Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low Carb Health & Technical Forums > Cholesterol, Heart Disease
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Mon, Jul-18-11, 20:20
LarryAJ's Avatar
LarryAJ LarryAJ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 702
 
Plan: PP/PPLP
Stats: 150/140/140 Male 68 inches
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Northern Virginia
Exclamation Plot of total cholesterol versus ALL cause mortality.

I found this
at - http://renegadewellness.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/cholesterol-mortality-chart.pdf.
The data is from the World Health Organization. I tried to go to the URL shown on the chart axis, but they did not work - for me - maybe someone can find the correct link.

It is a bit "busy" for a plot, especially at the scale shown. If you go to the link to renegadewellness.files.wordpress.com, you will get a PDF view that will let you scale up (or down) to view the detail easier.

The solid BLUE line is for - All Cause Mortality, average/regression curve (r=-0.67)
The BLUE dots are the data points for each countries deaths for all causes, age-standardized per 100,000.
The solid GREEN line is for - Communicable, maternal, perinatal and nutritional conditions (r=-0.62)
The dashed GREEN line is for - I.A. Infectious and parasitic diseases (r=-0.57)
The solid RED line is for - Noncommunicable diseases (r=-0.49)
The RED dots are the data points for each countries Cardiovascular Disease deaths
And the dashed RED line is for - Cardiovascular diseases (r=-0.3) NOTE: the tag on the line says "Cardiovascular diseases and total cholesterol are weakly correlated" indicated by the shallow curve of the line. AND if you look at the distribution of the RED dots, they are all over the chart (seemingly as many above as below the line) making you wonder how the "curve" really fits the data.

It is interesting that both green lines drop to zero at 220 mg/dl of total cholesterol. Could it be that high total cholesterol is a immune system enhancer!?! But most important is that the lowest rates of all cause mortality
are for cholesterol readings of 200<TC<240 mg/dl.

I didn't like the "curve fit" for the Cardiovascular diseases - RED dots, especially the right end where the data points do not justify the steep rise. And, for that matter the rise on the left does not fit the data points very well there either! So here is a new graph with the BLUE line, All Cause Mortality, average/regression curve and the BLUE dots, the data points for each countries deaths for all causes, removed. I then added BLUE dots to show where I think they fit the data points better. I hope you will agree. Here it is:


Note the "curve" is almost flat as you would expect if there is poor correlation between the two axis. And if anything it slopes down as cholesterol goes up.

** edited to add **
In 1987, in the Journal of the American Medical Association Framingham Study investigators reported these two important findings: 1) Over age 50 there is no increased overall mortality with either high or low serum cholesterol levels, and 2) In people with a falling cholesterol level (over the first 14 years of the study), for each 1% mg/dl drop in cholesterol there was an 11 percent increase in all-cause mortality over the next 18 years. (JAMA 1987;257:2176-2180) **end**

I hope this is informative for everyone.

Last edited by LarryAJ : Tue, Jul-19-11 at 18:40. Reason: Make link to source more obvious. ;) 1st edit: And to add the modified chart - 2nd edit.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Mon, Jul-18-11, 20:42
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 45,195
 
Plan: Paleo 99.5%
Stats: 210/170/160 Female 67.5"
BF:
Progress: 80%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Do you have a link? This is a cool chart!
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Tue, Jul-19-11, 04:43
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 9,909
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/162/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 83%
Location: USA
Default

This is great! My own doctor says my cholesterol (267 last year) is actually protective as a woman grows older. He's awesome.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Thu, Jul-21-11, 02:01
amandawald amandawald is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,735
 
Plan: GF mod carb/Schwarzbein
Stats: 160/160/160 Female 164cm
BF:
Progress: 51%
Location: Brit in Germany
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WereBear
This is great! My own doctor says my cholesterol (267 last year) is actually protective as a woman grows older. He's awesome.


You are lucky to have a doctor who has a clue about cholesterol. And congrats on the "high" cholesterol reading!!! Hopefully, that means you have a better chance of having a long and healthy life!!!

amanda
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Thu, Jul-21-11, 06:38
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 9,909
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/162/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 83%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amandawald
You are lucky to have a doctor who has a clue about cholesterol. And congrats on the "high" cholesterol reading!!! Hopefully, that means you have a better chance of having a long and healthy life!!!

amanda


Thanks, but it's not luck. I fired my husband's doctor and switched him to my guy. I don't understand people who slavishly stick with a doctor when they aren't listened to or they don't like his advice.

He or she works for US, people!
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Mon, Sep-19-11, 13:22
ProfGumby's Avatar
ProfGumby ProfGumby is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,927
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 361/285.0/240.0 Male 5'11"
BF:Shake Hands w/Beef
Progress: 63%
Location: In Da U.P. eh? Menominee
Default

I am on the gateway of flushing another Dr down the drain....maybe. I just got a phone call that my cholesterol,levels were "very high" and my bad was "really high"

I am waiting for the numbers and will have to sit through another appointment with him to see what the numbers really are. I am also going to ask about a blood test for my vit D levels, my homosystine (sp) and c reactive protein levels too. Never had it done, he never ordered it or talked about it either.

I am also STILL looking for a doctor who seems to even know about this stuff!

Ah, physician, heal thyself and leave me alone!
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Mon, Sep-19-11, 16:56
Ilikemice's Avatar
Ilikemice Ilikemice is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 715
 
Plan: Paleo-ish general LC
Stats: 151/128/123 Female 64 in
BF:
Progress: 82%
Location: Middle Tennessee
Default

Don't forget, ProfGumby, you might ask for a VAP or NMR too. If you gots big fluffy LDL, that'll hush 'em right up (well, hopefully)
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Mon, Jul-02-12, 18:56
aj_cohn's Avatar
aj_cohn aj_cohn is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,948
 
Plan: Protein Power
Stats: 213/167/165 Male 65 in.
BF:35%/23%/20%
Progress: 96%
Location: United States
Default

I recently finished listening to the 3-part podcast interview of Chris Masterjohn, PhD by Chris Kresser, LAc. (I think I now have an honorary masters in cholesterol studies.) Anyway, Masterjohn thinks that LDL particle size is not a causal factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Rather, he thinks that particle size is a marker for time the particle has spend in the bloodstream. In turn, that's a marker for LDL receptor health, the only real causal link to CVD. There's no lab test for LDL receptor number or receptivity, which would be preferable.

But Masterjohn pointed out a number of limitations to the particle size testing. The biggest one is that different companies' test, purporting to measure particle size, give significantly different results for blood samples taken from the same person at the same time. The second is that there's no accepted standard for what the VAP test calls pattern A and B; they are standards made up by the lab itself.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Fri, Dec-30-16, 07:24
glib1 glib1 is offline
New Member
Posts: 3
 
Plan: low-carb
Stats: 170/156/155 Male 69in
BF:
Progress:
Default

I am bumping up this old thread to point out the important Japanese study of last year

https://healthimpactnews.com/2015/j...ol-live-longer/

https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/381654

summary: for women past 60 or so, the higher the cholesterol the longer the life. There is never a good reason to give statins to a woman. For men, ideal is 250-300. The important thing is to be well above 160. Now go convince your doctor, and if you can not, put up a strenuous resistance when he orders statins. Note that this is a meta-analysis, with plenty western studies mixed in.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 14:09.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.