 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / February 2005Numbers
Total Cholesterol 226 HDL 58 LDL 155 Trig 66 I know these numbers are not good, or at least they can be better. Yes, it would have helped if I had blood work done right before going low carb, but I didn't. The last time I had it checked about 5 years ago the total cholesterol number was 172 (I don't remember the breakdown). I was 150 and had lost the weight eating low cal, low fat. I had gained back 50+ pounds due to not caring, so for all I know, my cholesterol could have been higher than today's numbers. I have been on low carb (Atkins) for six months, losing 54 pounds. My blood pressure has gone down (110/50 from 140/90). My percentages on FitDay average 62% fat, 8% carb, 25% protein. I eat 1400-1500 cals a day. I admit, I have been inactive, but I am starting a cardio/resistance training program at the local hospital tomorrow, working out 3-4 times a week. I am seeing my doctor for a follow up in 3 months to have my cholesterol checked again. Will the exercise program bring these numbers down, or am I destined to a life of low fat dieting, which about right now, I am considering. I want to lose 10-15 more pounds. I'm probably ranting more than anything, I really expected better numbers than that.  SignatureLisa 208/154/140-145 High weight in 2004: 228 Low-carb since June 2004 The numbers are, at the very least, not bad. Read about "fluffy LDL", trigs/HDL ratio, and note your very high HDL. i > Total Cholesterol 226 > HDL 58 [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > I'm probably ranting more than anything, I really expected better numbers > than that. Signature223/172.8/180 Hmmm...(yes I went and read) Makes me wonder why the doctor was in such a hurry to put me on lipitor. That made me think I had this horrible problem on my hands. Lisa > The numbers are, at the very least, not bad. Read about "fluffy LDL", > trigs/HDL ratio, and note your very high HDL. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> LDL 155 >> Trig 66 They want you on Lipitor because the current thrust is toward there. However, the all-cause mortality of statins (of which lipitor is one) is about the same as not taking statins. In other words, you might not die of heart disease, but you'll die of cancer. Moreover, supposedly cholesterol for women doesn't matter much. As Ig noted, you have a pretty high HDL. > Hmmm...(yes I went and read) Makes me wonder why the doctor was in such > a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >>> LDL 155 >>> Trig 66 SignatureBob in CT > Hmmm...(yes I went and read) Makes me wonder why the doctor was in such a > hurry to put me on lipitor. That made me think I had this horrible problem > on my hands. I would suggest to wait with lipitor and do some reading. You are not in a completely obvious situation. It is unclear if you have a problem, if yes, of what magnitude, and if so, would lipitor address that problem. People with your numbers (super low trigs, super high HDL, high LDL) are not encountered often and there is probably not much research about them. Maybe eating less red meat and dairy and more chicken, fish and nuts would improve your cholesterol numbers, even though it is not obvious whether those numbers would result in some actual health improvements. There are more questions here, than there are answers. Good luck, keep us posted. i > Lisa >> The numbers are, at the very least, not bad. Read about "fluffy LDL", [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>> LDL 155 >>> Trig 66 Signature223/172.8/180 > Maybe eating less red meat and dairy and more chicken, fish and nuts > would improve your cholesterol numbers, even though it is not obvious > whether those numbers would result in some actual health improvements. Looking at what I've been eating (and drinking), there is cream I can cut. I'll have one black first thing in the morning, then 2 with a T. cream during the day. Funny, I never put anything in my coffee before lc, I got to thinking, why should I now? And it's becomming a "habit", and I feel if it's something I *have* to have, I shouldn't have it. I'm replacing the bottled salad dressings with olive oil, vinegar and herbs. I think I will use that for my veggies instead of the usual pat of butter, also. The other "red flag" I can remove is the steak-um roll -up I'll have a few days a week. I got to thinking about the hardened grease on my counter top grill after cooking up a serving...yuck. I'll use sliced chicken or turkey instead. And there is always fish. There are things I can tweak, and it gives me an opportunity to eat even better than I have been. This could be a challenge, one I need. Challenges are a good thing. > There are more questions here, than there are answers. > Good luck, keep us posted. Thanks, Ig, it's great to be able to bounce things off others. Yep, it will be interesting to see in 3-6 months. Between