So what's the truth about Cholesterol

noblehead said:

Didn't mean to offend Dillinger as we were discussing cholesterol only a few weeks ago and you said then that you didn't mind discussing your cholesterol levels on the open forum, if I have offended you then I do apologize as that wasn't my intention!

Click to expand...

Hi Noblehead - not offended at all; apologies if my reply seemed truculent; I just don't think my cholesterol levels are 'very high' I think they are slightly above, in certain respects, what the NHS wants for diabetics but I'm happy with them. As you may know I think the whole obsession with cholesterol may be coming at this the wrong way around; i.e. cholesterol could well be a symptom and not a cause of some other chemical misalignment.

Best

Dillinger

I'm nearly 47.

I suppose being a big pizza fan I look at it in terms of pizzas because though most of my life a pizza loaded with cheese was thought of as unhealthy where as you are saying it's either the base that is unhealthy or just the mixing in roughly equal amounts of fat and carbs.

I'm reminded of an old time diet called the Hay diet where protein and carbs were eaten seperately but you are going one step beyond that saying they should hardly be mixed at all

borofergie said:

SouthernGeneral6512 said:

The only point is life expectancy was probably less than it is today during the pre-neolithic times when we lived on saturated fat although I don't know if that would be because of the diet or the hard life?

Click to expand...

Only because of non-dietary factors. Mortality was high (due to infection and getting eaten by things), but if you survived those then you could expect to live a long and healthy life. People certainly weren't dying of obesity related diseases.

There is no reason at all to suggest that your body is better off running on man-made vegetable oils rather than on the largely saturated animal fats. Body fat is largely saturated, why do you think that is?

Click to expand...

To add to this: my favourite evolutionary theory is that the driving factor behind our evolution from primate to man was the need to run long distances. Part of the requirement for that to happen was the ability to store fat. So, in agreement with Borofergie it was not the diet that curbed life expectancy but other factors such as disease. The body evolved to store fat but it had a huge requirement for doing so (ie) running a Hell of a lot. We've lost the need to run now but our body still stores fat....

There is another theory, we wern't designed to run long distance, only short ones but fast to kill our prey. We were designed to walk, to be on the move for some of the time.
Also we store fat particularly from the fruit we ate hence 'harvest'. It was stored to get us through the winter. We have access to fruit all year round so the body is in fat storage mode the whole time.

SouthernGeneral6512 said:

I suppose being a big pizza fan I look at it in terms of pizzas because though most of my life a pizza loaded with cheese was thought of as unhealthy where as you are saying it's either the base that is unhealthy or just the mixing in roughly equal amounts of fat and carbs.

I'm reminded of an old time diet called the Hay diet where protein and carbs were eaten seperately but you are going one step beyond that saying they should hardly be mixed at all

Click to expand...

Pizza is fat piled on top of huge amounts of refined carbohydrate, it's probably one of the worst things you could ever eat.

My personal opinion is that no-one (other than athletes) can process more than about 160g of carbohydrate a day. Eating in excess of that doesn't make any biological sense, and isn't what you evolved to eat.

If you aren't eating carbs, then you need to get energy from fat (because protein is more or less fixed). Natural saturated fat has to be a healthier option that mechanically recovered vegetable oils.

dawnmc said:

There is another theory, we wern't designed to run long distance, only short ones but fast to kill our prey. We were designed to walk, to be on the move for some of the time.
Also we store fat particularly from the fruit we ate hence 'harvest'. It was stored to get us through the winter. We have access to fruit all year round so the body is in fat storage mode the whole time.

Click to expand...

I like the fruit thing, but surely it is no coincidence that humans are the fastest land animals over large distances? I think that we're hard-wired to run long distances.

borofergie said:

SouthernGeneral6512 said:

I suppose being a big pizza fan I look at it in terms of pizzas because though most of my life a pizza loaded with cheese was thought of as unhealthy where as you are saying it's either the base that is unhealthy or just the mixing in roughly equal amounts of fat and carbs.

I'm reminded of an old time diet called the Hay diet where protein and carbs were eaten seperately but you are going one step beyond that saying they should hardly be mixed at all

Click to expand...

