- Messages
- 124
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Other
- Dislikes
- Brain tumours
This may be common knowledge, and it may not be. It wasn't to me, so I did a bit of research into it because to be honest, I seem to correct my diabetic nurse more often than I listen to her. I'm not confident she has a good understanding of low carb diets. It's probably not her fault, but the science really does need to hit doctor's surgeries one day before we all end up on pointless medication for no apparent reason.
Okay, here's the latest development. After dropping over four stone in weight as a T2 diabetic using a low carb diet (20g carbs a day, and no exercise because I'm a lazy sod), and keeping my blood sugar levels down to normal throughout the last year, I expected diabetic remission. I earned it, right? I'm a lightweight, non-diabetic, low blood sugar wonder these days, who can still eat a chocolate eclair when I want one (7g carbs each, from Asda frozen foods--a lovely treat after ketosis).
But because my cholesterol went up a point, I'm stuck with more diabetes checks in May 2014. Why? Since when is cholesterol anything to do with diabetes, and more to the point, is it actually high cholesterol?
The answers are: It has nothing to do with diabetes, and no--the cholesterol measurement in a standard test doesn't mean you're at risk from heart disease. In fact, it doesn't mean anything at all.
So here are the numbers I was given by the nurse:
Starting cholesterol (pre diet) = 6.9 (blood sugar = high/diabetic) (weight = 15 stone 3lbs)
Midway cholesterol (2 months on a keto diet) = 4.1 (blood sugar = low/no longer diabetic) (weight = 12 stone 7lbs)
Endgame cholesterol (7 months on a keto diet) = 5.3 (blood sugar = low/no longer diabetic) (weight = 10 stone 10 lbs)
Okay, so that cholesterol looks bad, doesn't it? Everything else is good though. This confused me. I feel healthy, I look healthy and I'm not diabetic. What's with the hinky cholesterol results?
The nurse didn't give me much advice that I was willing to take. She told me to cut down my fats, but I know that those are my energy source, and they're good for me, so I wasn't taking that advice.
So I came home and did my research. I also asked the wonderful woman who advised me on my diet in the first place. She's always right and saved me from the dreaded medication in the beginning by getting me on a keto diet in the first place (my hero).
So here's the breakdown for anyone with the same concerns I had about cholesterol:
Cholesterol comes in three forms, but the ones that we care about are called HDL and LDL. If your levels are 1 part HDL and 2 parts LDL, then you're healthy. The number on the cholesterol (5.3 is mine right now) don't mean anything because it's how many parts are good cholesterol (HDL) and how many are bad cholesterol (LDL). The ratio of 2:1 (2 parts LDL and 1 part HDL) is the healthy level.
I didn't get a breakdown of my 5.3 cholesterol, so I don't actually know if I'm in the good or bad side of that equation. The number of the weight is meaningless. If for example 4.3 of that 5.3 result are HDLs, then I'm the healthiest person alive in terms of cholesterol levels. HDLs are protective cholesterols that prevent arteries clogging up. LDLs are the nasty cloggers. If you have just one third of protective cholesterols in your blood, then you're gonna be fine.
Another interesting fact is that high fat diets lead to larger chunks of LDL cholesterol. Chunks so large they are too big to stick to artery walls. So on a high fat diet, you're less likely to get blocked arteries. Here's more info on that: http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/faq/f/carbcholesterol.htm
Looking around to confirm it all, I checked this site out. For science geeks, this defines the ratios really well in terms of use. I thought it was an interesting article about it all:
http://eatingacademy.com/how-low-carb-diet-reduced-my-risk-of-heart-disease
And finally, I asked the wonderful woman who set me on the low carb path, and her own results made me really curious about what my LDL:HDL breakdown is because I'm now convinced that my diabetic nurse doesn't understand cholesterol results at all. Here's what my guru said:
Did you get a breakdown on the cholesterol? An overall figure is useless without a breakdown showing the ratio between LDL and HDL cholesterol. Normally, the ideal is to have a ratio of one third HDL (good) cholesterol to two thirds LDL (bad). If the LDL is more than three times the HDL, they start getting concerned. At 3:1, you are considered to have a low risk of heart problems.
When I last got a blood test done, my total cholesterol was about 5.2 or something similar, and they looked at the breakdown. And nearly had collective heart attacks. My HDL was higher than my LDL. They had never seen that before, and wanted to know how I did it. My risk was pretty much zero.
So I'd have a look at the breakdown.
But in any case, you are right. Cholesterol has nothing to do with blood sugar or diabetes. And it's not a predictor of anything except your likelihood of being prescribed statins. As many people with low cholesterol have heart attacks as with high cholesterol. Reducing cholesterol does nothing to improve your life expectancy.
Do NOT let them put you on statins. In the next episode, I'll explain the concept of NNT to you, and you'll go through the roof.
So, I'm dying to find out what NNT is, but I'll be saying 'no thank you' to statins and requesting a breakdown of my cholesterol levels. Someone should do an article about backwards medical practices vs dieting realities based on science. Since when was medical science based on heresay and creativity? I expect it to be based on fact and scientific study. But with diets, that appears to be too much to ask for.
Overall: The doctor =0 / The internet and a friend =2 (doctors, you fail).
Okay, here's the latest development. After dropping over four stone in weight as a T2 diabetic using a low carb diet (20g carbs a day, and no exercise because I'm a lazy sod), and keeping my blood sugar levels down to normal throughout the last year, I expected diabetic remission. I earned it, right? I'm a lightweight, non-diabetic, low blood sugar wonder these days, who can still eat a chocolate eclair when I want one (7g carbs each, from Asda frozen foods--a lovely treat after ketosis).
But because my cholesterol went up a point, I'm stuck with more diabetes checks in May 2014. Why? Since when is cholesterol anything to do with diabetes, and more to the point, is it actually high cholesterol?
The answers are: It has nothing to do with diabetes, and no--the cholesterol measurement in a standard test doesn't mean you're at risk from heart disease. In fact, it doesn't mean anything at all.
So here are the numbers I was given by the nurse:
Starting cholesterol (pre diet) = 6.9 (blood sugar = high/diabetic) (weight = 15 stone 3lbs)
Midway cholesterol (2 months on a keto diet) = 4.1 (blood sugar = low/no longer diabetic) (weight = 12 stone 7lbs)
Endgame cholesterol (7 months on a keto diet) = 5.3 (blood sugar = low/no longer diabetic) (weight = 10 stone 10 lbs)
Okay, so that cholesterol looks bad, doesn't it? Everything else is good though. This confused me. I feel healthy, I look healthy and I'm not diabetic. What's with the hinky cholesterol results?
The nurse didn't give me much advice that I was willing to take. She told me to cut down my fats, but I know that those are my energy source, and they're good for me, so I wasn't taking that advice.
So I came home and did my research. I also asked the wonderful woman who advised me on my diet in the first place. She's always right and saved me from the dreaded medication in the beginning by getting me on a keto diet in the first place (my hero).
So here's the breakdown for anyone with the same concerns I had about cholesterol:
Cholesterol comes in three forms, but the ones that we care about are called HDL and LDL. If your levels are 1 part HDL and 2 parts LDL, then you're healthy. The number on the cholesterol (5.3 is mine right now) don't mean anything because it's how many parts are good cholesterol (HDL) and how many are bad cholesterol (LDL). The ratio of 2:1 (2 parts LDL and 1 part HDL) is the healthy level.
I didn't get a breakdown of my 5.3 cholesterol, so I don't actually know if I'm in the good or bad side of that equation. The number of the weight is meaningless. If for example 4.3 of that 5.3 result are HDLs, then I'm the healthiest person alive in terms of cholesterol levels. HDLs are protective cholesterols that prevent arteries clogging up. LDLs are the nasty cloggers. If you have just one third of protective cholesterols in your blood, then you're gonna be fine.
Another interesting fact is that high fat diets lead to larger chunks of LDL cholesterol. Chunks so large they are too big to stick to artery walls. So on a high fat diet, you're less likely to get blocked arteries. Here's more info on that: http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/faq/f/carbcholesterol.htm
Looking around to confirm it all, I checked this site out. For science geeks, this defines the ratios really well in terms of use. I thought it was an interesting article about it all:
http://eatingacademy.com/how-low-carb-diet-reduced-my-risk-of-heart-disease
And finally, I asked the wonderful woman who set me on the low carb path, and her own results made me really curious about what my LDL:HDL breakdown is because I'm now convinced that my diabetic nurse doesn't understand cholesterol results at all. Here's what my guru said:
Did you get a breakdown on the cholesterol? An overall figure is useless without a breakdown showing the ratio between LDL and HDL cholesterol. Normally, the ideal is to have a ratio of one third HDL (good) cholesterol to two thirds LDL (bad). If the LDL is more than three times the HDL, they start getting concerned. At 3:1, you are considered to have a low risk of heart problems.
When I last got a blood test done, my total cholesterol was about 5.2 or something similar, and they looked at the breakdown. And nearly had collective heart attacks. My HDL was higher than my LDL. They had never seen that before, and wanted to know how I did it. My risk was pretty much zero.
So I'd have a look at the breakdown.
But in any case, you are right. Cholesterol has nothing to do with blood sugar or diabetes. And it's not a predictor of anything except your likelihood of being prescribed statins. As many people with low cholesterol have heart attacks as with high cholesterol. Reducing cholesterol does nothing to improve your life expectancy.
Do NOT let them put you on statins. In the next episode, I'll explain the concept of NNT to you, and you'll go through the roof.
So, I'm dying to find out what NNT is, but I'll be saying 'no thank you' to statins and requesting a breakdown of my cholesterol levels. Someone should do an article about backwards medical practices vs dieting realities based on science. Since when was medical science based on heresay and creativity? I expect it to be based on fact and scientific study. But with diets, that appears to be too much to ask for.
Overall: The doctor =0 / The internet and a friend =2 (doctors, you fail).