this and working out 3-4 times a week, maybe I'll actually break this up and down weight plateau and drop some bf along the way. SignatureLisa 208/154/145-150 High weight in 2004: 228 Low-carb since June 2004 >> Maybe eating less red meat and dairy and more chicken, fish and nuts >> would improve your cholesterol numbers, even though it is not obvious [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > grill after cooking up a serving...yuck. I'll use sliced chicken or > turkey instead. And there is always fish. and nuts too. > There are things I can tweak, and it gives me an opportunity to eat > even better than I have been. This could be a challenge, one I > need. Challenges are a good thing. Plus, it will be very interesting to see what your experience is. >> There are more questions here, than there are answers. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > working out 3-4 times a week, maybe I'll actually break this up and down > weight plateau and drop some bf along the way. Good luck! Signature223/173.0/180 > > Maybe eating less red meat and dairy and more chicken, fish and nuts > > would improve your cholesterol numbers, even though it is not obvious [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > a serving...yuck. I'll use sliced chicken or turkey instead. And there is > always fish. This sounds good. I would be interested to hear about your improvements, if any, over the next few months. > There are things I can tweak, and it gives me an opportunity to eat even > better than I have been. This could be a challenge, one I need. Challenges > are a good thing. Your overall numbers don't seem too bad. Trigs are good, and TC/HDL ratio is 3.89. Not that bad, and if you have no other risk factors, like family history, diabetes, smoking, it's even better. Total Cholesterol is over 200, but not way out of line. For me, I would much rather bring my cholesterol numbers down through diet and exercise, rather than drugs. Most doctors probably would have the opinion to nip a slight increase in the bud by prescribing drugs early. They may not see too many people bring their levels down. Since only a very few are successful at keeping the weight off, they probably only see numbers that continue to get worse by age and weight increase. Understandable from that point of view. My own cholesterol numbers have improved by eating low carb and exercising. It was also suggested to me that I should consider cholesterol lowering drugs in the past. The advise to me in the mean time was to eat low fat and high carb. I had done that for a good many years without results. I was astounded by both reading and experience that lowering carb consumption actually works to lower cholesterol. I have no medical training (other than basic life support), so what I say shouldn't be taken as advice. Tom 210/180/180 > > There are more questions here, than there are answers. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > High weight in 2004: 228 > Low-carb since June 2004 > For me, I would much rather bring my cholesterol numbers down through > diet and exercise, rather than drugs. Most doctors probably would have the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that continue to get worse by age and weight increase. Understandable from > that point of view. I think my dr was shocked. I changed my diet to get my blood sugar down and within a month my cholesterol changed enough that she assumed it was because of the statin she had prescribed (that I didn't take.) But my cholesterol was already good, which is one reason I hadn't taken the statin. SignatureNo Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes > > For me, I would much rather bring my cholesterol numbers down through > > diet and exercise, rather than drugs. Most doctors probably would have the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > of the statin she had prescribed (that I didn't take.) But my cholesterol > was already good, which is one reason I hadn't taken the statin. My doctor still sticks with the notion that eating low fat is the correct answer. He's amazed of my claim of eating high fat/low carb has helped to lower my cholesterol. Whenever I got it checked before, I was given pamphlets from the heart assoc. about how lowering fat intake may help to reduce cholesterol. I told him it's the high amount of refined carbs people are eating rather than the amount of fat consumed. I hope he does some reading. > -- > No Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes "I think my dr was shocked. I changed my diet to get my blood sugar down and within a month my cholesterol changed enough that she assumed it was because of the statin she had prescribed (that I didn't take.) But my cholesterol was already good, which is one reason I hadn't taken the statin. " If your chol was already good, why did the dr prescribe a statin? > "I think my dr was shocked. I changed my diet to get