Pizza is fat piled on top of huge amounts of refined carbohydrate, it's probably one of the worst things you could ever eat.
My personal opinion is that no-one (other than athletes) can process more than about 160g of carbohydrate a day. Eating in excess of that doesn't make any biological sense, and isn't what you evolved to eat.

If you aren't eating carbs, then you need to get energy from fat (because protein is more or less fixed). Natural saturated fat has to be a healthier option that mechanically recovered vegetable oils.

Click to expand...

I'm beginning to think that :sick:. TBH the original Italian pizza was more of a snack with very thin base and a smattering of cheese on top the problem is the one we have is the one that came back from America with a thick base and drippling with cheese.

Can I ask how you feel physically on your high saturated fat diet. Also how is your doctor about it?

SouthernGeneral6512 said:

Can I ask how you feel physically on your high saturated fat diet. Also how is your doctor about it?

Click to expand...

I feel fantastic: my HbA1c is less than most non-diabetics, my cholesterol is too low, I feel healthier, and sleep better than at any other time I can remember. I run about 15 miles a week, and I recently smashed my 10 year old 10k PB. I'm also down over 60lbs since diagnosis.

My numbers are so good that my Doctor doesn't have any choice but to agree with what I'm doing.

Nobody else agrees that it's possible, but I fully intend to completely cure my diabetes by the time I'm 45.

borofergie said:

dawnmc said:

There is another theory, we wern't designed to run long distance, only short ones but fast to kill our prey. We were designed to walk, to be on the move for some of the time.
Also we store fat particularly from the fruit we ate hence 'harvest'. It was stored to get us through the winter. We have access to fruit all year round so the body is in fat storage mode the whole time.

Click to expand...

I like the fruit thing, but surely it is no coincidence that humans are the fastest land animals over large distances? I think that we're hard-wired to run long distances.

Click to expand...

The conventional theory is that running was a by-product of being able to walk on two legs, however, primates have that ability but have not evolved anatomically to run. Looking at the differences between primates and humans shows that we developed shoulders that can rotate free of the head and neck, shorter forearms (all to aid balance) and feet and leg structures that helped absorb shock like springs and the ability to push off the toes. The current trend towards barefoot running is testimony to this. Primates can walk on two legs but they don't move too fast unless they use their arms as well. They don't need to as they can sit pretty in a tree and eat away.

The vast majority of animals can outsprint humans and we are not flight animals, it's unlikely that we ever needed bursts of speed for hunting. The more likely scenario is that before we had spears, bows etc we may have had to pursue our prey for a long time and wait for them to tire. Or, we may have scavenged, vultures are always an indicator of a carcass and an available meal and we would have been intelligent enough to work that out. The energy expenditure in getting there would be worth it, as opposed to the unreliability of hunting.

Given how long ago this was I'm not sure that winters would be too much of a problem as this was probably all going on much nearer the equator. By the time man had spread into Europe fire had been discovered and animal hides were being used for clothing. The cold wasn't too much of an issue but we were still hunter gatherer's = lots of fruit and meat!

Wouldn't it be amazing to be able to compare our blood glucose / pressure / cholesterol etc to early man?

borofergie said:

SouthernGeneral6512 said:

Can I ask how you feel physically on your high saturated fat diet. Also how is your doctor about it?

Click to expand...

I feel fantastic: my HbA1c is less than most non-diabetics, my cholesterol is too low, I feel healthier, and sleep better than at any other time I can remember. I run about 15 miles a week, and I recently smashed my 10 year old 10k PB. I'm also down over 60lbs since diagnosis.

My numbers are so good that my Doctor doesn't have any choice but to agree with what I'm doing.

Nobody else agrees that it's possible, but I fully intend to completely cure my diabetes by the time I'm 45.

Click to expand...

If I was your doctor I would write a paper on you .

Before diagnoses did you eat a lot of carbs?

Scardoc said:

borofergie said:

dawnmc said:

There is another theory, we wern't designed to run long distance, only short ones but fast to kill our prey. We were designed to walk, to be on the move for some of the time.
Also we store fat particularly from the fruit we ate hence 'harvest'. It was stored to get us through the winter. We have access to fruit all year round so the body is in fat storage mode the whole time.

