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

What is 'Real LDL'?

I'm considering a lie down in a darkened room
Geoff
 
Thank you all, that's really helpful. My LDL has shot way up since going keto, and I need to establish whether I've actually got reliable figures before deciding on a course of action.

As an aside, here's my understanding of the difference between measurement units:
mg/dl measures the weight of a substance in a given volume of blood.
mmol/l measures the number of particles of a substance present in a given volume of blood.

So, the conversion between the two units all depends on the size and density of the particles, I guess, and will be different for any given substance.
 
It is fairly normal for the LDL to shoot up, especially if you are experiencing weight loss. I have seen it explained that fat that was ‘trapped’ in the fat cells is released into the bloodstream as fuel. When weight loss stops, in the vast majority of people LDL goes back down. In any event, following Keto your Trigs should be going down and the LDL should be changing to the ‘large fluffy’ variety that is not a risk to cardio-vascular health, so your risk score will probably be reducing.

You can get LDL particle size actually measured and LDL levels actually measured but I think you have to get it done privately. I believe that if Trigs are lower than 1 you need to use the Iranian Equation to more accurately estimate LDL.
 
Thanks, but I'm already quite lean. I appear to be what Dave Feldman calls a 'lean mass hyper-responder.' My consultant (who I'm seeing on Wednesday) is understandably concerned about my levels; I think I may be heading for an NMR and/or VAP test, to confirm whether my particles are indeed atherogenic.
 
Colin of Kent said:
My consultant (who I'm seeing on Wednesday) is understandably concerned about my levels; I think I may be heading for an NMR and/or VAP test, to confirm whether my particles are indeed atherogenic.
Click to expand...

Do you know what your levels are ? Have you looked at your trigs/HDL ratio ?
Geoff
 
Mr_Pot said:
The molecular weight of triglyceride is different to that of glucose so a mole of each substance will have a different weight and the conversion to mg/dl is not the same.
Click to expand...
Isn't titration fun? takes me back to A level organic chemistry lessons.
 
librarising said:
Do you know what your levels are ? Have you looked at your trigs/HDL ratio ?
Geoff
Click to expand...
Historically, my total cholesterol has never been higher than 4.8 mmol/l (186 mg/dl)

In September, I had:
cholesterol 21.5 mmol/l (831 mg/dl)
HDL 3.1 mmol/l (120 mg/dl)
LDL 16.8 mmol/l (650 mg/dl)
triglycerides 3.5 mmol/l (310 mg/dl)

Then the following in October:
Cholesterol 22.1 mmol/l (854 mg/dl)
HDL 3.2 mmol/l (124 mg/dl)
LDL 17.9 mmol/l (692 mg/dl)
triglycerides 2.3 mmol/l (204 mg/dl)

Today, I found out that my HDL is stable at 3.0 mmol/l, trigs have dropped even further (can't remember the exact number - 1.5 maybe?), and LDL has fallen dramatically to 12.5 mmol/l. Although this LDL number is above what 'conventional' medicine deems acceptable, from what I've read, the TG:HDL ratio is more important, and LDL is nothing to worry about. And I'm optimistic that it may fall further in time.

My HbA1c has fallen to 46 mmol/l, which is lower than it's ever been my entire life.
 
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.…