• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Lipid levels

Caeseji

Well-Known Member
Messages
658
Location
Hull
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
Dislikes
Self-fellating idiots that don't at all look at other people's views
So! Decided to get myself checked over yesterday just to keep a handle on my HBA1C levels but seems like they threw a lipid panel into the mix without me realising thus I had eaten a quite high fat meal before it.

Breakdown as follows:

Serum cholesterol level 6.4 mmol/L
Serum triglyceride levels 1.0 mmol/L
Serum HDL cholesterol level 1.0 mmol/L
Serum LDL cholesterol level 4.9 mmol/L
Serum cholesterol/HDL ratio 6.4
Serum non high density lipoprotein cholesterol level 5.4 mmol/L

I can already see they are trying to up my statin to 40mg from 20mg but looking at this my HDL is on the low side but my HDL:TG ratio is 1 so I am not so worried at all but I know I am going to be having a rather awkward conversation when I go back.

No HBA1C yet but hopefully that'll be some good news!
 
Hi @Caeseji

yeah i fell foul of that on my first LCHF blood test.
fasted for the next one from 8pm..blood drawn at 1145am
so a good fasting gap, and my HDL despite having sampled muchly of the BAD things while on two holiday
i actually went from high risk into normal on Hughs calculator.

( looked good as simple paper score as well,)

So i'd say with your dedicated approach to this, a fasting level,
would bring you right down imho

Good luck on the HBA1c front..Going great guns, mate.
 
bulkbiker said:
Did they say why?
Click to expand...
Oh you know BB, I’m a naughty diabetic and we all should be taking them I think I read my results and I had a really high Trigs and total cholesterol at the time. My LDL was 1 but my trigs were 4.6! Now they’re 1 and I find that is better.
 
Caeseji said:
Oh you know BB, I’m a naughty diabetic and we all should be taking them I think I read my results and I had a really high Trigs and total cholesterol at the time. My LDL was 1 but my trigs were 4.6! Now they’re 1 and I find that is better.
Click to expand...

A lot better and if they were 1.0 after a fatty meal and no fasting then you know I'd be questioning whether they were in the slightest bit necessary...
 
@bulkbiker @Caeseji when I get my (three month) results in just over 2 months can I send them to you so you can tell me what they mean
 
bulkbiker said:
A lot better and if they were 1.0 after a fatty meal and no fasting then you know I'd be questioning whether they were in the slightest bit necessary...
Click to expand...
I did look at my results when I first took control when I got my 114 HBA1C and it wasn’t abnormal according to their metric with a 4.6 trigs, 1.0 LDL and 0.8 HDL which sounds awfully like a heart attack waiting to happen. Reducing the trigs to 1 and HDL up to 1 sounds a lot more like a favourable outcome no matter what the 4.9 LDL says, right? I think that’s why they are trying to up the dosage on the statins, for the high LDL.

@copilost I am still getting my head around it here myself but I hope it’s some good news!
 
@bulkbiker So I managed to track down my December results and ran it through Dave's tool as @Tipetoo referenced.

--===== CholesterolCode.com/Report v0.9.5.15 =====--
• Male • 29 • Coffee: 3 cups/day •
• 29 on years on Standard American •
• 6h water fasted • Cholesterol Rx: true •

Total Cholesterol: 143 mg/dL 3.7 mmol/L
LDL Cholesterol: 39 mg/dL 1mmol/L
HDL Cholesterol: 31 mg/dL 0.8mmol/L
TG Cholesterol: 363 mg/dL 4.1mmol/L

---------RISK REPORT---------
Atherogenic Index of Plasma: 0.71 mg/dL >>> Highest Risk Third
----> Go to https://tinyurl.com/ycccmmnx for more on AIP

Framingham Offspring: 1.3 Odds Ratio >>> High Risk
----> Go to https://tinyurl.com/y5fc5adl for more on this Framingham study

Jeppesen: >>> Highest Risk Third
----> Go to https://tinyurl.com/y63xp7lj for more on the Jeppesen study

Cholesterol Remnants: 73 mg/dL >>> 0.82 mmol/L >>> High Risk
----> Go to https://tinyurl.com/y84u92wm for more on Cholesterol Remnants

------CONVENTIONAL MARKERS AND RATIOS------
Friedewald LDL-C: 39 | Iranian LDL-C: 245
TC/HDL Ratio in mg/dL: 4.61
TG/HDL Ratio in mg/dL: 11.71 | TG/HDL Ratio in mmol/L: 5.12

So this result was put as completely normal, no need for intervention.

--===== CholesterolCode.com/Report v0.9.5.15 =====--
• Male • 30 • Coffee: 5 cups/day •
• 7 on months on Keto (less than 20g carbs) •
• 1h water fasted • Cholesterol Rx: false •

Total Cholesterol: 247 mg/dL 6.4 mmol/L
LDL Cholesterol: 39 mg/dL 1mmol/L
HDL Cholesterol: 39 mg/dL 1.0mmol/L
TG Cholesterol: 89 mg/dL 1.0mmol/L

---------RISK REPORT---------
Atherogenic Index of Plasma: 0 mg/dL >>> Lowest Risk Third
----> Go to https://tinyurl.com/ycccmmnx for more on AIP

Framingham Offspring: 1 Odds Ratio >>> Medium Risk
----> Go to https://tinyurl.com/y5fc5adl for more on this Framingham study

Jeppesen: >>> Medium Risk Third
----> Go to https://tinyurl.com/y63xp7lj for more on the Jeppesen study

Cholesterol Remnants: 169 mg/dL >>> 0.2 mmol/L >>> Medium Risk
----> Go to https://tinyurl.com/y84u92wm for more on Cholesterol Remnants

------CONVENTIONAL MARKERS AND RATIOS------
Friedewald LDL-C: 190 | Iranian LDL-C: 181
TC/HDL Ratio in mg/dL: 6.33
TG/HDL Ratio in mg/dL: 2.28 | TG/HDL Ratio in mmol/L: 1

And this is considered abnormal and needed action?! What?! Running my numbers through QRisk too sets me up for a grand total of a 0.5% risk of having cardiac issues in the next 10 years too. What even is going on in the NHS these days?
 
And this is considered abnormal and needed action?! What?! Running my numbers through QRisk too sets me up for a grand total of a 0.5% risk of having cardiac issues in the next 10 years too. What even is going on in the NHS these days?[/QUOTE]

Have you watched Ivor Cummings lectures on his diagnosis with high cholesterol? The video is on this link.

https://www.diabetes.co.uk/in-depth/ivor-cummins-jeff-gerber-heart-disease/
 
You have to remember that you now know more than most GP's about cholesterol...
 
I ran my numbers through Dave Feldman’s calculator. My HDL is too low to put me in the lowest risk per Jeppesen, but it is good enough to qualify as very lowest risk per Framingham. Interesting.

Total: 127
LDL 69
HDL 48
TG 50

If I just could increase my HDL to 58, I would drop to lowest risk in Jeppesen. I have read that 60-70 is more or less the ideal level for HDL at least as a health marker. Below 40 seems to be consistently noted as conferring higher risk.

Studies show artificially raising HDL does no good.

Has anyone noticed any specific foods or type of exercise that had had a particular favorable impact on HDL? (Other than just low carb)
 
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.…