Click to expand...

I like the fruit thing, but surely it is no coincidence that humans are the fastest land animals over large distances? I think that we're hard-wired to run long distances.

Click to expand...

The conventional theory is that running was a by-product of being able to walk on two legs, however, primates have that ability but have not evolved anatomically to run. Looking at the differences between primates and humans shows that we developed shoulders that can rotate free of the head and neck, shorter forearms (all to aid balance) and feet and leg structures that helped absorb shock like springs and the ability to push off the toes. The current trend towards barefoot running is testimony to this. Primates can walk on two legs but they don't move too fast unless they use their arms as well. They don't need to as they can sit pretty in a tree and eat away.

The vast majority of animals can outsprint humans and we are not flight animals, it's unlikely that we ever needed bursts of speed for hunting. The more likely scenario is that before we had spears, bows etc we may have had to pursue our prey for a long time and wait for them to tire. Or, we may have scavenged, vultures are always an indicator of a carcass and an available meal and we would have been intelligent enough to work that out. The energy expenditure in getting there would be worth it, as opposed to the unreliability of hunting.

Given how long ago this was I'm not sure that winters would be too much of a problem as this was probably all going on much nearer the equator. By the time man had spread into Europe fire had been discovered and animal hides were being used for clothing. The cold wasn't too much of an issue but we were still hunter gatherer's = lots of fruit and meat!

Wouldn't it be amazing to be able to compare our blood glucose / pressure / cholesterol etc to early man?

Click to expand...

I bet if we could examine these people we would find a few surprises

Well, food was hard to come by in neo lithic times, so fast and hard running are a modern phenomenomenom etc etc. So if you run short, run fast. If you run far run slow. Conserves what little fat storage we had in them thar days, me lad.

dawnmc said:

Well, food was hard to come by in neo lithic times, so fast and hard running are a modern phenomenomenom etc etc. So if you run short, run fast. If you run far run slow. Conserves what little fat storage we had in them thar days, me lad.

Click to expand...

Short and fast running (to escape from a large predator) is fuelled by your muscle glycogen.
Long and slow running (to chase down an anteltope for dinner) is fuelled by your fat reserves.

We evolved to do both... :thumbup:

noblehead said:

Thanks Stephen, I have to get back to work now but will have a good read later and give you my thoughts!

Click to expand...

Right just had a read of what you wrote Stephen. It's good news that your cholesterol has stayed low despite your increase in fats and do hope this continues for you, before diabetes when you were eating normal levels of carbs were you also eating a high proportion of animal fats or did you follow the low-fat route?

I agree that the Swedish results aren't reliable or conclusive and it would have been more of interest had they published the cholesterol levels of the 25% who have reportedly changed to a lchf diet, if you read the following article it says that the 100 scientists that are involved in the NNR 2012 have reviewed all 'new scientific knowledge has emerged'.......what do you suppose the new scientific knowledge is for them to say 'which low fat dairy products preferably are used and salt (NaCl) intake is limited, are associated with lower risk of most diet-related chronic diseases' .......?

Here the article which states it:

''Thorough revision
After a thorough revision, where experts have reviewed a vast amount of scientific publications, most of the recommendations from the 4th edition (2004) remain unchanged.

However, the RI for vitamin D (i.e in children above 2, adults and elderly > 75), selenium (i.e. in adults) have been increased and increasing the iodine recommendations for pregnant and lactating women is under consideration.

More emphasis is put on quality of fat and carbohydrates and their dietary sources. Specific recommendations for the total intake ranges for carbohydrates and fats are not given in NNR 2012. Instead, recommendations include ranges for monounsaturated, polyunsaturated, saturated and trans-fatty acids, dietary fibre and added sugars.

Diets recommended
In practice, following NNR would mean that diets with plenty of fibre-rich plant foods (e.g. dark green leafy vegetables, cabbages and onions, beans and peas, root vegetables, fruits and berries, nuts, wholegrain cereals); with frequent consumption of fish and seafood and vegetable oils, and in which low fat dairy products preferably are used and salt (NaCl) intake is limited, are associated with lower risk of most diet-related chronic diseases.

