18

Gabe,

You are aware, are you, that the fat in beef is only about 50% saturated?
It’s about 41% monosaturated, with a small amount of polyunsaturated.
(Exact ratios partly depend on how the cows were fed).

This distribution of fat is generally true in all animal fats, so the generally-held view that animal fats are all saturated is simply incorrect.

The most saturated fat is of course coconut oil at around 90%.

(Not that I personally think there is anything wrong with saturated fat. The fact that it has no carbon double-bonds means that it is the most stable form of fat, e.g. much less likely to be oxidised than unsaturated forms of fat).


(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #19

Just listened to this episode of Tim Ferriss’s podcast with Peter Attia (show notes for this episode and one related episode are here). Around the 8:30 mark, Peter explicitly says that elevated LDL-P, and especially LP(a), heighten cardiovascular risk. A little later in the podcast when discussing the ketogenic diet, he specifically says that he’s had some patients that he took off keto when their biomarkers didn’t go in the right direction.

It looks to me as if LDL is something on which even the keto community is far from settled on. For all the claims that it’s not LDL itself but the co-pathologies that come along with elevated LDL that are the worry (for instance, in Therapeutic Lipidology this is mentioned quite explicitly in the mainstream literature as a possibility) – it’s far from settled.

@siobhan


(Siobhan) #20

Yes I would agree it is far from settled, either way. I would classify Lp(a), and particle count as possible markers or symptoms. I would be willing to bet that in cases of athersclerosis they can be symptoms of an underlying issue - like high blood sugar in diabetics. If we quantify it as a risk we may knee jerk react to giving them insulin instead of looking for possible underlying issues.

Lp(a) in particular is pretty interesting, especially regarding how little we actually know about it. The stuff we do know is enough to warrant a raised eyebrow. I think it would be unwise to go after lowering Lp(a) (via medications etc) because what I’ve seen so far it is a part of the immune system we may need.
Like, for example, inflammation is a risk (marker) too but it is in reaction to an irritant.

That is why I am trying to look at mechanisms of the system so I can begin to truly understand what is going on. The better we understand the mechanisms the less we can blame markers and instead find root causes.

In short… yes it is possible high ldl-p is a marker (among many) but if there are other reasons it could go up that are not detrimental (lean, athletic people who are fat burners needing more circulating energy? possibly) we need to understand that too because it tells us how reliable of a marker it is.

For now, we don’t know, and that is part of why there is not a clear consensus on it.
Warrants lots and lots and lots more research though
@gabe