PDA

View Full Version : Cholesterol and "annual" report



banshee
03-21-2006, 02:35 PM
On the old board, I used to post an "anniversary" thread in this forum, both as a celebration of another year following PP, and as a reflection on the past year. I'm a bit late this year, as the old board went down before my anniversary (Dec 1st), and I decided to wait for my annual cholesterol tests before posting in the new forum.

Anyway, it has now been just over 3 years (almost 3.5 years!) of strictly following the principles of Protein Power. The last year has had some successes as I finally started to incorporate exercise into my lifestyle, and some challenges, as I had some health issues that led to a diagnosis of asthma :mad:, and started a new job :). While I love the new job and it's taking my career in a direction I want to go, the first year of any new job is always a bit stressful as you try to fit into a new work culture and dynamic.


First, for the success: I got my cholesterol test results today, and it looks really good. :D

March 2006:

Total: 170
HDL: 60
LDL: 85
Trig: 127
Here are the results from previous years:
March 2005:

Total: 182
HDL: 60
LDL: 110
Trig: 61October 2003:

Total: 179
HDL: 60
LDL: 94
Trig: 127May 1997:

Total: 190
Trig: 219Total and LDL are the lowest ever since starting this WOL. HDL is staying constant at 60. The triglyceride results are confusing me a bit, since they were 127 in Oct 2003, excited me when they went down to 61 in March of 2005, but are now back up to 127 :confused:. I know that trig numbers tend to plummet on PP, and can change quickly, which makes me wonder if they can also rise suddenly in response to a single higher carb day? In any case, my numbers are all in the "normal" range and my ratios are all excellent as well. I'm pleased that the trend over the last 3 years has continued in the direction of better cholesterol numbers. I'll be curious to see what change, if any, will occur next year after a full year of consistent resistance training. I'd love to see my HDL bump up a bit, even if it's already at an "excellent" level at 60.

I really wish I knew what my cholesterol numbers were before PP. I do know that my total cholesterol was 190 and my Trigs were at least 219, but my doctor had never done the complete lipid panel before. (I say at least 219 because that test was done before I went strictly low-fat after my gallbladder was removed, and I suspect that my trigs had gotten even higher on the low fat/high carb diet the doctor put me on.)

They say that it takes a certain number of days (21?) to form a new habit, but I think for some "habits", like bad eating habits, it can take a lot longer. My first two attempts at low carb failed after 8 months. I was very strict and followed the plan religiously, but just couldn't make it a habit, even after that long on plan. I was sabotoged by my sweet tooth, which never went away. Cravings and temptation were a constant struggle during the 8 months each time, and eventually did me in.

I finally learned how to bake low-carb desserts that I can enjoy, and that allow me to "feed" the cravings and avoid temptation. Even then, it took me about a year before I could easily pass by the sugary temptations at work and at friends/relatives. And even now, 3 years later, I still get cravings if I skip my own low-carb indulgences. If there weren't so many great recipes out there waiting to be tried, and low-carb chocolates readily available in the stores, I'd probably still be having a hard time avoiding the sugar. For me, "real" sugar is very much an addiction. It may sound cliched, but for me, there is no such thing as "just one bite" of something with real sugar, just as there is no such thing as "just one drink" to an alcoholic. As an example, at our company holiday party this year, they had lemon bars. I thought to myself, I've been maintaining for over 2 years now, and I haven't had a lemon bar in over 3 years, I'll just eat one. 6 lemon bars later, I managed to curb my wayward fingers. (It helped that they had started clearing away the trays!) So even though I have made a habit of eating well, real sugar can still derail me.

I guess that's it for now. My new year is all about controlling my allergies/asthma, exercising (mostly resistance training, with as much aerobics as my asthma can stand as I try to build endurance,) and continuing on plan. I'm also working on helping my husband try to get on an exercise and supplement program, and hopefully cconvince him to reduce his carb levels even further. (He still eats 'real' bread in the form of hamburger and hot dog buns, along with the occasional croissant or roll when we eat out. He's never been a big sugar eater, so thankfully that hasn't been an issue, but getting him to cut out the white flour has been tough...)

Something for those still in the weight loss phase to remember - maintenance is an ongoing committment, and an ongoing challenge, but it is also enjoyable because you have "reached your goal". However, you often find that the original goal has changed, or that you want to add to it. For me, achieving my original size goal was a tremendous accomplishment, but now I've added a fitness goal to my list. I want to be able to enjoy the health I've gained, and to do that, I need to get my body to where I can go hiking with friends, or skiing and scuba diving with my husband, or playing with my nieces without feeling like an "old person". I had too many years of sitting on the sidelines because I was too overweight and unhealthy, and I don't want to ever be that person again!

Belfrybat
03-22-2006, 07:35 AM
What a wonderful testimony to low carbing. Thank you for the encouragement! :)

dvdmon
03-22-2006, 11:13 AM
Mary, that tri number does seem anomalous. You might want to get it recheked in a month and try to be careful with carbs during that month. It's possible it was also a misreading or some other technical problem, who knows. I wouldn't be too concerned, but I would try testing it again in another month or so, which should be plenty of time for your body to readjust to a more dilegent following of a low-carb regime...