In contrast, when food products low in essential nutrients and fibre and high in energy, like sugar-sweetened beverages, sweet bakery products or confectionary, refined cereals and solid fats (e.g. butter) are frequently consumed, the risk for chronic diseases and weight-gain will increase. Also, high consumption of processed and red meats (i.e., beef, pork and lamb), may enhance the risk of adverse health and chronic disease in the population.

The new NNR - a Nordic joint venture
The work on the new edition is part of a long and fruitful Nordic co-operation hosted by the Nordic Council of Ministers.

The work has been led by a Nordic working group and more than 100 scientific experts have been involved in the revision. The work has mainly focused on a revision of areas in which new scientific knowledge has emerged. A systematic review (SR) has been applied to selected nutrients/topics where new data considered being of specific importance for setting NNR were available since the last edition. A less stringent updating of reference values was applied for other nutrients/topics.''


Thanks for the reply again

noblehead said:

Right just had a read of what you wrote Stephen. It's good news that your cholesterol has stayed low despite your increase in fats and do hope this continues for you, before diabetes when you were eating normal levels of carbs were you also eating a high proportion of animal fats or did you follow the low-fat route?

Click to expand...

I was a typical low-fat kinda guy. Skimmed milk, low-fat yoghurt, lean cuts of meat, and fat too much fruit. I honestly think that it's the fruit that got me, that and the bread.

I wish I'd written down my original cholesterol results. I'll have to ask the Doc for them next time I go.

I agree that the Swedish results aren't reliable or conclusive and it would have been more of interest had they published the cholesterol levels of the 25% who have reportedly changed to a lchf diet, if you read the following article it says that the 100 scientists that are involved in the NNR 2012 have reviewed all 'new scientific knowledge has emerged'.......what do you suppose the new scientific knowledge is for them to say 'which low fat dairy products preferably are used and salt (NaCl) intake is limited, are associated with lower risk of most diet-related chronic diseases' .......?

Click to expand...

Without seeing the evidence it's hard to tell. But like the Swedish study, I'd agree that low-fat is infinitely preferable to high-fat/high-carb. I doubt that any of the recommendations are in the context of a low-carb diet.

Most of their recommendations I'd agree with (I'd disagree with including grains and excluding red meat). Quality fat and quality carbohydrates (which in my book means green vegetables and starches), coming from whole foods. That's pretty much what I eat (less the starches).

Unless they really have some stunning new data, I'll go with the Cochrane review for advice about fat consumption.

Personally, I think that if we eliminated flour and sugar from our diets, there would be no T2 diabetes.

borofergie said:

Personally, I think that if we eliminated flour and sugar from our diets, there would be no T2 diabetes.

Click to expand...

:clap: :clap: :clap: I absolutely concur with this statement. The silent white killers, and yet the sugar lobby in the US uses all the millions it needs to silence any and all reports that show just how bad the product is. The same applies to the flour industry.

For years people were warned of the dangers of smoking and the tobacco industry flexed it's very wealthy muscle to keep the reports hidden, until there was no hiding the truth any longer, and how many smokers died early?

How many sugar and flour consumers will die before the industries are forced to tell the truth?

Mmm, not too sure about statins/cholesterol but mine has reduced from about 5.9 to 3.8 overall. I thought that there was also something about statins protecting the kidney function but I may be mixing that up with another one of the medications.

Defren said:

borofergie said:

Personally, I think that if we eliminated flour and sugar from our diets, there would be no T2 diabetes.

Click to expand...

:clap: :clap: :clap: I absolutely concur with this statement. The silent white killers, and yet the sugar lobby in the US uses all the millions it needs to silence any and all reports that show just how bad the product is. The same applies to the flour industry.

For years people were warned of the dangers of smoking and the tobacco industry flexed it's very wealthy muscle to keep the reports hidden, until there was no hiding the truth any longer, and how many smokers died early?

How many sugar and flour consumers will die before the industries are forced to tell the truth?

Click to expand...