my blood sugar > down and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > If your chol was already good, why did the dr prescribe a statin? Good question, because my sugar was too high (350+) and there are studies saying all diabetics need to be on a statin, even those with normal cholesterol. I did take a quarter of a pill each day for three months after that, but I'm sorry, I don't think it's a good idea for my LDL to be 29, I think my body needs some cholesterol to function right, so I quit taking it again. SignatureNo Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes > bottled salad dressings > with olive oil, vinegar and herbs. I think I will use that for my [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > better than I have been. This could be a challenge, one I need. Challenges > are a good thing. Avocado, olives, walnuts, almonds, macadamias, pecans, peanuts, fish oil supplements, flax seed, policosanol, pantethine, psyllium. I heard of a book called, '50 ways to lower your cholesterol.' SignatureNo Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes >> bottled salad dressings >> with olive oil, vinegar and herbs. I think I will use that for my [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > up >> a serving...yuck. There is little to no evidence that saturated fat causes heart disease. Really. See, for instance: http://www.thincs.org/ > I'll use sliced chicken or turkey instead. And there > is [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > supplements, flax seed, policosanol, pantethine, psyllium. > I heard of a book called, '50 ways to lower your cholesterol.' Ditto. SignatureBob in CT > >> bottled salad dressings > >> with olive oil, vinegar and herbs. I think I will use that for my [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > There is little to no evidence that saturated fat causes heart disease. > Really. See, for instance: I agree. I'm still trying to read more to be sure. I don't limit saturated fat in my own diet. My cholesterol numbers are good. > http://www.thincs.org/ This is a good website Bob. It has a lot more info than is evident on the first page. I know you have posted this link before in other discussions of cholesterol. Thanks. > > I'll use sliced chicken or turkey instead. And there > > is [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > -- > Bob in CT >> On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 11:36:02 -0600, None Given >> <nonegiven@invalid.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > of > cholesterol. Thanks. You're right that there is a lot of info. that's not on the website. While I'm not really sure whether saturated fat is a factor in heart disease, at least the people on that website are willing to say that saturated fat (and total cholesterol) might not be a factor in heart disease. Speaking of heart disease, has anyone seen this: http://www.technewsworld.com/story/Saving-Lives-with-Healthy-Gums-40398.html SignatureBob in CT > >> On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 11:36:02 -0600, None Given > >> <nonegiven@invalid.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > saturated fat (and total cholesterol) might not be a factor in heart > disease. Speaking of heart disease, has anyone seen this: http://www.technewsworld.com/story/Saving-Lives-with-Healthy-Gums-40398.html Yes. I have read similar in a different article. There is also a connection of heart disease with chlamydia. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/285757.stm There are lots of different factors and diseases which may affect a researchers study on cholesterol and heart disease. > -- > Bob in CT > >> On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 11:36:02 -0600, None Given > >> <nonegiven@invalid.invalid> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > You're right that there is a lot of info. that's not on the website. Actually I meant to say that there was alot more in this site than first meets the eye. It doesn't have a lot of pics and things, so it doesn't look very promising at first glance, until I started exploring all the links. It is actually quite informative, with tons of articles. Re-reading what I said, I guess it could have sounded like I said it was missing too much about other factors. Not true. > While I'm not really sure whether saturated fat is a factor in heart > disease, at least the people on that website are willing to say that > saturated fat (and total cholesterol) might not be a factor in heart > disease. Speaking of heart disease, has anyone seen this: http://www.technewsworld.com/story/Saving-Lives-with-Healthy-Gums-40398.html > -- > Bob in CT > You're right that there is a lot of info. that's not on the website. > While I'm not really sure whether saturated fat is a factor in heart > disease, at least the people on that website are willing to say that > saturated fat (and total cholesterol) might not