Author Topic: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque  (Read 8019 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lozzark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,286
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #30 on: 09 December 2013, 11:54:50 AM »
Their massive duty of care means ignorance is not an option and certainly no excuse surely.  Should doctors be forced to tow the party line?  After all it is a higher authority saying we are right irrespective of what you think.  Is that not a form of bullying or blackmail?
T2 Dx 2000 Metformin Gliclazide HbA1c 53 BP 129/79 Cholesterol 5.4, HDL 1.16, LDL 2.9.

Offline lozzark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,286
T2 Dx 2000 Metformin Gliclazide HbA1c 53 BP 129/79 Cholesterol 5.4, HDL 1.16, LDL 2.9.

Offline Pattidevans

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 23,647
  • It's ONLY Diabetes. It could be something worse!
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #32 on: 10 December 2013, 03:59:43 PM »
This thread got seriously hijacked at this point so I have split it and removed it to the off topic section here http://diabetes-support.org.uk/diabetesforum/index.php/topic,4383.0.html
Patti


Type 1.  Mis-diagnosed T2 May 2003, finally had CPeptide test 15/7/11 and proper diagnosis 1/9/11.  Now pumping Apidra with Roche Spirit Combo pump. Hba1c 6.1 April 2016.


© 2015 Patti Evans

Offline graj0

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,319
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #33 on: 12 December 2013, 11:25:13 AM »
Sorry Patti,

I talk too much. Very easy to go off topic.
Graham
Type II since '97? Metformin 2 gm, Gliclazide 0 gm (was 240), Januvia 0 mg (was 25 mg) Atorvastatin 0 mg (was 40), Doxazosin 8 mg, Amlodapine 10 mg, Lisinopril 20 mg.

Offline Pattidevans

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 23,647
  • It's ONLY Diabetes. It could be something worse!
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #34 on: 12 December 2013, 05:07:23 PM »
It wasn't you Graham, it was the rest of us.
Patti


Type 1.  Mis-diagnosed T2 May 2003, finally had CPeptide test 15/7/11 and proper diagnosis 1/9/11.  Now pumping Apidra with Roche Spirit Combo pump. Hba1c 6.1 April 2016.


© 2015 Patti Evans

Offline CamillaC

  • Member
  • Posts: 290
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #35 on: 12 December 2013, 05:53:48 PM »
Hi Avocado,
well done. You show that saturated fat and cholesterol have nothing to do with anything! I am the same, bloods all normal despite eating as much fat as i want. It is carbs that are the root of most of the problems in my view, control them and you are fine.
Camilla xxx

Type 2, Diet controlled.

Offline lozzark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,286
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #36 on: 06 July 2015, 12:51:52 PM »
Since things are a little quiet at the moment, I thought I'd resurrect the old cholesterol old chestnut by identifying article that represent my point of view.


Firstly an article saying it is not LDL, but a particular type of LDL that is the problem.  It is increased by refined carbohydrate consumption (presumably because that increases blood glucose).  http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35058896/ns/health-heart_health/t/bad-cholesterol-its-not-what-you-think/#.VZpczflVhBc


Another article by Colpo explaining bad cholesterol is based on bad science
http://www.jpands.org/vol10no3/colpo.pdf
A rebuke and a response from Colpo (on the second page)
http://www.jpands.org/vol11no1/correspondence.pdf


and finally a short history
http://www.alternet.org/story/78554/the_bad_science_that_created_the_cholesterol_con
T2 Dx 2000 Metformin Gliclazide HbA1c 53 BP 129/79 Cholesterol 5.4, HDL 1.16, LDL 2.9.

Offline lozzark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,286
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #37 on: 24 August 2015, 06:05:09 PM »
A more useful take on heart disease/atherosclerosis:


Emerging science is now favouring the idea that atherosclerosis is caused by the small dense LDL particles. None of the standard lipid profile tests tell you about these.  However there is a very high correlation between having a high concentration of these particles and a high ratio of triglycerides to HDL.  Measuringthis ratio is a little tricky because you are given them in mmol/L when you need them in mg/dL.  You can convert HDL by multiplying by 38.67  and triglycerides by multiplying by 88.57 or you can use original values and multiply the ratio by 2.29.   If that takes your ratio to over 5, you are in a place you do not want to be.  Triglcerides naturally reduce and HDL naturally increases with a low carb diet.  Actually the key is to keep serum glucose to as near normal levels as possible.  Regular exercise also helps as does reducing omega-6 intake and increasing omega-3.  Alcohol inhibits the breakdown of triglycerides and so may have a bearing on the basal reading during a lipid profile test.

Reducing cholesterol by means of a statin has no bearing whatsoever because statins reduce only LDL, and not the small dense particles it contains.  There is a strong possibility that everyone has been led up the garden path to statin land ( a land of aches, pains and memory loss)!
T2 Dx 2000 Metformin Gliclazide HbA1c 53 BP 129/79 Cholesterol 5.4, HDL 1.16, LDL 2.9.