Err, but people know the truth reasonable well about sugar and about flour... Eat too much of these two food items and you will put on weight! Hence why the government tells you to cut back on these and start eating a healthy balanced diet!

And no you wouldn't eliminate T2 diabetes banning these two food items, to say this would mean that a theory concerning T2 was correct!

But going back to cholesterol and prehistoric man..

I think if we could actually check out their diet, then there would be a few surprises, for prehistoric man to have an high fat/protein low carb diet, his hunting skills would have to surpass his gathering skills which considering that no access to guns etc, just a piece of flint on the end of a stick... So it's likely main source of food would be gathered then supplemented as often as possible with meat!

But again the meat would be very lean, as is still custom with wild animals... Take the modern wild rabbit, it's very lean meat and wild rabbit don't have visible fat, I know this has I am given wild rabbits for my dogs (and I get the delightful job, not of skinning them :sick: ) and as yet not come across a fat wild rabbit!

Bit similar to the Aborigines who are hunters and gathers, and some still go on walk about, yet a lot of their protein comes from grubs and insects rather than kangaroo's which are a tad more difficult to catch/kill without a riffle! But many tribes that still remain traditional in their ways, hunt and gather but protein/fat isn't the main part of their diets!

So far from the anecdotal evidence presented so far here, well the longest low carber seems to have one of the highest cholesterol levels, so as other are either taking statins or only been VLC/HF'ing for several months... Not looking good for claiming that a VLC/HF diet had no effect etc on cholesterol long term!

I eat a normal diet, which does include the evil flour and complex carbs, I don't aim for low fat, as I have full fat dairy products (skimmed milk is disgusting stuff) and I enjoy my fry up, and my roast tatties cooked in Beef Dripping.. Yet my cholesterol is in the 3's!

So looking at the research, and comparing against my own results... I think I know what I'm going to keep doing...

jopar said:

But again the meat would be very lean, as is still custom with wild animals... Take the modern wild rabbit, it's very lean meat and wild rabbit don't have visible fat, I know this has I am given wild rabbits for my dogs (and I get the delightful job, not of skinning them :sick: ) and as yet not come across a fat wild rabbit!

Click to expand...

Rubbish. Here is a photo of the insides of a grass-reared bison, they are around 50% by fat (that's what all the yellow stuff is), if you eat the organ meat and the bone marrow:
[mod edit: photo changed to link. Photo may be quite graphic for some]
http://www.archevore.com/storage/DSC_0106.JPG?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1302192150066

Do you think hunter-gatherers live exclusively off rabbit? Try eating a squirrel, it's like opening a can of grease.

jopar said:

So far from the anecdotal evidence presented so far here, well the longest low carber seems to have one of the highest cholesterol levels, so as other are either taking statins or only been VLC/HF'ing for several months... Not looking good for claiming that a VLC/HF diet had no effect etc on cholesterol long term!

Click to expand...

So you're drawing conclusions from an n=3 experiement with 3 people - 2 of whom have very low-cholesterol and 1 has reasonable choleterol.

BTW, I've been low-carbing (<80g a day) since April 2011, Libby for longer. Exactly at what stage do you think that the high cholesterol is going to hit us?

Dr Richard Feinman said:

Dietary carbohydrate restriction is the single most effective method (except for total starvation) of reducing triglycerides, and is as effective as any intervention, including most drugs, at increasing HDL and reducing the number of small-dense LDL particles. Beyond lipid markers, carbohydrate restriction improves all of the features of metabolic syndrome.

Click to expand...

(As far as I know he hasn't written a book, but he does have a beard, maybe you can use that as a random excuse to ignore what he says),

jopar said:

Err, but people know the truth reasonable well about sugar and about flour... Eat too much of these two food items and you will put on weight! Hence why the government tells you to cut back on these and start eating a healthy balanced diet!

Click to expand...

Google "healthy wholegrains". Nuff said. Next question...

And no you wouldn't eliminate T2 diabetes banning these two food items, to say this would mean that a theory concerning T2 was correct!

Click to expand...

What, my theory that T2 diabetes has to do with refined carbohydrate intake? Or your theory that says T2 diabetics get diabetes because they are lazy and fat?