Cholesterol and Statins

[Goonergal]

All

A number of posts have been deleted for bickering. Please remain civil in your response to those you may not agree with.

 

[amcfad]

Did you get a full lipid panel?
If you want to share we could analyse.. providing you had fasted for long enough before the blood was taken.

As it always should be it's up to you what goes into your body.

Hi bulkbiker, sorry for the late bump on this but after jumping through a lot of hoops and online forms I have managed to gain access to my records. What would I need to send for an analysis of my cholesterol? The nurse has told me I am now in remission and just need check-ups on 6-12 month basis from here on in.

 

[bulkbiker]

Hi bulkbiker, sorry for the late bump on this but after jumping through a lot of hoops and online forms I have managed to gain access to my records. What would I need to send for an analysis of my cholesterol? The nurse has told me I am now in remission and just need check-ups on 6-12 month basis from here on in.

Its normally just a blood test ideally having fasted for 12-14 hours.
Not all surgeries do it but just ask for a full lipid panel next time you get a blood test or see what the breakdown of your cholesterol numbers are online.
You really need the triglycerides and HDL numbers to get anything remotely useful.

 

[amcfad]

Its normally just a blood test ideally having fasted for 12-14 hours.
Not all surgeries do it but just ask for a full lipid panel next time you get a blood test or see what the breakdown of your cholesterol numbers are online.
You really need the triglycerides and HDL numbers to get anything remotely useful.

I think I have them however I'm not sure whether I had fasted for 12 hours or so prior to getting the bloods done? I willtry to upload some pics.


Will these do?

 

[bulkbiker]

I think I have them however I'm not sure whether I had fasted for 12 hours or so prior to getting the bloods done? I willtry to upload some pics.View attachment 49496 View attachment 49497 View attachment 49498 View attachment 49499


Will these do?

Ok so looking at those figures we get

So your trig/HDL ratio has improved over time apart from the last one. I'd suggest this may have been non fasted as that can impact on the trigs especially.
Anything under 0.87 is considered excellent so you're not too far away even at the most recent.

 

[amcfad]

Ok so looking at those figures we get

View attachment 49500

So your trig/HDL ratio has improved over time apart from the last one. I'd suggest this may have been non fasted as that can impact on the trigs especially.
Anything under 0.87 is considered excellent so you're not too far away even at the most recent.

Now that will make a lot of sense as the previous ones were all taken around 09.00 with no breakfast so probably never had anything for around 12 hours. The latest was taken at 15.00, and if memory serves I had a 2 x mozzarella cheese wraps with tuna mayo filling just before midday.

Is there a simple equation that gives those figures I can learn?

 

[bulkbiker]

Is there a simple equation that gives those figures I can learn?

Yep divide trig number by HDL number. That's it.

 

[amcfad]

Yep divide trig number by HDL number. That's it.

Thanks bb

 

[AndBreathe]

I had a very interesting experience a week ago. I was at the local Cardiac Centre of Excellence having a bus load of tests as part of a research study. I have never qualified for a study before, but these criteria were easy - an historic diagnosis of T2 and no history of cardiac disease. As someone in remission, I was being included in a small cohort with that additional quality.

Anyway, anyway, at the end of the day, after a bunch of blood tests, an ECG, an echo cardiogram, a stressed ECG, a CT scan (including arterial calcium analysis), and MRI (which included images of my liver and pancreas, and extended MRI to include the introduction of Adenosine, (and a fabulous cup of tea!!), I had a long chat with the cardiologist to discuss my various results. Not all were back, or had been adequately analysed at that point, but along with other "stuff" we had a decent chat about my lipid levels, which had tested in line with my history TC usually high sixes to mid 7s.

This time I was mid 7s, but the usual excellent trigs ratios (I don't have the numbers in writing yet). Needless to say, I girded my loins for the statin discussion, but the wind was well and truly taken from my sails. In essence, for someone like me, they would not consider recommending a statin. If I had heart challenges, that would be a different matter.

Not sure how much of the discussions will be replayed in my post-clinic letter to me and my GP, but I really hope that bit is in there. I just hope that sort of messaging is trickling out to GPs.

I tell you what; watching your own heart beat on the MRI is fascinating!

