Cholesterol!

Hi Guys,
Had some blood tests the other week (I went low carb last sept and it stopped R.H. dead in its tracks.)
GGT now 72, all other liver readings mid range. My GGT was over 140 Dec. 14! Been coming down gradually.

Took myself off statins early Jan and just got my L.C.H.F unvarnished result. HDL up 0.4 to 1.6 but total now 6.4...do you think think this is excessive? Is it the kind of result you are getting?

My daughter (a GP) was not pleased with me stopping statins!
Last HBA1c 44 in Jan.Just diet, no meds for diabetes.
atb
Derek
I take Rivaroxaban for Afib and 100mgs Eplerenone for Conn's and 2mgs Doxazosin for slight secondary HTN and prostate.

Derek wrote:Hi Guys,
Had some blood tests the other week (I went low carb last sept and it stopped R.H. dead in its tracks.)
GGT now 72, all other liver readings mid range.  My GGT was over 140 Dec. 14! Been coming down gradually.

Took myself off statins early Jan and just got my L.C.H.F unvarnished result.  HDL up 0.4 to 1.6 but total now 6.4...do you think think this is excessive? Is it the kind of result you are getting?

My daughter (a GP) was not pleased with me stopping statins!  
Last HBA1c 44 in Jan.Just diet, no meds for diabetes.
atb
Derek
I take Rivaroxaban for Afib and 100mgs Eplerenone for Conn's and 2mgs Doxazosin for slight secondary HTN and prostate.

"My daughter (a GP) was not pleased with me stopping statins!" is she trying to see you off?

Joking aside, unless a person suffers from hypercholesterolemia, which very few do, I believe cholesterol testing is a complete waste of time and money in the UK, it only serves as a tool to get people onto statins. Dr. Ronald Krauss came up with the way to test cholesterol using a special centrifuge, the idea caught on big time, big pharma loved it. Years down the line he put his hand up and said he had made a big mistake re. LDL cholesterol. It was discovered that LDL comes in various forms, basically large and small particles. The small could be dangerous and penetrate the artery wall causing an atheroma or plaque in the artery wall. The large particle LDL is now considered harmless. The reason testing in the UK is useless, is the fact NHS does not have the new equipment that can separate the LDL particles into good and the so called bad, hence the estimated numbers are meaningless. I doubt many GP's know that, or they would not push statins on everyone, despite the financial rewards they receive for doing so.

It is pretty much accepted these days, that high HDL and low trigs are the numbers we want to achieve, LDL numbers are meaningless. Also as we age the higher the total cholesterol numbers we have the longer we are likely to live. I remember a study done in France in an old ladies rest home. They checked the cholesterol numbers of all on a regular basis, almost without exception, those with the lowest total cholesterol numbers died first.

You asked if we thought 6.4 was high, for what it's worth mine have been between 5.9 and 6.3 for nearly eight years.

The last word to Dr. John Briffa.

“Sometimes when talking to someone about their cholesterol, I ask them to ask me what my cholesterol is. Then I answer: “I have no idea, because I never have it checked.” That’s not because I take an ostrich-like stance on matters that relate to my health – it’s because the great likelihood is that knowing my cholesterol numbers would not lead to me having a different view on my health or have any bearing on how I live my life. End of.”

Link to Dr Briffa here well worth reading the full article.

http://www.drbriffa.com/2012/11/30/ask-me-what-my-cholesterol-level-is/

Derek wrote:Hi Guys,
Had some blood tests the other week (I went low carb last sept and it stopped R.H. dead in its tracks.)
GGT now 72, all other liver readings mid range.  My GGT was over 140 Dec. 14! Been coming down gradually.

Took myself off statins early Jan and just got my L.C.H.F unvarnished result.  HDL up 0.4 to 1.6 but total now 6.4...do you think think this is excessive? Is it the kind of result you are getting?

My daughter (a GP) was not pleased with me stopping statins!  
Last HBA1c 44 in Jan.Just diet, no meds for diabetes.
atb
Derek
I take Rivaroxaban for Afib and 100mgs Eplerenone for Conn's and 2mgs Doxazosin for slight secondary HTN and prostate.

Hi Derek did you get a full lipid panel results trigs, LDL, HDL and TC cholesterol ?

After years of getting a full lipid panel my surgery only did HDL and TC last time I had blood work done: TC = 5.91 and HDL = 2.6

Graham

graham64 wrote:

Derek wrote:Hi Guys,
Had some blood tests the other week (I went low carb last sept and it stopped R.H. dead in its tracks.)
GGT now 72, all other liver readings mid range.  My GGT was over 140 Dec. 14! Been coming down gradually.

Took myself off statins early Jan and just got my L.C.H.F unvarnished result.  HDL up 0.4 to 1.6 but total now 6.4...do you think think this is excessive? Is it the kind of result you are getting?