be a factor in heart > disease. Speaking of heart disease, has anyone seen this: It's probably not the saturated fat at all, but the skewed ratio of Omega6:Omega3 fatty acids in meat caused by the way most meat animals are fed these days. A diet high in Omega 6 promotes inflammation which probably is a bigger factor in heart disease than cholesterol. SignatureNo Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes || Total Cholesterol 226 || HDL 58 [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] | Your triglycerides, the deadliest component, will rise on a | high-carb lowfat diet. They are manufactured by the liver from excess carbohdrates consumed -- Peter website: http://users.thelink.net/marengo > | Your triglycerides, the deadliest component, will rise on a > | high-carb lowfat diet. They are manufactured by the liver from excess [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Peter > website: http://users.thelink.net/marengo I know, I was just saying that out of frustration. Knee-jerk reaction. There is no way I'd go back to low fat with all the added sugar. My mom started out with high cholesterol, climbed on the Snackwell wagon and ate her way to diabetes (after all, it's low fat and I can eat as much as I want), and still has high cholesterol. I know this is probably more an issue of age (42), nearing menopause, being lazy, and hereditary issues, than diet. I have read dietary cholesterol has little effect on blood cholesterol. Exercise will lower the numbers. Lisa These are not "bad" numbers. Do not let them put you on any anti-cholesterol med for these numbers. You should have them rechecked in another six months. The drug reps promise doctors a lot things for scripting out their drugs. You do not need meds for these relatively good numbers. Signaturebjgeiger > Total Cholesterol 226 > HDL 58 [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > I'm probably ranting more than anything, I really expected better numbers > than that. > Total Cholesterol 226 > HDL 58 [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > High weight in 2004: 228 > Low-carb since June 2004 What amazes me is that someone loses 54 pounds, drops both systolic and diastolic blood pressure by a ton, yet someone wants to put them on medication. (Plus, triglycerides are really low.) I think this "you have one thing out of alignment, therefore you need to be on medication" mentality is just wrong. It makes me wish I'd have gone to medical school. SignatureBob in CT Hi, > What amazes me is that someone loses 54 pounds, drops both systolic > and diastolic blood pressure by a ton, yet someone wants to put them [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > mentality is just wrong. It makes me wish I'd have gone to medical > school. What bothers the hell out of me is that there is no statistically significant difference in death rates between the treated and control groups in Pfizer's own literature for the damn drug. The big picture outcome stuff! That ticks me off. Take care, Carmen SignaturePlease note change in Reply To address carmensrt <at> gmail <dot> com Hotmail isn't working and is being abandoned > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Take care, > Carmen That is totally true. The all-cause mortality is unchanged. SignatureBob in CT >> Hi, >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > That is totally true. The all-cause mortality is unchanged. It is, supposedly, increased if results from all studies are added up. Signature223/173.0/180 : Will the exercise program bring these numbers down, or am I destined to a : life of low fat dieting, which about right now, I am considering. I want to : lose 10-15 more pounds. : : I'm probably ranting more than anything, I really expected better numbers : than that. exercise will bring your HDL up and that, as martha would say, "is a good thing"....................... stay on your LC WOE and find some routine exercise that you like and will do. rosie > exercise will bring your HDL up and that, as martha would say, "is a > good thing"....................... stay on your LC WOE and find > some routine exercise that you like and will do. rosie I am doubtful that exercise will further improve HDL that is as high as the OP's. Signature223/173.0/180 > > exercise will bring your HDL up and that, as martha would say, "is a > > good thing"....................... stay on your LC WOE and find > > some routine exercise that you like and will do. rosie > > I am doubtful that exercise will further improve HDL that is as high as > the OP's. I dunno. I think the OP's was 59. Mine went from 60 to 80something when I started low-carbing. I have no way of knowing if that was from diet, exercise or the combination, but there's definitely a possiblity of improvement. Martha Signature"ALPO is 99 cents a can. That's over SEVEN dog dollars!!" Revek - ASDLC |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.