6 months on.

[catza]

I have just had my first 6 months check with the Diabetics Nurse following diagnosis and come away feeling quite down. The good news is that I now have an HbAic of 5.2 down from 6 and my weight loss is confirmed as 73lbs. The bad news is that my Cholesterol is up from 5.1 to 6.5 so my LCHF diet doesn't seem to have been an all around success and I am now being advised to take 40gm of Simvastatin a day and cut out the fats I regard as healthy.

I also had a lecture on putting more carbs on my plate and to forget about LCHF. HCLF must be followed to stay healthy.!!!

So...... I am in a it of a quandary. My HbAic reflects my reduction in carbs and I have no intention of upping them as I have not felt as comfortable in my body for years since having cut out the wheat and other high carb items. The fact that this is the first time I have successfully lost weight for a sustained period also shows that this revision in my diet is right for me.

Increasing the protein % and cutting out some of the fats worries me. Taking statins worries me. Am I missing something?

Oh and after 'discussing' my diet and cholesterol results my BP was sky high so now I have to see the Dr about that. White Coat Syndrome with knobs on strikes with a double whammy!!!!!!!!!

Not a happy camper.

[angua]

I have just had my first 6 months check with the Diabetics Nurse following diagnosis and come away feeling quite down. The good news is that I now have an HbAic of 5.2 down from 6 and my weight loss is confirmed as 73lbs.

First off getting your numbers down is pretty damn good ... losing 73 lbs is AMAZING

Congratulations on a difficult job really well done

The bad news is that my Cholesterol is up from 5.1 to 6.5 so my LCHF diet doesn't seem to have been an all around success and I am now being advised to take 40gm of Simvastatin a day and cut out the fats I regard as healthy.

I also had a lecture on putting more carbs on my plate and to forget about LCHF. HCLF must be followed to stay healthy.!!!

So...... I am in a it of a quandary. My HbAic reflects my reduction in carbs and I have no intention of upping them as I have not felt as comfortable in my body for years since having cut out the wheat and other high carb items. The fact that this is the first time I have successfully lost weight for a sustained period also shows that this revision in my diet is right for me.

Increasing the protein % and cutting out some of the fats worries me. Taking statins worries me. Am I missing something?

Oh and after 'discussing' my diet and cholesterol results my BP was sky high so now I have to see the Dr about that. White Coat Syndrome with knobs on strikes with a double whammy!!!!!!!!!

Not a happy camper.

Not sure why you would want to listen to anyone giving you a lecture about your diet, since you've just proved that eating the way you have has brought about beneficial changes. Are they suggesting that you reverse your current trend by eating carbs, thereby getting poorer bg results and probably a weight gain ?

Though I expect they'll have meds to 'bring you into line' for that too

With respect to your Cholesterol - did they give you a breakdown of the components ? if not ask them - LCHF diet will raise your cholesterol (the good bits) but should reduce your ldl's and trig's

Don't be downhearted Catza, you have done so very well in a really short time - give yourself a little space to think this all through (just like you did when you first started low carbing)

Gilly xx


p.s. Ask them to provide you with details of medical trials that prove your raise cholesterol is a bad thing

[paragliderpete]

Hi Great results, Just ask yourself where would you be if you took your DN's advice. You are doing great and don't let anyone say otherwise.
With your protien, I work on 1g per kg of ideal body wgt. For example someone with and ideal wgt of 100kg would need to eat 100g of protien per day to maintain lean body mass. This is the protien content of your food , not wgt of meat.
You could try introducing more plant fat into your diet such as olive or coconut oil.
On the lchf diet my total cholesterol is steady at around 2.8 with hdl/ldl of 125/100 and trigs 0.9. So don't be too quick to give in. If you are still loosing wgt, I wouldn't worry to much about cholesterol levels until you are nearing your target wgt

[catza]

Thank you both for taking the time to comment on my wailing post.

Gilly the sad breakdown of my cholesterol results is not pretty.

Total 6.5
Trigs 1.8
HDL 1.3
LDL 4.2

So my interpretation of them is that the LDL is way to high, the HDL is just about OKish and the Trigs are borderline high as well. As someone who always had a low total cholesterol of around 2/3 in the past I am so fed up at the moment and just feel like having a chip butty. Not going to really but this has really knocked my confidence and I will have to rethink the diet that I felt so comfortable with.

Pete, Thanks for the tip about the protein. I still have a little over 100 lbs to loose before I can even consider a maintenance diet regime. I will get there, of this I am certain but it looks like I will have to sacrifice a little glucose control in order to replace some of the fat with carbohydrates. I know that eating larger quantities of low GI vegetables will ensure I don't get plagued by hunger pangs but, darn it, I worked dang hard to get my membership to the 5% Club.

[Daibell]

Hi. Congrats on getting your weight and HBa1c down by keeping the carbs down; obviously the right path to follow. I'm on 40mg of Simvastatin and have no ill effects. Give it a try and you may also have no problems. Don't forget to include unsaturated fats in the fats you do have such as oily fish.

[borofergie]

Statins for women;

the combination of data from 11 smaller trials didn't show a clear benefit when it came to warding off strokes or deaths from any cause in women.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/ ... 7F20120625

To date, no large trial of women statin users who already have cardiovascular disease has been shown to increase life expectancy by one day. More importantly, the use of statins in women at lower risk has not increased life expectancy nor prevented heart attacks and stroke.

[Defren]

Congratulations on super figures.

Cholesterol seems to be a funny old thing and something I can't get my head around, so I just let the folks here do it for me. My figures were fine but my trigs heading toward not fine. I was put on Simvastatin at diagnosis, but after wailing I didn't want to be on Statins a compromise was reached that I have since broken. I was put onto Atorvastatin 10mg and I merrily took them until my hair started falling out in enormous clumps. I have now binned them. Partly due to articles posted here that show they do little for woman anyway. I refuse to be bald to take a medication they may do me no good anyway. My diet is LCHF although I do struggle to keep the fat higher than protein and often fail. It's not an easy balancing act, the same as moving things around within your diet to keep BG good and try to push down cholesterol.

I would not presume to try to advise you, I really don't know enough about the subject to help, so I will send a big squishy cyber hug (((Catza))).

[catza]

Cheers Daibell. Reassuring to hear you have no side effects. I already eat loads of oily fish, the DN couldn't fault my diet other than the lack of carbs and my apparent addiction to butter and cream. A good job she didn't realise what other naughty fats I include. What me? eat pork crackling? Of course not.

boro, I just knew you would give me that quote. Up to now I happily accepted what Dr Kendrick has said about Statins but, now I have had to face the problem head on, I find that I am more inclined to hedge my bets and take the little blighters. Though I am also inclined to half the dose and see what effect that, combined with a slight diet rethink, has over the next 2 months before I get my levels checked. It seems a cop out but my diabetes/weight has put me in a high risk group and until I reduce that risk I am scared to go against the 'Official' medical advise.

My gut reaction to-day is too take the statins until such time as I get my weight down or I experience any side effects. I refuse to be fat, diabetic and bald so maybe my body will have the final word.

Jo, just seen your post. Thanks for the hugs. I am being such a wimp. It seems so confusing at the moment. Half of me is saying stick to what you decided when you read all the links about statins but the other half of my brain argues that hedging my bets may be the safest route. Having already been on massive doses of steroids which went straight to my head I have no intention of loosing any more hair through Statins.

I just can't seem to make up my mind which way to go.

[Paul_c]

Thank you both for taking the time to comment on my wailing post.

Gilly the sad breakdown of my cholesterol results is not pretty.

Total 6.5
Trigs 1.8
HDL 1.3
LDL 4.2

your HDL is not far off, they want it to be greater than 1.5.

The LDL is the beasty here... the question is are they checking for the two different types of LDL? It's the large fluffy type that's good for you and the small hard LDL that's bad... Unless they specifically test for the good large fluffy LDL, then it'll get counted in with the bad LDL.

The issue here is that a low carb high fat diet does produce more LDL, but... and it's a very big but... the LDL you get with the diet is mostly the good large fluffy LDL.

this link explains things better:
http://www.cbn.com/health/NaturalHealth/drsears_heartattack.aspx

In more recent years, scientists discovered two types of LDL cholesterol. One type consists of large, fluffy LDL particles that appear to have no potential to cause atherosclerosis or the development of plaques on the large or medium-sized arteries. The other type consists of small, dense LDL particles that are strongly associated with arterial plaques and this can increase the risk of heart disease. So now you have good “bad” cholesterol (large, fluffy LD particles) and bad “bad” cholesterol (small, dense LDL). Getting confused? Well, so is everyone else who is fighting the cholesterol wars, because we now know that the more bad “bad” cholesterol you have, the more likely you are to have a heart attack, whereas having a high level of the good “bad” cholesterol isn’t likely to have any adverse health effects.

