Re: Cholesterol's Function?

From: Robert (RobertJ_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 03/25/05 

Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:59:56 -0800

"Mirek Fidler" <cxl@volny.cz> wrote in message
news:3ajis9F6c4scjU1@individual.net...
> >>You you want to base your claims on facts, try first to feed data of
> >>this person (LDL 187, HDL 91, TG 51) to some of risk calculators that
> >>are based on models using actual data. To my knowledge, this profile is
> >>far from atherogenic.
> >>
> >>Mirek
> >
> >
> > There is no mention of other risk factors to make an LDL goal. A 187 is
far
> > from good.
>
> HDL 91 and TG 51 is far from bad. Balance is what is really predictive.
>
> If he is 50 years old, non-smoker, no DM, BP < 120, his profile
> indicates same risk (2%) as e.g. one with HDL 50, LDL 120, TG 120 (which
> would be considered absolutely OK without further risk factors).

Not in all cases. Keep in mind that they are "independant" risk factors
which mean that they are independant of each and every other lipid analytes.
HDL is independant of LDL and vice versa.
Each is assigned as a risk factor. If you want to claim all of them in a
whole places the individual in question at lower risk then you are cheating
the concept of independance.

>
>
> > With family
> > history, diabetes or if he had a recent MI then it is not good.
>
> That is true.
>
> > There is no mention of age as with increasing age it gets more fuzzy on
> > benefits overall as predictors of CAD.
>
> Hm, I guess opposite is true also. I think best benefit is somewhere
> between 40-60 years. Before 40, CAD event is too unlikely, after 60 it
> is too fuzzy as you have said.

The best benefit as you mention is within that age group but the statin
therapy with the help of pharm is expanding the benefits of lipid lowering
drugs into other health arenas such as Alzeheimers.
No pathological theories, as only blind therapies, have shown the benefit of
delaying development Alzeheimers etc. if they continue to hold up.

>
> > There is differences on male vs female also so many factors involved
before
> > one can make an assessment and say that "profile is far from
atherogenic".
>
> This specific profile is low-risk (that is, less than 10% for 10 years
> prediction) both for male and female for all ages.
>
> Of course, little we know about other risk factors (but based on low TG
> DM or MetS diagnosis is unlikely). Anyway given this profile alone,
> risk is definitely low (<10% is considered low AFAIK).
>
> Mirek

Too early to make that assessment without more input. Those are numbers
acceptable to the conventional testing done. I understand that but there is
a reason why this person started out with a high glycohemoglobin of 6.1
which is borderline abnormal. I believe that is A1C and not 1AC.
Keep in mind that some individuals can have a normal lipid profile by
conventional lipid profiles that don't fractionate the LDL and be dead the
next day. A genetically inherited LDL very atherogenic light form.
People see the normal lipid profile and say that it is useless and does not
correlate but in fact only misleading.
There are other risk factors not mentioned such as CRP and homocysteine and
these are non lipid factors or factors not measured in the lipid profiles.
No mention here so again it is too early to say the individual as a whole is
at risk or not.
Statistics based on the relative risks of the conventional risk factors
within this profile it is relatively low.
He might be one of the 10% that will die which be might acceptable in terms
of general health policy and resources but if the other 10% can be detected
and treated properly then you can cut the odds down even more.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 2-element SteppIR model 202
    ... something to keep in mind in this day and age is that synthetic guys ... rope where vandalism is a risk. ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • Re: Should I get another doctor? (UK)
    ... If you got a cholesterol ration then you had a full lipid profile, ... risk, and over 10 is much above average risk. ... life altering or even life ending "event". ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: Safety in Numbers
    ... we can see that both cycling and walking ... are in general low risk activities based on both per hour and also per ... and time was some hidden risks based on age. ... different ways for various reasons. ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)
  • Re: Safety in Numbers
    ... walking hold when comparing the age and fitness range of the cyclist ... For example young men are much more at immediate risk of death ... markedly different when comparing risks for pedestrians versus cyclists, ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)
  • Re: Safety in Numbers
    ... walking hold when comparing the age and fitness range of the cyclist ... For example young men are much more at immediate risk of death ... categories who are particularly vulnerable to accidents as pedestrians ... and for the same reasons are unlikely to be cyclists. ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)