High Cholesterol despite correct weight, diet, exercise...What to do?

[Chuckanut]

The confusion over cholesterol is an example of the way our medical establishment has failed us. For example we were told that HDL is GOOD cholesterol. And, LDL is BAD cholesterol. This is nonsense. We need both in the required amounts. And excess of anything has the potential to be bad.

If the medical establishment stopped treating us like idiots and just explained what they knew and/or believed to be true at the moment we would all be better off. And we would have more trust in what the 'experts' say.

 

[JBTX]

The confusion over cholesterol is an example of the way our medical establishment has failed us. For example we were told that HDL is GOOD cholesterol. And, LDL is BAD cholesterol. This is nonsense. We need both in the required amounts. And excess of anything has the potential to be bad.

If the medical establishment stopped treating us like idiots and just explained what they knew and/or believed to be true at the moment we would all be better off. And we would have more trust in what the 'experts' say.

The answer is they don’t always know and what they think they know sometimes changes.

While you may need some LDL the amounts a young healthy adult has are very low, so most of us probably have more than we need. HDL is tricky, in some ways it is a marker more than anything else, in some instances high HDL can be a marker for good things, in others not so good. The evidence seems to indicate that just driving up HDL by itself may not be helpful.

From some of the stuff I’ve read APOb count is the most accurate indicator of heart disease risk, and after that non HDL cholesterol.

 

[Koolau]

It might vary by location but in Central FL, an order is required to get the Cardiac Calcium Score scan done.

I got mine because of an ad in the local newspaper.

"$49 Heart Check"

I don't know if everyone knows, but the CCS is basically a CT scan, more or less concentrated in the heart area. But it does see the lungs, because my test also detected lung nodules.

I tried to ask what the radiation dose was but they would only say "It's very low." Having had significant background in Radiation Biology and Health Physics, I know that any CT scan (no mater how circumscribed) has a fair amount of radiation dose to the body. In my case the technician doing my test had to do it TWICE.

Below is a chart of various radiation doses which are then compared to the average daily exposure from background of, for instance, your own Potassium-40 and Carbon-14, solar and cosmic radiation and "rocks" which contain radioactive isotopes.

https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/Radiology-Safety/Radiation-Safety/Dose-Reference-Card.pdf

The chart suggests that the radiation dose from a CCS is about 1.7 mSv which is roughly equivalent to about 6 months of background radiation. For comparison, a chest X-ray is about 0.1 mSv or roughly 10 days of natural background radiation.

Now, all of medicine (ALL!) is bounded by risk/benefit ratios. Nothing is harmless - though it may be very helpful. One needs to at least consider the risk/benefit ratio for any test - including a CCS. Remember, YMMV.

 

[Amethyst]

I try not to think of doctors as Us vs. Them. However, i'm aware that ours is a litigious society, and people in The Medical Establishment have a greater than average exposure to lawsuits.

Thus, I surmise/presume that a great deal of the tedious procedures and cautious, imprecise language (which have all gotten worse over the decades) have to do with fending off lawyers.

On top of that, doctors have to serve everybody - smart, dull, and everything in between - and their approach no doubt reflects that. Once a doctor realizes I'm following what he/she is saying, the conversation often gets more revealing.

If the medical establishment stopped treating us like idiots and just explained what they knew and/or believed to be true at the moment we would all be better off. And we would have more trust in what the 'experts' say.

 

[Pluperfect]

I would say at minimum, you are pre-diabetic. Ask your doctor to get an A1C test.

I don't have a doctor. And even if I did, I'm not interested in getting five tests so I can throw out the high and the low and average the rest. Although if I like the first test's results I would obviously just rely on that.

Just got the results of my yearly-physical blood tests, accompanied by a brief note from the doctor: "Total cholesterol elevated above 200 at 223 and LDL cholesterol elevated above 100 at 133. Recommend eating a healthy low-fat low LDL cholesterol diet and exercising regularly as tolerated to help with these. ..."

As others have noted, this looks like generic advice, and like you wondered, why are YOU being given this advice? You already do that!

