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
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Thu, Jan-24-13, 17:04
starrunner's Avatar
starrunner starrunner is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 91
 
Plan: Atkins, BFFM, BFL
Stats: 130/113/112 Female 64
BF:20%/17%/15%
Progress: 94%
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Default My numbers

I just received my most recent cholesterol test results:

Total Cholesterol 234
HDL 88
LDL 137
Triglycerides 45

I am a 50 year old female. I know the HDL and Triglycerides are good, but how bad is the Total/HDL? I know I am going to get pressure from my very well meaning and concerned husband and our doctor to go on a statin. I absolutely refuse to do this. I take fish oil, garlic, policosanol, COQ10 and have been eating oat bran. I will not take a statin or red yeast rice.
I eat whole eggs (2-3 per day) and the saturated fat content of my diet is roughly 15%. I am willing to drop that to get the Total below 200, but will that really do it? I am post menopausal and I have read the lower estrogen is the cause of increased cholesterol readings. I have had a heart screening and all of the tests were good. I would really appreciate any input and moral support.



Judy
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sat, Feb-09-13, 13:52
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
Posts: 13,433
 
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
Default

This is an amazingly good lipid profile; High HDL and very Low TGs. The ideal total cholesterol range to optimize health and minimize mortality is 200-260. * Total cholesterol under 200 mg/dl indicates impaired immune function. (Perfect Health Diet, p 366).

TGs/HDL ratio is a good proxy for the type of LDL you have. Under 2 means you have more of the beneficial large fluffy type...Less than 2 is good, less than 1 excellent, and your ratio is .51.
TC/HDL is less significant, but still often used, and that is an excellent 2.6, anything under 4.4 is good. Your doctor should give you an award, not suggest statins.


* Even more so for women, in a recent Norwegian study.

Quote:
In women, the results were somewhat different: the higher the cholesterol level was, the lower the overall risk of death. However, this finding only became statistically significant in the category of cholesterol levels of 7.0 mmol or higher. Compared to women with cholesterol levels less than 5.0 mmol/l, the women with the highest cholesterol levels were 28 per cent less likely to die overall.

(5.0=195 and 7.0 =273!)

http://www.drbriffa.com/2011/10/06/...or-celebration/

Last edited by JEY100 : Sun, Feb-10-13 at 08:59.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sat, Feb-09-13, 16:40
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

There's a chart floating around out there composed from data collected by the World Health Organization re: mortality and TC levels. The lowest all-cause mortality is in the TC range of 200-259. It climbs sharply lower and higher than that. So I think you are fine!
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Sun, Feb-10-13, 20:33
starrunner's Avatar
starrunner starrunner is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 91
 
Plan: Atkins, BFFM, BFL
Stats: 130/113/112 Female 64
BF:20%/17%/15%
Progress: 94%
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
This is an amazingly good lipid profile; High HDL and very Low TGs. The ideal total cholesterol range to optimize health and minimize mortality is 200-260. * Total cholesterol under 200 mg/dl indicates impaired immune function. (Perfect Health Diet, p 366).

TGs/HDL ratio is a good proxy for the type of LDL you have. Under 2 means you have more of the beneficial large fluffy type...Less than 2 is good, less than 1 excellent, and your ratio is .51.
TC/HDL is less significant, but still often used, and that is an excellent 2.6, anything under 4.4 is good. Your doctor should give you an award, not suggest statins.


* Even more so for women, in a recent Norwegian study.




(5.0=195 and 7.0 =273!)

http://www.drbriffa.com/2011/10/06/...or-celebration/



Thank you so much! That is very reassuring. Thanks for the references too, I'll have these with me when I go to the doctor.

Judy
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Sun, Feb-10-13, 20:34
starrunner's Avatar
starrunner starrunner is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 91
 
Plan: Atkins, BFFM, BFL
Stats: 130/113/112 Female 64
BF:20%/17%/15%
Progress: 94%
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonwtwindo
There's a chart floating around out there composed from data collected by the World Health Organization re: mortality and TC levels. The lowest all-cause mortality is in the TC range of 200-259. It climbs sharply lower and higher than that. So I think you are fine!



Thank you!
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Sun, Feb-17-13, 22:43
Nolaig Nolaig is offline
New Member
Posts: 1
 
Plan: Modified paleo
Stats: 180/135/135 Male 64 inches
BF:
Progress:
Default

Excellent numbers.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Wed, Feb-20-13, 19:30
starrunner's Avatar
starrunner starrunner is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 91
 
Plan: Atkins, BFFM, BFL
Stats: 130/113/112 Female 64
BF:20%/17%/15%
Progress: 94%
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nolaig
Excellent numbers.