My daughter (a GP) was not pleased with me stopping statins!  
Last HBA1c 44 in Jan.Just diet, no meds for diabetes.
atb
Derek
I take Rivaroxaban for Afib and 100mgs Eplerenone for Conn's and 2mgs Doxazosin for slight secondary HTN and prostate.

Hi Derek did you get a full lipid panel results trigs, LDL, HDL and TC cholesterol ?

After years of getting a full lipid panel my surgery only did HDL and TC last time I had blood work done: TC = 5.91 and HDL = 2.6

Graham

Hi Graham,
The blood results only did HDL and total cholesterol, but I will ask my doctor about further analysis.
Thanks for your input.
regards
Derek

Eddie wrote:

Derek wrote:Hi Guys,
Had some blood tests the other week (I went low carb last sept and it stopped R.H. dead in its tracks.)
GGT now 72, all other liver readings mid range.  My GGT was over 140 Dec. 14! Been coming down gradually.

Took myself off statins early Jan and just got my L.C.H.F unvarnished result.  HDL up 0.4 to 1.6 but total now 6.4...do you think think this is excessive? Is it the kind of result you are getting?

My daughter (a GP) was not pleased with me stopping statins!  
Last HBA1c 44 in Jan.Just diet, no meds for diabetes.
atb
Derek
I take Rivaroxaban for Afib and 100mgs Eplerenone for Conn's and 2mgs Doxazosin for slight secondary HTN and prostate.

"My daughter (a GP) was not pleased with me stopping statins!" is she trying to see you off?  

Joking aside, unless a person suffers from hypercholesterolemia, which very few do, I believe cholesterol testing is a complete waste of time and money in the UK, it only serves as a tool to get people onto statins. Dr. Ronald Krauss came up with the way to test cholesterol using a special centrifuge, the idea caught on big time, big pharma loved it. Years down the line he put his hand up and said he had made a big mistake re. LDL cholesterol. It was discovered that LDL comes in various forms, basically large and small particles. The small could be dangerous and penetrate the artery wall causing an atheroma or plaque in the artery wall. The large particle LDL is now considered harmless. The reason testing in the UK is useless, is the fact NHS does not have the new equipment that can separate the LDL particles into good and the so called bad, hence the estimated numbers are meaningless. I doubt many GP's know that, or they would not push statins on everyone, despite the financial rewards they receive for doing so.

It is pretty much accepted these days, that high HDL and low trigs are the numbers we want to achieve, LDL numbers are meaningless. Also as we age the higher the total cholesterol numbers we have the longer we are likely to live. I remember a study done in France in an old ladies rest home. They checked the cholesterol numbers of all on a regular basis, almost without exception, those with the lowest total cholesterol numbers died first.

You asked if we thought 6.4 was high, for what it's worth mine have been between 5.9 and 6.3 for nearly eight years.

The last word to Dr. John Briffa.

“Sometimes when talking to someone about their cholesterol, I ask them to ask me what my cholesterol is. Then I answer: “I have no idea, because I never have it checked.” That’s not because I take an ostrich-like stance on matters that relate to my health – it’s because the great likelihood is that knowing my cholesterol numbers would not lead to me having a different view on my health or have any bearing on how I live my life. End of.”

Link to Dr Briffa here well worth reading the full article.

http://www.drbriffa.com/2012/11/30/ask-me-what-my-cholesterol-level-is/

Thanks for the information Eddie I will check out those references.
regards
Derek

Derek wrote:Hi Graham,
The blood results only did HDL and total cholesterol, but I will ask my doctor about further analysis.
Thanks for your input.
regards
Derek

Looks like in the Lancs area at least cholesterol blood tests are being restricted to TC/HDL, I recently got a letter for my annual diabetes health check. 

Quote from letter

"There has been some changes to the procedure following new national guidance"

It also states I do not now need to fast for this test

Whereas previously the appointment with phlebotomist was in the morning its now in the afternoon and a urine sample has to be provided the following morning, so instead of a single AM visit to the surgery were I had my blood taken and dropped of my urine sample I have now to go twice. 

Seeing as we don't now get trigs and LDL tests 

graham64 wrote:

Derek wrote:Hi Graham,
The blood results only did HDL and total cholesterol, but I will ask my doctor about further analysis.
Thanks for your input.
regards
Derek

Looks like in the Lancs area at least cholesterol blood tests are being restricted to TC/HDL, I recently got a letter for my annual diabetes health check. 

Quote from letter

"There has been some changes to the procedure following new national guidance"

It also states I do not now need to fast for this test

Whereas previously the appointment with phlebotomist was in the morning its now in the afternoon and a urine sample has to be provided the following morning, so instead of a single AM visit to the surgery were I had my blood taken and dropped of my urine sample I have now to go twice. 