Or, well, I think you do that. What exactly is a "low-fat low LDL cholesterol diet"? Is that really what the report said? It makes no sense.

Not only does it not make sense, even if it actually meant "healthy diet," you're already doing that. And exercising. So this "advice" has nothing to offer to you. It's probably CYA for the doctor, but at the expense of being irrelevant and worse, confusing, to the more important person in this scenario--you

If the medical establishment stopped treating us like idiots and just explained what they knew and/or believed to be true at the moment we would all be better off. And we would have more trust in what the 'experts' say.

The problem is that a lot of us are idiots, and only moreso when it comes to complex things like health, with all its moving parts PLUS genetics thrown in just to make everything more opaque.

This makes it really hard to come up with blanket, hard-and-fast rules, but people don't deal well with nuance, and they're by and large not all that smart AND they're not really interested in their health. So it's blanket rules that really aren't that good or nothing at all.

And if someone is pretty smart and is motivated to look into it on their own, it's a hellscape of different opinions and advice that like so much other advice doesn't take individuals into account even though every body is unique.

Here's an easy example. I recently got my teeth cleaned for the first time in 12 years. I waited that long because my history tells me I can, and sure enough, the hygienist said my teeth were in great shape and didn't need much cleaning at all. I assume it has to do with genetics, because I don't take superlative care of my teeth--just brush twice a day with a regular toothbrush and floss every once in a while.

I've concluded that this is just how my teeth roll, and think that applies to many aspects of our health. Or certainly my health, anyway.

 

[Koolau]

I don't have a doctor. And even if I did, I'm not interested in getting five tests so I can throw out the high and the low and average the rest. Although if I like the first test's results I would obviously just rely on that.

As others have noted, this looks like generic advice, and like you wondered, why are YOU being given this advice? You already do that!

Or, well, I think you do that. What exactly is a "low-fat low LDL cholesterol diet"? Is that really what the report said? It makes no sense.

Not only does it not make sense, even if it actually meant "healthy diet," you're already doing that. And exercising. So this "advice" has nothing to offer to you. It's probably CYA for the doctor, but at the expense of being irrelevant and worse, confusing, to the more important person in this scenario--you

The problem is that a lot of us are idiots, and only moreso when it comes to complex things like health, with all its moving parts PLUS genetics thrown in just to make everything more opaque.

This makes it really hard to come up with blanket, hard-and-fast rules, but people don't deal well with nuance, and they're by and large not all that smart AND they're not really interested in their health. So it's blanket rules that really aren't that good or nothing at all.

And if someone is pretty smart and is motivated to look into it on their own, it's a hellscape of different opinions and advice that like so much other advice doesn't take individuals into account even though every body is unique.

Here's an easy example. I recently got my teeth cleaned for the first time in 12 years. I waited that long because my history tells me I can, and sure enough, the hygienist said my teeth were in great shape and didn't need much cleaning at all. I assume it has to do with genetics, because I don't take superlative care of my teeth--just brush twice a day with a regular toothbrush and floss every once in a while.

I've concluded that this is just how my teeth roll, and think that applies to many aspects of our health. Or certainly my health, anyway.

I get away with 1 yearly cleaning without the hygienist raising too much fuss. I envy you. 12 years! My hygienist would absolutely have a fit - even if my teeth were fine!

 

[RetiredHappy]

I don't have a doctor. And even if I did, I'm not interested in getting five tests so I can throw out the high and the low and average the rest. Although if I like the first test's results I would obviously just rely on that.

We all lead our lives the way we believe is best for us. I won't be able to convince you that you are less healthy than you believe yourself to be. If I have those test results, I would be all over it.

 

[thepalmersinking]

Just got the results of my yearly-physical blood tests, accompanied by a brief note from the doctor: "Total cholesterol elevated above 200 at 223 and LDL cholesterol elevated above 100 at 133. Recommend eating a healthy low-fat low LDL cholesterol diet and exercising regularly as tolerated to help with these. Other labs did not show any significant/concerning findings. Thank you."

