Cholesterol, what the?

[Helene2013]

Thank you. Interesting articles. I am there myself at 52, last period was in October last year. Before this, it was on/off for a few months, lasting a day or 2. Cholesterol was always in the good, but higher range.

I always worked out (for the past 3 years I train about 6 days out of 7 and it is not light training), generally ate well - but too much of sweets/desserts. hihi Rarely red meat. I'm no steak person. Ground beef in spaghetti sauce but that is about it. Rarely a burger. I'm not into much fish (white non smelly one is fine but other than that, I just can't get it down the throat!), but lots of chicken white.

I only cut the "sugar" and no good fat and it seems to work as I did lose some 12 pounds since March. My cholesterol numbers did not go down drastically though. I checked the last result with the one of March (so 3 months ago) and it has improved. But no dreaming in colour that I can't go back to "dessert" and junk food or I'll be right back to square one. The good thing is that my apo-lipo B is right in the middle range. This is the test the doctor wanted done. It is an extra and not done automatically with the standard cholesterol check. More expensive to our plan (we are covered under this) and still something fairly new here as testing. Our genetic is bad on that side so she said it would be good to know. Those results to her would be more important than the total cholesterol. It'd give her an idea if our arteries are blocked, or carriers are at work. Ideally, you want the result number as down as possible. So being mid-range is normal, but I still would like to see it lower. It would means less chances of getting particles traveling and sticking to arteries. (wow... this is getting too technical I think). hihi

I'll keep working at this and go back late next spring to see how we did for that past year. It will probably be a life battle for hubby and I. The silence disease as they call it. Hoping by then to have another 10 pounds down. In no hurry to get there. Slowly but surely and still enjoy life instead of cutting down and then crashing into any food.

But I'm glad the doctor took the time to call us and meet us about it. Raised the flag even if we all hate getting news that something is wrong with the blood panel. We are lucky enough to have the time/tools to change our habits. Some will never see it coming, or take the steps to improve. I want to grow old...and active and healthy. If possible! At least it's my goal.

[shootingstar]

I've known people personally who are skinny...and have high chloestrol. So weight is not always a factor at all.

[Crankin]

Helene, not sure what the terms app-lipid a/b mean. Is this another way of referring to HDL and LDL? Without knowing the ratio of HDL/LDL your total # doesn't mean that much. My total was 250 last fall, but my HDL (good cholesterol) is so high at 90 that it makes my ratio really good and it can also bump up the total number.
Just wondering if this is referred to in a different way in Canada, or these are other proteins that I don't know about.
I am not one who craves sugar, but I have made a concerted effort to decrease it even more. I got laughed at the other day at work, when I refused a piece of very good cake celebrating a colleague's upcoming wedding. I'd say I have dessert once a week in the summer, because I do occasionally eat soft serve ice cream, and less at other times of the year. There are no sweets in my house, except fruit. I haven't eaten junk food (chips, fried foods) on any regular basis in 35+ years, when I had to lose 25 pounds. It worked, so I figured what good would that stuff do me? I am even more convinced that sugar causes inflammation, which can cause issues in the arteries, with all that I read, so it's not so hard for me to do this. However, I don't get dogmatic about it. I will not be restricting myself while on vacation that starts later today, especially as it includes 4 days of city walking and 6 days of hard cycling.

[Helene2013]

Crankin,
It is apo-lipo (known also as Apo B). I googled quickly a link for you so you can understand better. It is a "deeper" test - just blood drawn too to complete the basic blood panel used for cholesterol testing.

https://labtestsonline.org/understan...apob/tab/test/

Our numbers seem to be different also. We don't read the 250, etc.

Total HDL/LDL is one reading. Then you have that Apo B one that is even "better" to understand where you truly are at. At least from my understanding with the doctor's discussion we had.

The total HDL/LDL is getting to be less and less a reference, at least from what my doctor said. I don't know much about all those numbers but know that we are in the right bracket. Just too high into that ok bracket so we will keep working at it. My total is at 4.1 (and max to reach to keep on "safe" side is 5.2)

the numbers in Canada are like this for basic testing. Have not checked for USA
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-625-.../11732-eng.htm

[Crankin]

Thanks for doing the research for me! So, it is something different, but related. I think I will ask to get this done in the fall. My HDL/LDL ration is in the excellent category, despite my high total #. But, my LDL is borderline acceptable and my triglycerides are just OK. Like ACG, I can't exercise any more than I do, or there will be other health consequences and my diet, while always been good, is now just where I want it. Don't think I can deny myself any more than I do. I would take a statin if I had to. I have an irrational fear of CV disease.

[Boeo]

Much of the "scientific" research in favor of statins is flawed and fraudulent. The most reliable evidence has long tied statin use with memory problems, muscle disorders, liver damage, cataracts, nerve damage, pancreatitis, erectile dysfunction, brain dysfunction, diabetes, and with an increased risk of cancer and higher mortality (statins only somewhat reduce the risk of non-fatal heart attacks).

The physiological mechanisms of how statins do serious damage are also well understood, such as by their impairment of oxidative cell metabolism, the increase in inflammation and cell destruction, the lowering of cholesterol and steroid hormone production, the promotion of pancreatic injury, etc. - rather thoroughly explained in this scholarly article on how statins, and a cholesterol-lowering popular diet pill advertised by Dr. Oz, promote diabetes at How Statins & Garcinia Cambogia Side Effects Raise The Diabetes Risk

Yet despite of the existence of that scientific knowledge, the medical business and the public health authorities keep ignoring it and continue to recommend statins to diabetics and make claims that they have a low risk profile despite that they are also significantly linked to cancer and higher mortality (just look at the propaganda put out by the Mayo clinic on statin drugs: "the risk of life-threatening side effects from statins is very low"). And because of such medical propaganda, few people are aware that the medical claims of benefits of statins are mostly based on flawed and fraudulent "scientific" studies conducted by people with vested interests.

Also, older people with HIGH cholesterol live longer than those with low cholesterol levels (see above mentioned article for numerous scientific study references confirming this).

Because the cholesterol-heart disease theory, or rather medical dogma, is wrong, the use of statins is also wrong by logical extension. Statins have almost no real benefit in the very vast majority of users. They do more harm than good. It's a "scientific" scam.