Hey folks -

Haven't been on the board for ages. Still LC/Paleo with some dairy although I am not perfect.

Here's a recent test - any thoughts on LDL?

Total 262
HDL - 110
LDL - 139 (down from 149 about 6 months ago)
Trigs - 64
VLDL - 13 (not sure what that is)
Ratio 1.3
CRP - 1.54

I'm in my mid 50s with about 20 stubborn lbs. to lose.

Thanks!!

I have no thoughts on LDL or anything else connected to cholesterol, other than without it we'd die

Jo xxx

Looks fine to me.

Thanks for the input Nancy.

LDL looks good and the Trig/HDL is outstanding! .58! Ratio under 2 is good and under 1 is optimal. HDL over 100 is amazing; be prepared for a long life

Thanks Janet. I love that Hippocrates quote.

My practitioner wants the LDL lower - whatever.

Without knowing how much of the LDL is VLDL, the number is pretty meaningless. LDL isn't the bad guy. But it's VLDL that gets manufactured in the presence of too much sugar.

It baffles that about two years after the AHA revised its guidelines, including a de-emphasis on LDL, so that levels below 190 were not of concern unless there are other more general medical issues, 99% of the doctors have not gotten the message.

The guideline recommends statin therapy for the following groups:

- People without cardiovascular disease who are 40 to 75 years old and have a 7.5 percent or higher risk for having a heart attack or stroke within 10 years.
- People with a history of a cardiovascular event (heart attack, stroke, stable or unstable angina, peripheral artery disease, transient ischemic attack, or coronary or other arterial revascularization).
- People 21 and older who have a very high level of bad cholesterol (190 mg/dL or higher).
- People with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes who are 40 to 75 years old.

Some patients who do not fall into the four categories may also benefit from statins, a decision that should be made on a case-by-case basis.

**********

Now you very well might have been "caught" by the first risk calculator, but it was not the LDL level per se.

LDL is a calculated!! Number and 139 is actual below the level that has been shown to be healthy for older women.
Zoe Harcome's article explains the basics of cholesterol:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=466506

MickieSue - VLDL is 13 5 - 40 mg/dl


Janet - thanks for posting that link.

I saw that the second time, Lizzy. In that case, I wouldn't be worried at all. VLDL is very low, and that's what you should be going for.

Way too many docs have failed to get the message that what we have been taught is "normal" for cholesterol isn't. And the fact that, for example, men with cholesterols under 200 are more at risk to suffer fatal heart attacks at a young age was a result of the Framingham study that just got brushed over.

The bottom line is that we don't know what a healthy cholesterol is for any given individual--and there don't seem to be a lot of researchers trying to learn how to figure that out.

Thank you Janet and MickiSue. I need to find a new practitioner anyway. The practice is going through major changes and I need to leave - they keep losing NDs and MDs and I no longer have faith.
The tedious and horrible foot work continues to find a MD, ND or whoever is on the same page - cripes.

Did you ask about how to find a new doctor before? Anyway, I put some ideas in post 14 here: http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=464616

I get a newsletter from a DrDeborah (Gordon) in Ashland Oregon. Her website use to be very LC ...now it has most every "real food" diet as options. Good luck finding a new doctor near you!

Thanks Janet - I'll check out that thread and Dr. Deborah's website. I'm in OR now but she's too far away but I'm sure her website will be of interest. I went to the Functional Medicine website and found a bunch of MDs to look into. You can search by zip code for practitioners. I also looked into the American College for the Advancement of Medicine. I'm sure I can find someone - Oregon tends to be progressive.