Thank you!

I go back to the doctor on March 19th for another test (an annual physical for insurance purposes). I am better prepared to discuss cholesterol numbers with him now.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-13, 09:50
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,863
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Another thing to be aware of, the calculated value of LDL is going to be very skewed by your low triglycerides. It could be off by as much as 30%. There's a thread here about how to recalculate it when your Trig. are lower than 100. I think it is stickied.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-13, 21:23
starrunner's Avatar
starrunner starrunner is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 91
 
Plan: Atkins, BFFM, BFL
Stats: 130/113/112 Female 64
BF:20%/17%/15%
Progress: 94%
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
Another thing to be aware of, the calculated value of LDL is going to be very skewed by your low triglycerides. It could be off by as much as 30%. There's a thread here about how to recalculate it when your Trig. are lower than 100. I think it is stickied.


Thanks Nancy!

I just found it:

LDL = TC/1.19 + TG/1.9 - HDL/1.1 - 38

For me, LDL = 103 using this equation
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Thu, Mar-21-13, 09:31
bbmedic413 bbmedic413 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 94
 
Plan: Ketogenic diet
Stats: 221/207/170 Male 72"
BF:
Progress: 27%
Location: Massachusetts
Default

Those are rockstar numbers you have there. Especially considering you're postmenopausal and your age. No woman your age should be on a statin. Over 200 for TC is shown to be protective and healthy. Low cholesterol is FAR more dangerous for somebody in your position.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Thu, Mar-21-13, 10:41
JoanD'Arc's Avatar
JoanD'Arc JoanD'Arc is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 535
 
Plan: iDukan, Consolidation
Stats: 174/147/147 Female 5'7"
BF: Goal: < 30%
Progress: 100%
Location: California
Default

Sorry to hijack your thread, your HDL is awesome...

These are my numbers, I'm not particularly concerned, but when I do the 'formula' my LDL gets worse-152.

TC-224
HDL-62
TG-112
LDL-140

Should I be 'trying' to lower my LDL.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Thu, Mar-21-13, 14:38
bbmedic413 bbmedic413 is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 94
 
Plan: Ketogenic diet
Stats: 221/207/170 Male 72"
BF:
Progress: 27%
Location: Massachusetts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoanD'Arc
Sorry to hijack your thread, your HDL is awesome...

These are my numbers, I'm not particularly concerned, but when I do the 'formula' my LDL gets worse-152.

TC-224
HDL-62
TG-112
LDL-140

Should I be 'trying' to lower my LDL.



The problem with a standard lipid panel is that it doesn't tell us much beyond the total LDL-C. What you really need is an LDL particle count or an Apo-B count. That will really tell you your risk factors. Just an LDL-C isn't worth much. Generally though, as your trig-HDL ratio goes down, your Apo-B and pattern B goes down with it.

If you want a great education on lipid profile numbers, check out the Livin La Vida Low Carb podcast, the episode with Thomas Dayspring. He is the modern day Yoda of all things cholesterol.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Fri, Mar-22-13, 20:57
starrunner's Avatar
starrunner starrunner is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 91
 
Plan: Atkins, BFFM, BFL
Stats: 130/113/112 Female 64
BF:20%/17%/15%
Progress: 94%
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbmedic413
Those are rockstar numbers you have there. Especially considering you're postmenopausal and your age. No woman your age should be on a statin. Over 200 for TC is shown to be protective and healthy. Low cholesterol is FAR more dangerous for somebody in your position.



Thank you! I agree about not going on a statin-I never will. I also agree that low cholesterol is more dangerous. From everything I have read, keeping my cholesterol at or over 200 is what I want to do.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Fri, Mar-22-13, 21:02
starrunner's Avatar
starrunner starrunner is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 91
 
Plan: Atkins, BFFM, BFL
Stats: 130/113/112 Female 64
BF:20%/17%/15%
Progress: 94%
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoanD'Arc
Sorry to hijack your thread, your HDL is awesome...

These are my numbers, I'm not particularly concerned, but when I do the 'formula' my LDL gets worse-152.

TC-224
HDL-62
TG-112
LDL-140

Should I be 'trying' to lower my LDL.


Thank you! I was taking a fish oil called "Med Omega" by Carlson. 1-2 teaspoons a day. That was the highest HDL I've had. Before it was between 60-70. Now if I could just get my husband to take fish oil. His HDL is only 40.
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Fri, Mar-22-13, 21:53
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,863
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

If you stay low carb your HDL will rise slowly over time. Lots of us get our HDL to around 100.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 21:48.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.