 

[Dr Snoddy]

AndBreathe, that is absolutely fascinating! Where is this centre? I would be in the same category as you so I might be able to be a guinea pig.

 

[AndBreathe]

It

AndBreathe, that is absolutely fascinating! Where is this centre? I would be in the same category as you so I might be able to be a guinea pig.

In the midlands Dr Snoddy, but best we don't find ourselves on the naughty step for thread derailment.

 

[bulkbiker]

It


In the midlands Dr Snoddy, but best we don't find ourselves on the naughty step for thread derailment.

Hey guys it's my thread.. derail away merrily.. and as you are talking about cholesterol anyway so not even derailing! No tyranny here please.. x

 

[bulkbiker]

Latest results just in....

Conversation with doc will be interesting if they bother to set one up that is..

 

[Mattrblue]

I have been taking a small amount of statin each day for 10 years now. 4 weeks ago I was diagnosed with diabetes.

I haven't got time to read all of this thread, but from first glance most people seem very anti-statins. My GP said there was no connection and no reason not to continue to take my statins.

So is anyone actually ok with statins here?

 

[bulkbiker]

My GP said there was no connection and no reason not to continue to take my statins.

Did he give you a reason as to why you should take them?

 

[Mattrblue]

I've suffered from high cholesterol for quite a while.

 

[bulkbiker]

I've suffered from high cholesterol for quite a while.

Do you have a full lipid panel breakdown.?
"High" cholesterol can mean lots of different things and can be protective in some instances..

 

[KK123]

I haven't got time to read all of this thread, but from first glance most people seem very anti-statins

Hi there. For me I just don't like the idea of taking a strong pill on a 'just in case' basis. I am not against statins at all if they can be justified, maybe because of existing heart conditions for example, and even then only with tangible justification. The problem is that they are prescribed for all of us just because we share a condition, no account is taken of lifestyle/sex/diet/diabetes management and so on. My cholesterol level as a 60 year old female is 7.6 (HDL 2.5/trigs 0.5/LDL around 4.7). As far as I am aware I am very healthy and show no markers for heart disease albeit I have (well controlled) diabetes. It's a bit like giving all type 2s insulin on the basis 'well it's progressive, you may need it eventually so have it now'. I wouldn't mind so much if they actually looked at your arteries or whatever but I hate the thought of my LDL being artificially lowered when there is no benefit that I can see. A recent in depth genetic assessment (via the NHS) showed I have polygenic higher than 'average' LDL' so nothing is going to lower that other than strong statins. My ratios are ok so my body is doing what it should given the hand it has been dealt. Them telling me I 'should' be under 4 is illogical, why??? I'm not average, I'm me.

 

[Mattrblue]

Do you have a full lipid panel breakdown.?
"High" cholesterol can mean lots of different things and can be protective in some instances..

Hi, I have an app that shows me my latest results. One section is called 'Serum Lipids', is this what you mean?
When I go into the option there are further choices to view behind it.

Serum cholesterol = normal at 4.95mmol/L (normal range 0-5.20)
Serum HDL cholesterol level = abnormal at 1.13 mmol/L (normal range 1.45-100)
Serum LDL cholesterol level = normal at 2.57 mmol/L (normal range 0 - 3.34)
Serum triglycerides = abnormal at 2.74 mmol/L (normal range 0 - 2.26)
Cholesterol HDL Ratio = 4.38 (no range given)
Non-HDL = 3.82 (no range given)

 

[bulkbiker]

Hi, I have an app that shows me my latest results. One section is called 'Serum Lipids', is this what you mean?
When I go into the option there are further choices to view behind it.

Serum cholesterol = normal at 4.95mmol/L (normal range 0-5.20)
Serum HDL cholesterol level = abnormal at 1.13 mmol/L (normal range 1.45-100)
Serum LDL cholesterol level = normal at 2.57 mmol/L (normal range 0 - 3.34)
Serum triglycerides = abnormal at 2.74 mmol/L (normal range 0 - 2.26)
Cholesterol HDL Ratio = 4.38 (no range given)
Non-HDL = 3.82 (no range given)

Yes it is.. looking at those results your total is fine .
Your triglycerides are quite high and your HDL quite low.
Had you fasted before the blood was taken for the test?