How can you tell which type of LDL you have? All you have to do is determine your ratio of triglycerides to HDL cholesterol, which would be found as part of the results of your last cholesterol screening. If you ratio is less than 2, you have predominantly large, fluffy LDL particles that are not going to do you much harm. If your ratio is greater than 4, you have a lot of small, dense LDL particles that can accelerate the development of atherosclerotic plaques – regardless of your total cholesterol levels.

So according to that article, your Trigs/HDL ratio is 1.8/1.3 which by my reckoning comes out way less than 2... so basically your DSN is talking rubbish...

Enjoy your results and refuse to change your diet or take statins. If needs be print that webpage out and ram it in their faces...

ps. there's plenty more good stuff in that link... just couldn't quote too much though.

[catza]

Thanks for the link and your interpretation of my figures Paul.

Oh dear, I just don't know what to do. I think I will dig out all my saved links and wade through them tomorrow. I feel as though I am being torn in two by my indecision to-night. I am a rational, intelligent woman normally but this has truly thrown me.

[Defren]

Jo, just seen your post. Thanks for the hugs. I am being such a wimp. It seems so confusing at the moment. Half of me is saying stick to what you decided when you read all the links about statins but the other half of my brain argues that hedging my bets may be the safest route. Having already been on massive doses of steroids which went straight to my head I have no intention of loosing any more hair through Statins.

I just can't seem to make up my mind which way to go.

It's not an easy decision to make, it's about your health after all. I did go along with my GP because I trust him. Now the Statins are in the bin and staying there. I have not had them for about 10 days [binned them in Cali, so a long way to go to retrieve them} I will go against my GP over Statins, but I do listen to him regarding everything else. Even after this long without them my hair is still falling out, granted it's slowed a little and thankfully I had really thick hair, but I must have lost about a quarter of thickness minimum. It's just not worth it for me, especially when posters have produced articles showing A. the side effects of Statins and B. there is no hard scientific data to show they benefit woman.

[librarising]

catza wrote
Gilly the sad breakdown of my cholesterol results is not pretty.

Total 6.5
Trigs 1.8
HDL 1.3
LDL 4.2

Do you have your March results for comparison ?
I'm looking for trends in the separate lipid figures.

Geoff

[catza]

Hi Geoff, sorry for not replying earlier. My earlier Cholesterol result in April was as follows.

Total 5.1
HDL 1.1
LDL 3.2

Unfortunately I don't have trigs figure but can get them if needed.

I have now seen my GP who listened to my fears over Statins, looked at the ratios but still thought they were a little too high. As far as he is concerned LDL is LDL and mine at 4.2 is too high. I have decided to more or less carry on with my normal diet for the next 2 months until I get a new Cholesterol test. The only change is to cut back very slightly on the fats percentage. I am not increasing either my carbs or protein so overall it amounts to an overall reduction in my ratio of fats over protein/carbs but the plus side is that so far I am loosing more weight as my calorie intake has reduced. I will not be taking Statins.

Intellectually I know that I should stand my ground but I find I become a Timorous Beasty when faced by a medical team who insist that my interpretation of my Cholesterol levels using my own research, and my subsequent reluctance to take Statins is wrong. The idea of me telling my GP that he has to read and accept the findings of articles such as the one linked to by Paul c was a non-starter. Maybe if it was published in the Lancet he may have accepted what it says but as it is he regarded my print outs as nothing better than the ramblings of a misguided Snake Oil Salesmen.

[Paul_c]

he may prescribe them, but nobody can force you to actually take the script to the chemists and take them...

[catza]

he may prescribe them, but nobody can force you to actually take the script to the chemists and take them...

My Doctor although wanting me to take Statins accepts that the choice is mine and he accepts that I have the right to refuse his recommendations so I won't need to lie to him.

I just wish he was more open minded about whether they are, in my case, actually needed. He is very supportive of my low carbohydrate regime and has even taken note of this forums existence and circulated it's location to the Diabetic Nurses in our practice as he appreciates how much support we can give to fellow diabetics. I did point out that it was the information I first gleaned for our forum about statins that set me on my current course so he may have more patients with similar views to me in the future. His reply was that proactive Diabetics lived longer.