• Guest, the forum is undergoing some upgrades and so the usual themes will be unavailable for a few days. In the meantime, you can use the forum like normal. We'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Cholesterol and Statins

Sapien said:
Can someone post a reputable study that shows saturated fat is good in large quantity (not just less bad than sugar and refined grains)?
Click to expand...
No because there are none.. in fact there never will be until people are taken at birth fed a specific diet for a lifetime then die and get autopsied.. however claiming that an ancestral food that mankind has eaten for millennia is "unhealthy" seems a bit crazy to me. Also of course it is not possible to eat "saturated fat" it doesn't exist in solitude in any food but is always accompanied by mono and poly unsaturated in differing ratios..

Edit to ad I think the PURE study showed a lack of any association between sat fat and ACM so negative evidence (which is probably stronger than any other) there was also a consideration that it may be slightly protective.
 
Last edited:
Guzzler said:
No studies but there is plenty of history. Sami, Masai, Inuit etc.
Click to expand...

There was this one three million year study that showed humans can thrive on natural animal fats and proteins. Ended in 1977.

 
Guzzler said:
Would not like to trawl the data on that one!
Click to expand...

Just get Walter Willet’s boys to run the meta analysis software looking for patterns within predetermined criteria. Normally does the trick
 

interesting point, @KK123 .
i wondered the same.

i also input my scores after following the LCHF diet many advocate on here..not keto mind.
and from my scores at DX in august 2018 to Jan 2019 just gone when i went down to almost normal levels HBA1c of 42
all my markers on this AND the previous used, hughs calculator had improved dramatically.

While i can see the concerns as to what we shouldn't eat., the main thread does seem to be lots of what is advocated here.
real foods, less fruit, less sugars, etc.

i suppose in any given situation a case COULD be made that any item we eat, can cause a heart attack, but in reality all any of us can do is take note, listen and with due diligence pick our own path way.

Can't think of a more depressing way of living then being afraid to eat anything, because it might be bad, in some way or other.
 
Not sure why the conversation has turned to SAFAs when we know that dietary cholesterol has very little impact on serum cholesterol. Obviously this statement comes with the understanding that plant sterols in cholesterol lowering margarines are an exception.
 
Jim Lahey said:
There was this one three million year study that showed humans can thrive on natural animal fats and proteins. Ended in 1977.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately for most of those years the humans were eating wild and not domesticated animals and certainly not factory farmed animals fattened up on corn.
 
Sapien said:
Unfortunately for most of those years the humans were eating wild and not domesticated animals and certainly not factory farmed animals fattened up on corn.
Click to expand...
They were not eating hyperpalatable, highly refined carbs every two hours either. And that is apart from from 30 years of trans fats and the man made polys of modern times. I know which I'd choose to eat between modern cattle and the other things.
 
bulkbiker said:
"Unfortunately"?
Click to expand...

Fortunately for them, unfortunately for us that most meat is now factory farmed. Unfortunately we can’t assume that if animal fat was healthy hundreds or thousands of years ago that still applies today. Animals are what they eat.

Today many animals are raised on corn and soy feed. Grass fed can still be fattened for market on corn. Lots of omega 6 fat relative to omega 3 in most meat these days- not too different from vegetable oils.

Fraud is not uncommon in marketing meat, fish, olive oil, etc. You don’t always know what you are really buying.

I think meat is way better than vegetable oil and grains, but I am not convinced that meat in large quantity is the healthiest low carb alternative. (aka carnivore).
 
Sapien said:
Today many animals are raised on corn and soy feed.
Click to expand...
Where do you live? Here in the UK most animals are out in the fields eating grass.. I doubt very much that the farm that most of my meat comes from would spend money on feed when grass is free...
 
bulkbiker said:
Where do you live? Here in the UK most animals are out in the fields eating grass.. I doubt very much that the farm that most of my meat comes from would spend money on feed when grass is free...
Click to expand...

“Unfortunately” in the US, but factory farms and deception aren’t unique to the US.

https://amp.theguardian.com/environ...00-livestock-mega-farms-investigation-reveals

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-an...abelled-in-one-in-five-samples-worldwide/amp/

https://amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/jan/04/olive-oil-real-thing
 
No factory farms in my county.
I despise all seafood.
Stopped using olive oil when I rediscovered butter and lard.
I'm alright, Jack (as long as I buy local meat).
 
Jim Lahey said:
Not quite “none” of us. I just recently had a hs-CRP. Precisely because I wanted some kind of rough measure of my inflammation status. Result in my signature. But granted I imagine I’m in the minority, and I had to pay for it myself.
Click to expand...

Hi Jim, that's the point, none of us get them unless we are willing to pay for them.
 
Is the hs-CRP test the same as a CRP ?

I was given a CRP as part of my routine health checks back in 2012, well before my T2 diagnosis. Not had one since.
 
Bluetit1802 said:
Is the hs-CRP test the same as a CRP ?

I was given a CRP as part of my routine health checks back in 2012, well before my T2 diagnosis. Not had one since.
Click to expand...

The standard CRP measured from 10 to 1000 mg/L and is used to detect inflammation. (a bit cheaper than hs-CRP) Those are measurement used in the US.

The hs-CRP (high sensitivity) measures from 0.2 to 10 mg/L and is used to evaluate CV risk.

Low risk is less than 1.0 mg/L. Average risk 1.0 to 3.0 and high risk above 3.0.

I have had the test three times. Once it came back 0.2. A different doc ordered it later and it came back 32.5! The doc said “not possible” and re-ordered the test two days later which came back <0.2. (Either I am in really good shape or really bad shape).

hs-CRP was covered by insurance, whereas the CAC (calcium score) was not covered. (Luckily my calcium score was zero.)
 

Thank you. You seem to be in very good shape!! Well done.

My records show the standard range was 0 to 10mg/l and just said C- reactive protein. My score was 5 at that time, but I have arthritis so that may explain things. I may ask for the other one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…