Offline Alan

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,154
    • Type 2 Diabetes - A Personal Journey
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #38 on: 28 August 2015, 12:07:11 AM »
A more useful take on heart disease/atherosclerosis:


Emerging science is now favouring the idea that atherosclerosis is caused by the small dense LDL particles. None of the standard lipid profile tests tell you about these.  However there is a very high correlation between having a high concentration of these particles and a high ratio of triglycerides to HDL.  Measuringthis ratio is a little tricky because you are given them in mmol/L when you need them in mg/dL.  You can convert HDL by multiplying by 38.67  and triglycerides by multiplying by 88.57 or you can use original values and multiply the ratio by 2.29.   If that takes your ratio to over 5, you are in a place you do not want to be.  Triglcerides naturally reduce and HDL naturally increases with a low carb diet.  Actually the key is to keep serum glucose to as near normal levels as possible.  Regular exercise also helps as does reducing omega-6 intake and increasing omega-3.  Alcohol inhibits the breakdown of triglycerides and so may have a bearing on the basal reading during a lipid profile test.

Reducing cholesterol by means of a statin has no bearing whatsoever because statins reduce only LDL, and not the small dense particles it contains.  There is a strong possibility that everyone has been led up the garden path to statin land ( a land of aches, pains and memory loss)!

This small pilot study suggests a ratio of 1.3 in mmol terms as the threshold to stay under. That converts to 3.0 in mg/dl terms.
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
--
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
There is nothing I could eat I like more than my eyes.
Type 2 Diabetes - A Personal Journey (latest: Small New York Baked Low Carb Cheesecake)
Born Under a Wandering Star (Latest:Dambulla, Sigiriya and Polonuwarra, Sri Lanka)

Offline lozzark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,286
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #39 on: 04 September 2015, 10:18:12 AM »
Hi Alan,
That's me done for!  I've had a ratio over twice that for over 15 years!
Nick

T2 Dx 2000 Metformin Gliclazide HbA1c 53 BP 129/79 Cholesterol 5.4, HDL 1.16, LDL 2.9.

Offline JillT

  • Member
  • Posts: 644
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #40 on: 05 October 2015, 01:08:04 PM »
This small pilot study suggests a ratio of 1.3 in mmol terms as the threshold to stay under. That converts to 3.0 in mg/dl terms.

Hi Alan, I've revived this thread because I came across an American link on the subject of ratios that recommends using HDL/Total C ratio as well as Trigs/HDL. I've never seen this mentioned before and on my Australian results it always shows Total C/HDL (ideal < 3.5) as the risk factor calculation. Was wondering if you'd ever heard of this before?

Also, would the mmol ratio be any different to the mg/dl ratio (I assume that as it's a US site, they'd be discussing those units):

http://www.yourmedicaldetective.com/public/523.cfm

Also, if it's not too complicated (maths is not one of my strong suits) why would the ratio change because the units used for the calculation change? I just can't get my head around why a conversion would be necessary?

Your input would be appreciated  :)

I'm Not Dead Yet
66yo Female, Western Australia
T2 DX'd 7/3/12 - GTT: Fasting 6.4 - 1 hr 14.2 - 2 hrs 12.9
BMI 7/3/12 = 30.4 –> 24.3 (20.18% weight loss)
HbA1c - 12/3/12: 6.2% - 25/1/16: 5.2% - 33
Idiopathic Interstitial Lung Disease/Pulmonary Fibrosis - DX'd Oct 09
No medications
Eating to my meter & Eating real food – Low carb/no grains works for me

Offline Alan

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,154
    • Type 2 Diabetes - A Personal Journey
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #41 on: 05 October 2015, 10:11:10 PM »
This small pilot study suggests a ratio of 1.3 in mmol terms as the threshold to stay under. That converts to 3.0 in mg/dl terms.

Hi Alan, I've revived this thread because I came across an American link on the subject of ratios that recommends using HDL/Total C ratio as well as Trigs/HDL. I've never seen this mentioned before and on my Australian results it always shows Total C/HDL (ideal < 3.5) as the risk factor calculation. Was wondering if you'd ever heard of this before?

Also, would the mmol ratio be any different to the mg/dl ratio (I assume that as it's a US site, they'd be discussing those units):

http://www.yourmedicaldetective.com/public/523.cfm

Also, if it's not too complicated (maths is not one of my strong suits) why would the ratio change because the units used for the calculation change? I just can't get my head around why a conversion would be necessary?

Your input would be appreciated  :)

Total/HDL is the common ratio which also appears on my lab reports; usually showing a target <4 on mine.

The trigs/HDL ratio is supposed to give an indication of the level of nasty dense particles in your LDL but the total/HDL does not do that. I'm not quite sure what it indicates apart from being better if HDL is high; I don't think it matters much if an inverse is used. Bear in mind it is skewed by HDL being part of the total. I used to get non-HDL/HDL which is probably more valuable, but still gives no indication of fluffy versus dense in the LDL.

