Re: Cholesterol
- From: Jim Chinnis <jchinnis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 18:04:56 GMT
Susan <nevermind@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in part:
As a lay person with high risk for CVD in my family history and my own,
I've looked into this question a great deal.
I think that simply measuring total cholesterol or LDL and defining risk
by those misses the true risk profile, which is far more complex.
Further, the same kind of clinician who diagnoses using only those
markers is likely to recommend a diet that will make things worse in the
long run, then rx meds to overcome the problem when diet and exercise
are "not enough."
A better screen, IMO, for risk would be complex, give more weight to
triglycerides above 100 (a predictive measure for CVD research indicates
is more accurate than cholesterol or LDL), assessment of LDL particle
size, since large fluffy particles are not the ones that oxidize and
cause damage, a measure of small, dense VLDL which is damaging, HDL, and
ratios of all the above. Further, an HbA1c, or glycated hemoglobin
above 5% is associated with increased CVD risk in diabetics and
non-diabetics, every point along the spectrum of normal. The same is
true for the spectrum of fasting blood sugar, with increases in CVD
beginning even in the lowest quintile of normal and increasing along the
whole normal spectrum. Waist to hip ratio should be considered, too, in
evaluating CVD risk.
A reduced starch and sugar diet will improve ratios and risk measures in
most folks. Combined with exercise, especially weight bearing, it's
often enough to reduce risk markers dramatically. This means increasing
fats, and adding those that are associated with increased heart health
would be wise. This means fish oil (preferably from eating wild caught
oily fish or supplementation if one won't eat fish), olive oil, nut
oils, avocado oil. If possible, meats and dairy should be from animals
that have been grass fed, not supermarket feed lot beef; these are rich
in heart healthy fats, compared to grain fed beef. Same as people. :-)
Just my opinion, as a lay person at high risk who's done a lot of
homework and experimenting. I reduced my TC a total of about 100 pt.
with diet, pantethine (must be liquid gel cap, I learned with
experimentation), doubled my HDL and reduced my TGLs a couple of hundred
points, even while an undiagnosed type 2 diabetic.
Very good statement and good advice.
I will just add that all the same, yes, there is a pretty robust correlation
between measures of cholesterol and incidence of heart disease. Much of the
early data are from the Framingham study. You can Google up lots of charts
showing dramatic relationships between the various cholesterol (and
triglyceride) measures and heart attack rates and such. What has been less
clear is the degree to which modifying ones cholesterol numbers changes ones
risk. Studies tend to change more than one thing at a time, and most agents
don't have huge effects on cholesterol levels. So most of the arguments
about cholesterol and heart disease are probably about the effect of
different treatments, not about the observed relationships between things
like LDL and HDL and heart disease.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cholesterol
- From: jonaheal
- Re: Cholesterol
- From: Susan
- Re: Cholesterol
- References:
- Cholesterol
- From: jonaheal
- Re: Cholesterol
- From: listener
- Re: Cholesterol
- From: Robert
- Re: Cholesterol
- From: William Wagner
- Re: Cholesterol
- From: Juhana Harju
- Re: Cholesterol
- From: jonaheal
- Re: Cholesterol
- From: Susan
- Cholesterol
- Prev by Date: Re: Cholesterol
- Next by Date: Re: Pain in my chest after eating and slight breathlessness help me please
- Previous by thread: Re: Cholesterol
- Next by thread: Re: Cholesterol
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading