High cholesterol on a lchf

[KevinPotts]

When I have my next Lipid Panel I'm going to also ask for an LDL sub fraction profile. If the surgery won't provide then this is obtainable privately for about £100 - not cheap, but important for those of us really wanting to understand the quality of our (bad) LDL cholesterol. This test reveals the size of the particles making up the LDL chol as small us bad and dangerous, whereas large and fluffy is fine even if your LDL number is high. So what medicine is finally revealing is that overall numbers even for the separate categories is insufficient to base a well informed diagnosis of "good" or "bad" upon.

 

[Brunneria]

My nurse definitely said that the test was 'different' if it was fasting, and more expensive.

Of course, i don't know if that is true, or whether she was just trying to guilt me for making her scrap the first wee bag, and write out another.

 

[zand]

My doctor sighed when I asked if my next test could be a fasting one so that I could get the full cholesterol results. He did say yes though.

 

[SunnyExpat]

No worries! I don't feel you have been curt. i am just aware how quickly an idea becomes cemented into urban myth.

I think i would be wary of linking cholesterol to sat/unsat fat by gender without very firm evidence - especially as we have seen others @donnellysdogs and (maybe?) @Kristin251 (sorry if i have you wrong, ladies) who have found lower sat fat works for them too.

Sending out a gender message could be misleading in both directions.

Very true, we can state we all react differently to saturated fats, and really kill off the urban myth that it doesn't raise cholesterol for anyone. It does seem to affect both genders, as you say.

Unless of course you have firm evidence that will apply to 100% of the population?
Until you can provide me links, I am happy to state it does raise mine, and others on here have also stated similar results, so I hope the myth it doesn't is firmly put to bed now, and caution is needed?
It doesn't prove zand wrong though, perhaps gender does have a better/worse distinction.

 

[serenity648]

this thread reminds me that we are all individual in what we can and cannot eat, and testing is very important. I am due a non-fasting cholesterol test in 7 weeks. Will they do a breakdown or will I only have the whole cholesterol number?

 

[JohnEGreen]

I think that I should set up an appointment with my DN or GP for my review as I have to my shame no idea what my cholesterol levels are I've been taking the statins for a long long time and am sure there must have been a reason for that apart from the fact that I would have to grow another hand to count all my close relatives that have died from or had heart attacks on my fingers that is.

And as it has just struck me that at 66 I'm the oldest male in my family. I think I better get a grip. Thanks all for the wake up call.

 

[SunnyExpat]

this thread reminds me that we are all individual in what we can and cannot eat, and testing is very important. I am due a non-fasting cholesterol test in 7 weeks. Will they do a breakdown or will I only have the whole cholesterol number?

You probably need to ask for the full breakdown beforehand, to ensure they actually do it. And get a morning appointment, and eat and drink nothing beforehand, and ask for a fasting test instead.

 

[serenity648]

the surgery has already said it doesnt do fasting cholesterol tests anymore : (

 

[zand]

the surgery has already said it doesnt do fasting cholesterol tests anymore : (

Ask again if they will do one, as a total cholesterol figure is a waste of time as it doesn't tell you anything. It's worth a try. I asked and got one.

 

[SunnyExpat]

Ask again if they will do one, as a total cholesterol figure is a waste of time as it doesn't tell you anything. It's worth a try. I asked and got one.

I found it helped it you knew what you wanted, why you wanted it, and discussed what you were going to do with the results.
They see many that have read they 'should get this done', and don't have any idea how to use the 'it' after.
If you sound like it will be a good investment for the surgery, I find they are usually supportive.

As zand says, ask for it again.

 

[zand]

No worries! I don't feel you have been curt. i am just aware how quickly an idea becomes cemented into urban myth.

I think i would be wary of linking cholesterol to sat/unsat fat by gender without very firm evidence - especially as we have seen others @donnellysdogs and (maybe?) @Kristin251 (sorry if i have you wrong, ladies) who have found lower sat fat works for them too.

Sending out a gender message could be misleading in both directions.

Yes sorry, you're right. I know that statins have been shown to be of no clinical benefit at all to women, whilst they do benefit a small percentage of men. Women also need higher cholesterol in later life as it protects them. So there are differences in the sexes in cholesterol in that respect, but I made a leap to get to the conclusion I made earlier.

On a personal level that's what I've always done, and when I chat on the forum it's me personally saying it, that's why I rarely put up links. I will be more careful in future because what applies to me may not work for anyone else because I don't research anything, I just talk about what I have done and what I think. I don't take anything a doctor says to me as gospel truth so I wouldn't expect anyone to believe what I am saying without checking it out for themselves first. Like you said earlier we're just online weirdos.

 

[SunnyExpat]

Yes sorry, you're right. I know that statins have been shown to be of no clinical benefit at all to women, whilst they do benefit a small percentage of men. Women also need higher cholesterol in later life as it protects them. So there are differences in the sexes in cholesterol in that respect, but I made a leap to get to the conclusion I made earlier.

On a personal level that's what I've always done, and when I chat on the forum it's me personally saying it, that's why I rarely put up links. I will be more careful in future because what applies to me may not work for anyone else because I don't research anything, I just talk about what I have done and what I think. I don't take anything a doctor says to me as gospel truth so I wouldn't expect anyone to believe what I am saying without checking it out for themselves first. Like you said earlier we're just online weirdos.

It's more valid than any number of doctors telling us why our bodies should be doing things they don't.
It's good information based on personal experiences, and then you find some of it fits in with what you see, other things don't, and you can tailor a system that suits you, and grows with you.
It's better than relying on a universal remedy for everyone, and deciding that's the only way for the rest of your life right up front.
I'm not interested in links, if you look, you'll find one to support anything somewhere on the internet.

 

[Daibell]

Ask again if they will do one, as a total cholesterol figure is a waste of time as it doesn't tell you anything. It's worth a try. I asked and got one.

My last non-fasting test came with a breakdown which my DN discussed with me. I don't think she specifically asked for the test to include a breakdown; it was automatic.

 

[jennarose93]

I am sorry you are having the problem with your cholesterol and trigs. Going on the LCHF did lower both of mine at first (and enabled me to lower my insulin dosage by 90u) but then the cholesterol leveled out to borderline at 204 and the trigs about 400 (they were 1700) Now I have about a hundred pounds to lose and I was eating only 1200 kcals (measure, weighing, reading labels). Of course there were those young folks who told me I was not eating enough. I tried eating and in two weeks gained 10 pounds and my glucose was slowly rising but still in range. So I went to a LCModifiedF and reduced my calories and immediately felt better and lost the extra weight swiftly. The insulin did not help even though i am taking very small amounts. I must add in the past three years I have had total hip replacement and a total shoulder replacement (ironic in a way as I was very athletic and that quality wore down my joints) I am just now being able to walk a little and toss the ball to the dog - it's going to take a while after being essentially bed to chair bound for the past 3 years. While on the LCMF diet I looked carefully at my family history and found familial hypercholesterolemia runs in my family - I have to get the fat reduced from my liver and pancreas (which is also a symptom). I can't and won't take statins or fibrates. So I cut the saturated meat fats out - except for my morning BPC - which has and is continuing to bring down the Triglycerides, feeling thinner in the belly -where most of my weight is (I have the potato head build) but weight fluctuates up and down a few pounds. I had decided, at first, to go on a 3 -7 day yoga fast and began to research the safest way for a diabetic, and i knew i would probably lower the 14u/am and 12u/pm 70/30 insulin but then I came across NC. After reading and studying, I am hoping I can get off the rest of the hormone known as insulin and lose enough weight to get my cholesterol and trigs WNL. I will then create a low carb plan using modified Atkins and Mediterranean until I have reached my goal weight - which should be a little easier off insulin. Once at goal I will enjoy an occasional cut of fatty meat etc and go from there.
Familial high cholesterol affects 1 in 400 people but only one in ten people with inherited high cholesterol realize they have it. One reason is because people refuse to believe it exists and you'll find in some LCHF and Paleo communities they'll say it is impossible, only affects a tiny portion of the population and al sorts of reasons why it's not the HF causing High Cholesterol. It is part of a metabolic syndrome diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and hypercholesterolemia.Hypertension usually develops as well. Like diabetes, that impairs the uses carbs for energy instead of fat stores, those with familial hypercholesterolemia are unable to filter out the excess fats and it goes into the blood etc. Recently I found out my elder brother had a scare 40 years with borderline diabetes and a dx of familial hypercholesterolemia - I remember he slimmed down from his bulky football player body and was quite svelt. Now i know what his motivation was. He has never had to have any medicine. Just have your doctor do a screening.