It would be far simpler if they actually measured the dense LDL particles. I'm not a lab tech so I don't know why they don't do that.

The units change because of different mg/dl and mmol/l conversions for the lipid components.
  • Divide Triglycerides in mmol/l by 0.0114 to get mg/dl. Thus 1 mmol/l = 88.5 mg/dl
  • Divide other lipids (LDL, HDL, Total) in mmol/l by 0.0259. Thus 1 mmol/l = 38.6 mg/dl
Therefore, a ratio of 1.3 in mg/dl terms for trigs/HDL = 1.3 x 88.5 / 38.6 = 2.98 = ~3.0 in mmol/l terms.
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
--
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
There is nothing I could eat I like more than my eyes.
Type 2 Diabetes - A Personal Journey (latest: Small New York Baked Low Carb Cheesecake)
Born Under a Wandering Star (Latest:Dambulla, Sigiriya and Polonuwarra, Sri Lanka)

Offline lozzark

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,286
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #42 on: 06 April 2016, 02:15:37 AM »
Hi Guys,
I just thought I'd mention that Eli Lilly have just abandoned their latest cholesterol lowering drug.  The reason is that the trials did not improve the rates of avoiding a heart attack by anything worth mentioning. Their drug was extremely effective, reducing cholesterol by 34%.  If you already know that reducing cholesterol will not improve your odds of not having a heart attack (unless you suffer from familial hypercholesterolemia), the result will be no surprise, but it must have been a shock for Eli Lilly, who obviously believe the lies about cholesterol.
https://wddty.com/news/2016/04/cholesterol-theory-discredited-by-drugs-trial-failure.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-12/lilly-halts-heart-drug-development-to-take-90-million-charge
http://marketrealist.com/2015/10/eli-lilly-terminates-evacetrapib-phase-3-trial/


I also came across this article about the development of the lipid hypothesis.  It's a long read and produced by someone wanting to sell something, but I could not see that much wrong with what the author asserts.
http://www.alsearsmd.com/landing/MB_UHR_CC_Eisen_Control_20150203.html?utm_source=uhr&utm_medium=mb&utm_term=solo&utm_content=buyer&utm_campaign=cc-eisen-control-20150203


I've also been compiling a list of what (potentially) causes or contributes to the cause of atherosclerotic plaque.  I've found around 30 potential causes - anyone interested in me writing them up?
T2 Dx 2000 Metformin Gliclazide HbA1c 53 BP 129/79 Cholesterol 5.4, HDL 1.16, LDL 2.9.

Offline sedge

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 13,782
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #43 on: 06 April 2016, 10:35:41 AM »
Anything interesting amongst em Nick? - I mean eg I don't think you need to tell us smoking does, and all the crap it gets up to, to cause the placque. LOL
Jenny

T1 DX 1972, pumping Novorapid 24/05/11

HbA1c - 7/07 8.7, 1/08 7.8, 9/08 8.4, 3/09 7.3, 7/09 7.2, 12/09 7.3, 11/10 8.1, 2/11 8.6, 9/11 6.5 2/12 6.4  5/12 50/6.7  11/12 52/6.9  01/13 46/6.4  06/16 46/6.4  12/16 45/6.4

Offline Pattidevans

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 23,647
  • It's ONLY Diabetes. It could be something worse!
Re: High cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque
« Reply #44 on: 06 April 2016, 08:27:17 PM »
Nick

I am glad to hear that Eli Lilly et al have seen the light.  May I ask if these are the PCSK9 drugs they have been touting?  I was asked to participate in a study about these locally and I said "only if I can be assured that I will get the placebo".

Yes, I think the tide is turning regarding cholesterol being the scapegoat for CVD.  I read all your links and they reinforce that view to some degree, but I fear the news about them abandoning the drugs are more to do with raised HDL not helping than the idea that chol has been unfairly demonised in the scheme of things.
Quote
I also came across this article about the development of the lipid hypothesis.  It's a long read and produced by someone wanting to sell something, but I could not see that much wrong with what the author asserts.
http://www.alsearsmd.com/landing/MB_UHR_CC_Eisen_Control_20150203.html?utm_source=uhr&utm_medium=mb&utm_term=solo&utm_content=buyer&utm_campaign=cc-eisen-control-20150203

It's certainly interesting in explaining some of the history behind the demonification of Cholesterol (BTW Eisenhower does not rank on my favourites list... my parents were very critical of his actions and attitudes toward Britain in the latter stages of the war and afterwards as they felt they cost Britain dearly) but the example of his health deterioration is appalling.

I would be interested in your list of potential causes of CVD.  I wonder if you have read Dr Kendricks' 11 episode (so far) blog on what he  does feelare the causes of heart disease?  I think you would enjoy it if you have not already read it.
Patti


Type 1.  Mis-diagnosed T2 May 2003, finally had CPeptide test 15/7/11 and proper diagnosis 1/9/11.  Now pumping Apidra with Roche Spirit Combo pump. Hba1c 6.1 April 2016.


© 2015 Patti Evans