Not having a fasting test and limited results for Cholesterol.  All very "redolent of rodent!".. I think they want to have us all on statins!  
atb
Derek

And just when we thought we knew a bit about cholesterol "'Good' cholesterol not always good, study suggests"

Some people with high levels of supposedly "good" cholesterol are at much greater risk of heart disease, a study suggests.

A bloodstream tussle takes place between "bad" cholesterol dumping fatty material in the arteries and good cholesterol taking it away.

But a Cambridge University study in the journal Science showed more good cholesterol was not always better.

It is thought the findings may help find new ways to protect the heart.

Eating olive oil, fish and nuts raises levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) - which is more commonly known as good cholesterol.

It is one of the things doctors test for when predicting your risk of a heart attack.

More on this story here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35775318

It has been known for a long time, people with so called good cholesterol numbers have just as many heart attacks as people with so called bad cholesterol numbers. That being said, the $30 billion a year statin earner for big pharma will carry on as usual

One day the boffins will know the true facts, whether we get told is another matter. Never let the truth get in the way of a good earner.

Eddie wrote:And just when we thought we knew a bit about cholesterol "'Good' cholesterol not always good, study suggests"

Some people with high levels of supposedly "good" cholesterol are at much greater risk of heart disease, a study suggests.

A bloodstream tussle takes place between "bad" cholesterol dumping fatty material in the arteries and good cholesterol taking it away.

But a Cambridge University study in the journal Science showed more good cholesterol was not always better.

It is thought the findings may help find new ways to protect the heart.

Eating olive oil, fish and nuts raises levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) - which is more commonly known as good cholesterol.

It is one of the things doctors test for when predicting your risk of a heart attack.

More on this story here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35775318

It has been known for a long time, people with so called good cholesterol numbers have just as many heart attacks as people with so called bad cholesterol numbers. That being said, the $30 billion a year statin earner for big pharma will carry on as usual

One day the boffins will know the true facts, whether we get told is another matter. Never let the truth get in the way of a good earner.

However, repeated trials that raise HDL with drugs have flopped, leading doctors to think something else is going on.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35775318

I would have thought there is a big difference with artificially raising HDL with drugs and naturally occurring HDL

Derek wrote:

graham64 wrote:

Derek wrote:Hi Graham,
The blood results only did HDL and total cholesterol, but I will ask my doctor about further analysis.
Thanks for your input.
regards
Derek

Looks like in the Lancs area at least cholesterol blood tests are being restricted to TC/HDL, I recently got a letter for my annual diabetes health check. 

Quote from letter

"There has been some changes to the procedure following new national guidance"

It also states I do not now need to fast for this test

Whereas previously the appointment with phlebotomist was in the morning its now in the afternoon and a urine sample has to be provided the following morning, so instead of a single AM visit to the surgery were I had my blood taken and dropped of my urine sample I have now to go twice. 

Not have a fasting test and limited results for Cholesterol.  All very "redolent of rodent!".. I think they want to have us all on statins!  
atb
Derek

Fortunately until last year I've always had the full lipid panel done, in seven years I have seen consistently low trigs <1.0 mmo/L and only small fluctuations in LDL 

As for statins due to numerous side effects it now on record that I'm intolerant of them 

Cheers
Graham

Reading about the Cambridge study some of it seems to focusing on a rare genetic condition that produces a lot of self generated cholesterol.
D.

I'm of the opinion (ie. may change my mind in the face of convincing evidence which I haven't seen yet) that "cholesterol" isn't the cause of anything, but the results especially trigs, HDL and the ratio between them are indicators that metabolism isn't working properly, the same factors that affect this are the factors that actually do the damage elsewhere too. Trigs/HDL relates to insulin resistance (and hence hyperinsulinemia), cardiovascular risk and particle size and density of LDL. EPIC-Norfolk (Kay-Tee Khaw) and a five year followup, and a huge New Zealand study (Elley et al.) both relate cardiovascular risk to A1c, starting from "normal" numbers of below 5%. Sadly "evidence-based" medicine doesn't inform doctors of this, all they are testing for is "statin deficiency", and since ACCORD - an appalling study - they tell many diabetics to INCREASE their A1c.

Will be interesting to see what else Malcolm Kendrick comes up with, he's now up to Part 8.

And noblehead is still quoting  cholesterol guidelines for diabetics which for the majority would mean statins to achieve the levels, mind you as I only get TC and HDL checked they don't apply to me 

I actually used to get MEASURED LDL rather than calculated, which was interesting as the result fell about midway between the Friedwald and Iranian calculations. Then the nurse or receptionist overrode the doctor and only did total and HDL. Now they have changed labs and the current one only does calculated LDL which is high when your trigs are low like mine. The doctor also did a non-fasting test and interestingly the results were within a whisker of the fasting tests. I suspect this wouldn't have been the case for a high carber with high trigs, like what I used to be. An NMR or VAP would be interesting for the particle size and distribution, so would be LP(a) or APO B  but unavailable on the NHS.