 

[AndBreathe]

If I may just interject here?

I am someone with an inconveniently high Total Cholesterol number. The medics nearly swallow their tongue if they don't understand the breakdown, but the sad truth is many don't (and of course, there are exceptions to every rule).

Initially, when I was told a stating "could be beneficial", I rejected it for all manner of reasons, which weren't based on science, but I set about my homework and learned my Scoobie Senses hadn't let me down.

Cutting to the chase, when I learned, even simplistically, about metabolic syndrome, and recognised I showed signs of much of it (raised HbA1c, BP, Lipids and cute little luuuurve handles), I decided to change at least part of that; focusing purely on my blood glucose numbers. I reduced my carbs.

My Total Cholesterol has tweaked a bit, but the fundamental changes are to the components , which have transformed from "Ooops" (not so good) to "Blimey!" (rather spiffing!).

I helped my GP to learn, as I had and her last assessment of my lipids was "You must be thrilled with those numbers". That statement was on the back of a Total Cholesterol of 6.5.

I urge you to watch @Brunneria's link to Ken Sikaris. He is the linchpin to my GP's learning process and she is almost as much a groupie as I could become. OK, have become.

I suggest you really get your thinking cap on and do a lot of learning for yourself. Lipid profiles, like the glucose side of things, don't have a one-size fits all.

Good luck with it all.

 

[SunnyExpat]

The higher has seen cholesterol, and weight both increase.
Not normally an indication things are getting better.

(While the GP asked if you were thrilled, after you explained what you you had found on the internet to show your interpretation was correct, more importantly, were they?)

 

[AtkinsMo]

You may find this interesting. Some modern day scientists have finally accessed and re-analysed the original data on a study, on which all our current dietary guidelines were based, and found that, contrary to the reported findings, the actual findings demonstrate that reducing cholesterol by restricting saturated fats actually INCREASES the risk of death! Moving on since the 1970s, so many people have 'modified' their cholesterol numbers, either by diet or by statins, that we don't really know what 'normal' cholesterol is, if we ever did. Here is an excellent summary of the new findings by Malcolm Kendrick.

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2016/04/13/greater-cholesterol-lowering-increases-the-risk-of-death/

 

[AtkinsMo]

Or here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/u...snt-fit-the-story-line.html?mabReward=A6&_r=0

 

[SunnyExpat]

You may find this interesting. Some modern day scientists have finally accessed and re-analysed the original data on a study, on which all our current dietary guidelines were based, and found that, contrary to the reported findings, the actual findings demonstrate that reducing cholesterol by restricting saturated fats actually INCREASES the risk of death! Moving on since the 1970s, so many people have 'modified' their cholesterol numbers, either by diet or by statins, that we don't really know what 'normal' cholesterol is, if we ever did. Here is an excellent summary of the new findings by Malcolm Kendrick.

https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2016/04/13/greater-cholesterol-lowering-increases-the-risk-of-death/

Is Kendrick the only source of this?
I've seen no others quoted really.

But I have read the studies he seemed to have come to his conclusion on, as have many others.
Even your second link doesn't agree with him.

 

[JohnEGreen]

Mind you Ancel Keys may not have been the bogeyman we all think he was.
This is an old blog but none the less worth reading.
https://rawfoodsos.com/2011/12/22/the-truth-about-ancel-keys-weve-all-got-it-wrong/