All statements, claims and opinions on this message board are those of the respective authors and are not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice. As comments are posted anonymously, it should be assumed that information on this forum comes from individuals who are NOT medical professionals and have received NO formal medical or scientific education or training. Comments and postings on this site are NOT moderated for accuracy of content as moderators are NOT medical professionals. Information on this site is for educational purposes only. You should not use the information on this site for diagnosis or treatment of any health condition. Always consult with a qualified medical professional before making medication, diet, dietary supplement, exercise, or lifestyle changes or decisions.
Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 10:28 am Post subject: what ratios really matter?
Latest lab work:
of course, the doc is horrified by the LDL.. she wrote "yikes" on the report & prescribed Cholestyramine (which I am porbably not going to take) as she knows I had adverse effects from statins.
Anyway, after researching Cholestyrmine & doing more reading articles have said that with triglycerides low, the LDL isn't accurate, other ratios like HDL/total and tri/HDL are more important indicators of a problem.
I would like to know same things. What I am not willing to accept presently is almost any answers based on the now widely discredited idea that cholesterol, HDL, LDL are the cause(s) of cardiovascular diseases. Your doctor, like most are still singing the old refrain about cholesterol and lipids -- we both may be dead of natural causes before ordinary doctors learn to sing a more accurate tune.
Suggest you browse through or search on the various articles by Duane Graveline, Malcom Kendricks, Kilmer McCully, Uffe Ravenskov, all on this site for the information most likely to be accurate and based on more accurate understanding of causes of cardiovascular diseases.
Back before I agreed to take Lipitor (one of my most stupid decisions) I too had such high LDL, as well as high triglycerides. BUT, ultrasound measurements on my cartoid arteries (big ones on each side of neck, that feed blood to brain) showed absolutely NO plaque of any kind. Ditto for subsequent measurements on femoral, etc. arteries in legs. Leaves my cardiologist with "egg on his face". He also thinks all statins are wonderful -- I try to keep poker face when he says that.
Perhaps someone that has digested all this will post some truly useful answer.
if you do the math for absolute risk rather that relative risk the cholesterol levels for longest life (lowest mortality) it puts you right in the sweet spot....ask your doctor to splain that lucy
here several "all cause" mortality versus cholesterol are discussed.
if these, especially the first, does not convince your doctor then come back and I'll give you more on this and start on statin side effects and thier prevalence.
this doesn't answer your question directly but goes to the real heart of the matter...ie that the whole lipid hypothosis is very bad science from start to finish. Doctor Graveline spoke about the future of diagnasing the markers of CVD but I can't find it right off....
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum