Diagnosis

[Hizzoner]

Part of my reasoning for dieting in this manner is an attempt to lower my cholesterol. I had it checked a few months ago and my level was 252. My LDL was 177....that is all that I remember.


I have been adhering to this diet very strictly for a few weeks now and feel significantly better and have lost some weight. But, the suspense was killing me so I bought a home cholesterol kit. It only measures HDL and total cholesterol.

My numbers were:

Total 265
HDL 35


I know that the info causes some inconclusiveness........but it is a little depressing.

Thoughts?

[mcsblues]

Let me see, you have read PP (how about PPLP?), you have read some of the THINCS site - Kendrick?, Ravnskov?. If you have you will know your "high" cholesterol is what used to be called "normal" (before drug companies changed the goal posts). You will know just how full of holes the whole diet/heart/cholesterol theory of CHD really is. You will know that a low carb diet helps in all the ways that just might have an influence on heart disease (it is anti inflammatory, improves ratios and also the types LDL cholesterol, slashes triglycerides) and yet you are depressed!:p Of course you need to give it (or any other change) more than a few weeks and I would be doubtful as to the accuracy (and usefulness) of a home test ... but stop stressing about a number ... that really only says you are normal anyway!:)

[bluejay111]

I totally agree with mcsblues. Below is part of an article (I believe) by Dr Mary Enig.

"Here is how they came up with the number 200 for cholesterol. The drug companies loved it because it made millions more people eligible for their cholesterol lowering drugs and makes billions of dollars for the drug companies.
How the number 200 came about for cholesterol level:…there was a political decision being made on the floor of the NIH (Building 10) Mazur Auditorium that day in December 1984. The decision would allow the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) to have yet another even more extensive long-term "trial" to work on. The NHLBI could not get more money from Congress for more large trials such as the MRFIT or LRC and they were developing the National Cholesterol Education Program.
With the cutoff number at the lower end of the normal range (200 mg/dl), they could include all of the healthy normal citizens in the range that would need treatment with diet, and since the diet would never work to permanently lower those normal levels (eg, 200 mg/dl to 240 or 260 mg/dl) to below 200 mg/dl, they could recommend that all these people should go onto cholesterol-lowering medications. (Bold is mine)
The three men who were heading the NHLBI (Cleeman, Lenfant, and Rifkin) were standing together in the Mazur Auditorium just before the Cholesterol Consensus Conference began. They were discussing the cutoff level of serum cholesterol to put into the consensus report. One said to the other two, "but we can't have the cutoff at 240 [mg/dl]; it has to be at 200 [mg/dl] or we won't have enough people to test." (Bold is mine)Several of us from the University of Maryland Department of Chemistry Lipids Research Group were standing directly behind them and within clear earshot. We looked at each other and of course were not surprised when the final numbers came out."

[gitfiddle]

They were discussing the cutoff level of serum cholesterol to put into the consensus report. One said to the other two, "but we can't have the cutoff at 240 [mg/dl]; it has to be at 200 [mg/dl] or we won't have enough people to test." (Bold is mine)Several of us from the University of Maryland Department of Chemistry Lipids Research Group were standing directly behind them and within clear earshot. We looked at each other and of course were not surprised when the final numbers came out."
Wow! :eek: I didn't know that, either!

I haven't got the quote to back this up, but the statistics show that yes, people with high cholesterol have heart attacks and so do people with low cholesterol.

Dr. Mike explained that there are more diseases associated with low cholesterol than with high cholesterol.

Also, how accurate would a home cholesterol testing kit be? :suspicious: Any background on that?

[lczeledoc]

Part of my reasoning for dieting in this manner is an attempt to lower my cholesterol. I had it checked a few months ago and my level was 252. My LDL was 177....that is all that I remember.


I have been adhering to this diet very strictly for a few weeks now and feel significantly better and have lost some weight. But, the suspense was killing me so I bought a home cholesterol kit. It only measures HDL and total cholesterol.

My numbers were:

Total 265
HDL 35


I know that the info causes some inconclusiveness........but it is a little depressing.

Thoughts?

The only concern is the HDL level--- a little on the low side. But then that is assuming that the test results are accurate. Cholesterol lab results have a great error range, even more so for a home test. So, don't worry, so long as you are eating a proper PP diet you are fine. Cholesterol is not the enemy that has been made out to be by big pharma. If your triglycerides are low and HDL is over 40, which a PP diet will do, you are fine.

[Hizzoner]

I guess I had suspected that my HDL would have risen and my total cholesterol would have dropped some. That seems to be the consensus of many of the low car diet books (overall cholesterol lowers)

[maxlharris]

I haven't got the quote to back this up, but the statistics show that yes, people with high cholesterol have heart attacks and so do people with low cholesterol.

Something like 50% of people who have heart attacks, have good cholesterol numbers. I forget my sourcing on this, but I first heard it on NPR when they were first talking about C-Reactive Protein as a better marker for heart disease risk.

The Eades (at least Dr. Mike) seems to be in the particle sizing / ratio camp as far as risk determination.

[lczeledoc]

I guess I had suspected that my HDL would have risen and my total cholesterol would have dropped some. That seems to be the consensus of many of the low car diet books (overall cholesterol lowers)

Yes, for most people, howver, there is a group people (high responders) for whom, LC makes their TC go up, including the LDL. I am one of such people. After doing PP for over a year, my TC went from 235 to 280 mg/dL. My LDL went up from soemting like 190 to 210 (not really valid since it is not actually measured, but derived from the TC and HDL) My HDL went from 34 to 48 mg/dL. My TG plummeted from 190ish to 80. Iam not worried about my Chol. level, because I do not believe in the Lipid hypothesis of CVD. Also, there is evidence that when TG go down in a LC diet, and LDL goes up, the source of the LDL increase is the benign less dense type. As long as my HDL levels are OK and TG levels are down, there is no problem!. The best thing about the PP diet is that I amnot diabetic anymore.
My Physician keeps wanting me to go on statins, I told him not ever. He thinks I have lost the weight by following "the prudent diet" that he recommended. I don't tell that I follow a LC diet, I just say that I don't eat starches.

[gitfiddle]

The best thing about the PP diet is that I amnot diabetic anymore. I would like to see that, too. I don't tell that I follow a LC diet, I just say that I don't eat starches.
Well, that's a "prudent" diet in my book! :) He hasn't figured out that not eating starches is basically a low-carb diet? He probably doesn't have time to turn around, much less learn something new.