banshee
03-22-2006, 11:25 AM
Mary, that tri number does seem anomalous. You might want to get it recheked in a month and try to be careful with carbs during that month. It's possible it was also a misreading or some other technical problem, who knows. I wouldn't be too concerned, but I would try testing it again in another month or so, which should be plenty of time for your body to readjust to a more dilegent following of a low-carb regime...
I'm actually wondering if the number from last year was anomalous. Maybe they accidentally divided by 2 and it should have been 122? ;) It just seems so strange to me that this year's number is exactly the same as in Oct 2003. I also noticed that the readings in 96/97 were always the same. I had about 5 different blood tests that year, and every reading was 190 TC and 219 Trig, which seems to indicate to me that the trig reading doesn't necessarily change that drastically...

dvdmon
03-22-2006, 11:31 AM
I'm actually wondering if the number from last year was anomalous. Maybe they accidentally divided by 2 and it should have been 122? ;) It just seems so strange to me that this year's number is exactly the same as in Oct 2003. I also noticed that the reading in 96/97 were always the same. I had about 5 different blood tests that year, and every reading was 190 TC and 219 Trig, which seems to indicate to me that the trig reading doesn't necessarily change that drastically...

Or maybe the lab is saving some ime and expense and just giving you numbers from your last test but changing one of them so that you don't get too suspicious? ;)

banshee
03-22-2006, 12:55 PM
Or maybe the lab is saving some ime and expense and just giving you numbers from your last test but changing one of them so that you don't get too suspicious? ;)

But Levi, wouldn't they be more inclined to change my numbers for the worse? After all, "they" believe that we're all supposed to do better on statin drugs, right? So if they're going to "make up" numbers, they should be making them worse, not better! :D

I know second guessing these things isn't really productive. I'm just curious about the mechanisms behind what causes changes in trigs. I wouldn't have said that I was more strict on low-carb last year than this year. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've been eating basically the same, so I wouldn't expect much change in my values, unless it could be caused by a single high carb day. I'm not really worried, because all of my ratios are good. I just like to know the science behind this stuff. And I'm one of those wierd people who like to chart my various numbers and see the trends and statistics. :rolleyes:

dvdmon
03-22-2006, 01:29 PM
But Levi, wouldn't they be more inclined to change my numbers for the worse? After all, "they" believe that we're all supposed to do better on statin drugs, right? So if they're going to "make up" numbers, they should be making them worse, not better! :D

I know second guessing these things isn't really productive. I'm just curious about the mechanisms behind what causes changes in trigs. I wouldn't have said that I was more strict on low-carb last year than this year. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've been eating basically the same, so I wouldn't expect much change in my values, unless it could be caused by a single high carb day. I'm not really worried, because all of my ratios are good. I just like to know the science behind this stuff. And I'm one of those wierd people who like to chart my various numbers and see the trends and statistics. :rolleyes:

Mary, I wasn't being all that serious. I think it would be pretty paranoic to consider such a scenario. But I guess I was just looking at your tri's and didn't realize your other numbers had improved as much as they did. I like to chart things too and I'm also interested in what other mechanisms might increase tri's since it sounds like the dietary ones have remained constant. Your ratios are still good. My guess still is some kind of lab mistake, but that's just a hunch since I don't have the scientific knowledge to explain it otherwise. If you don't get such an explanation here, you might consider, as I said, redoing the test in a month or so just to see what's happened. Also, have you gotten a standar panel of tests done on your blood? You know, liver enzymes and all that. I'm sure everything's fine, but when I see stuff about certain numbers going up without explanation, it seems prudent to do a bit broader set of tests to rule out other concerns...

banshee
03-22-2006, 02:41 PM
Hmmmm... ok, just for the heck of it, I just did a Google search on "what raises triglycerides". Besides the usual sites saying that obesity and high fat diets raise trigs, (and a few that actually say that low-fat will! :)) I found this little gem:


Beta-blockers, another class of medication used to treat high blood pressure, cortisone-like drugs, and estrogen can raise triglycerides.
Now, I've been taking beta-blockers for several years for my tachycardia, but at one point I had reduced my prescription to only half a pill in the evening, rather than 2 pills a day. This summer, I had a bit of a scare where I thought the pills weren't controlling my tachycardia, and the doc had me back on the full 2 pill dose while he did tests. Then we found out that my main symptom (chest pain) was caused by asthma, not the tachycardia. I'm back down to 1 pill a day now, but I'm also taking Advair, which includes a steroidal (cortisone-like?) component.

I think I just figured out why my trigs have bumped back up! Guess I should have done the Google search earlier! :rolleyes: Of course, now the question is whether i'm stuck with that level of trigs because of my meds, or if there's something else I can do to lower them again. (While I'm reasonably happy with my levels, I don't like that my trig/HDL ratio is ever so slightly above 2. It was my understanding that having it under 2 was best.)

dvdmon
03-22-2006, 03:24 PM
Mary, that sounds like great detective work! It'll be interesting to hear what your doc's take on it is too.

banshee
03-22-2006, 04:09 PM
Mary, that sounds like great detective work! It'll be interesting to hear what your doc's take on it is too.

Well, my doctor's take on my cholesterol is that it's great. I think they just look at the numbers compared to the "normal" range, and since my trigs are under 150, they consider them good. I'm the one who would like to see them lower. LOL I don't see the need to go in for a special visit, but I'll probably ask him about it the next time I'm in to see him.

Then again, one of the suggestions for lowering trigs is fish oil, and I've recently bumped up my daily dosage of that because high dosages are also recommended to help with asthma, so it's possible that plus my new exercise program will be enough to improve things... hmmmm, that just brought to mind another thought. Is the growing number of asthmatics in this country related to an omega 3/6 imbalance? Hmmmm...

Billie
03-22-2006, 04:35 PM
Mary I responded to this somehow on another post, but wanted to make sure I added my two cents of WAY TO GO!!!