Had bloods done this week. Hba1c down to 42 ..no diabetes meds. But TC high at 6.8 hdl 1.6.
Trigs recently 1.0
Unfortunately GGT has been going up since I went on rivaroxaban at end of Jan. Was 102 this week but other liver readings in range

atb
Derek
PS another drug I take, eplerenone puts up cholesterol

According to this your LDL is around 4.5 - 4.7. With your trigs the Iranian calculation would be more accurate. Mine isn't far off, whether or not that's a good thing I'm not sure, but the trigs/HDL ratio is excellent and shows a lack of insulin resistance. It also shows that your LDL is fully formed, not small and dense.

Derek wrote:Had bloods done this week. Hba1c  down to 42  ..no diabetes meds.  But TC high at 6.8 hdl 1.6.
Trigs recently 1.0
Unfortunately GGT has been going up since I went on rivaroxaban at end of Jan. Was 102 this week but other liver readings in range

atb
Derek
PS another drug I take, eplerenone puts up cholesterol

,

Tough about the drugs Derek not much you can do about them as they are a necessity for you, total cholesterol is high but your trigs and HDL are good, the TC/HDL ratio is also OK main problem is your LDL which using this online calculator comes in at 4.74

Good news with the A1c though

Looks like Chris beat me to it

chris c wrote:According to this your LDL is around 4.5 - 4.7. With your trigs the Iranian calculation would be more accurate. Mine isn't far off, whether or not that's a good thing I'm not sure, but the trigs/HDL ratio is excellent and shows a lack of insulin resistance. It also shows that your LDL is fully formed, not small and dense.

As you know Chris I only get TC and HDL checked now but seeing my trigs have for the past eight years been <1.0 mmol/L I've just put my latest TC 4.75 amd HDL 2.06 and added trigs at an estimated 1.0 into the online calculator I use and it comes up with an LDL of 2.23, everything is either optimal or ideal but alas not good enough for the statinators guidelines for diabetics

Thanks guys for your responses. It doesn't make sense since I starting cutting carbs my GGT went up from 35 at age 73...been low for years.
Must be meds.


D.

Derek wrote:Thanks guys for your responses.  It doesn't make sense since I starting cutting carbs my GGT went up from 35 at age 73...been low for years.
Must be meds.my


D.

Hi Derek, I'm not aware of any adverse link between LC and GTT, I do recall my GTT level was flagged up by the lab a couple of years ago but no follow up was requested by my Doc, like you all other liver functions were within range. If you have a consultant it maybe worth asking them if there is any contraindications re the drugs you take and liver function

Graham

graham64 wrote:

Derek wrote:Thanks guys for your responses.  It doesn't make sense since I starting cutting carbs my GGT went up from 35 at age 73...been low for years.
Must be meds.my


D.

Hi Derek, I'm not aware of any adverse link between LC and GTT, I do recall my GTT level was flagged up by the lab a couple of years ago but no follow up was requested by my Doc, like you all other liver functions were within range. If you have a consultant it maybe worth asking them if there is any contraindications re the drugs you take and liver function

Graham

Hi Graham, the makers of Rivaroxaban are being sued in US since some patients maintain it has damaged their livers.
regards Derek

graham64 wrote:

chris c wrote:According to this your LDL is around 4.5 - 4.7. With your trigs the Iranian calculation would be more accurate. Mine isn't far off, whether or not that's a good thing I'm not sure, but the trigs/HDL ratio is excellent and shows a lack of insulin resistance. It also shows that your LDL is fully formed, not small and dense.

As you know Chris I only get TC and HDL checked now but seeing my trigs have for the past eight years been <1.0 mmol/L I've just put my latest TC 4.75 amd HDL 2.06 and added trigs at an estimated 1.0 into the online calculator I use and it comes up with an LDL of 2.23, everything is either optimal or ideal but alas not good enough for the statinators guidelines for diabetics

Quite. They buy cut price lab equipment which doesn't tell you what you want to know so they can afford the statins.

Derek wrote:Hi Graham, the makers of Rivaroxaban are being sued in US since some patients maintain it has damaged their livers.
regards Derek

Hi Derek, that's worrying if it is the case that Rivaroxaban could be causing damage to the liver I'd be asking if there are any alternative medications

Hope you get things sorted

Hi Graham,
I went on the anticoagulant Dabigatran in the summer and I feel fine on this drug and my GGT seems to be coming down slowly.
atb
Derek

graham64 wrote:

Derek wrote:Hi Graham, the makers of Rivaroxaban are being sued in US since some patients maintain it has damaged their livers.
regards Derek

Hi Derek, that's worrying if it is the case that Rivaroxaban could be causing damage to the liver I'd be asking if there are any alternative medications

Hope you get things sorted