Thing is, I'm an ovo-lacto-vegetarian, who consumes oatmeal, salads, and olive oil daily. I eat only low-fat dairy (I absolutely cannot stand vegan "dairy" products), barely touch cheese, and limit myself to 3 eggs a week. I eat sweets occasionally. I exercise every day, including three, 3-hour gym workouts per week. There's not an extra pound on me. There are no more lifestyle changes I can make.

For reasons no one seems able to explain, my cholesterol has been borderline high for the past 10 years (I'm 66). This time around, my fasting blood sugar was 82, my triglycerides 100, and my HDL was 69, which is not as high as previous years, but still well in the good range. Blood pressure runs 110/70.

My older siblings struggle with obesity, Type 2 diabetes and heart disease, so there's Family History to consider, but honestly, what else can I do?

Your thoughts are welcome. (I'm aware that diet and nutrition topics can get heated rather quickly - please try to avoid triggering Porky, thanks!).

I suggest watching Dr. Prada Jamnadas on uTube

 

[FIREd_2015]

Here is a chart from a large study done in Sweden looking at Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) as a function of Apo A-1 and Apo B. The study followed 137,100 men and women aged 25-84 for an average 17.8 years. There is a second chart in the paper that shows the risk of a heart attack as a function of Apo A-1 and Apo B. My most recent Apo B was 1.23 which is high but my Apo A-1 was 1.87 which helps compensate for the high Apo B.
Link to summary of paper:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34851955/
Link to paper:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8635349/pdf/pmed.1003853.pdf

 

[6miths]

I didn't go to the paper but am I really going to get incredibly worried about a hazard ratio of 2.2 even when one has both indices at their worst possible? I've got more important things to lose sleep over. But maybe that's just me.

 

[cyber888]

Just got the results of my yearly-physical blood tests, accompanied by a brief note from the doctor: "Total cholesterol elevated above 200 at 223 and LDL cholesterol elevated above 100 at 133. Recommend eating a healthy low-fat low LDL cholesterol diet and exercising regularly as tolerated to help with these. Other labs did not show any significant/concerning findings. Thank you."

Thing is, I'm an ovo-lacto-vegetarian, who consumes oatmeal, salads, and olive oil daily. I eat only low-fat dairy (I absolutely cannot stand vegan "dairy" products), barely touch cheese, and limit myself to 3 eggs a week. I eat sweets occasionally. I exercise every day, including three, 3-hour gym workouts per week. There's not an extra pound on me. There are no more lifestyle changes I can make.

For reasons no one seems able to explain, my cholesterol has been borderline high for the past 10 years (I'm 66). This time around, my fasting blood sugar was 82, my triglycerides 100, and my HDL was 69, which is not as high as previous years, but still well in the good range. Blood pressure runs 110/70.

My older siblings struggle with obesity, Type 2 diabetes and heart disease, so there's Family History to consider, but honestly, what else can I do?

Your thoughts are welcome. (I'm aware that diet and nutrition topics can get heated rather quickly - please try to avoid triggering Porky, thanks!).

No need to worry. If your blood sugar is 82, then you are fine. Some doctors consider anything below 280 normal, especially for some - it is hereditary. Cholesterol is need by the body. The problem is that Big Pharma just wants doctors to prescribe statins once you hit 200+

 

[Buckeye]

Where can one order their own coronary calcium scan, and the test to distinguish between small and big LDL particles?
I just visited Quest Diagnostic Lab's web site (it's where the doctors send me) and they don't list either of these tests as something I can purchase.

Both my husband and I had it done as outpatient imaging at our local hospital that is part of the Orlando Health system. I think I initially googled it and they popped up. I just called the main number to the hospital and told them I wanted to schedule a CT Calcium Score Scan. The operator sent me to the appointments folks and they set everything up. I paid the $100 with a CC over the phone when I made the appointment. They have an online patient portal (MyChart) so I checked a couple of hours after the scan. There was the initial radiologists report that basically said she didn't see anything weird. It was another day or two before the actual score and report showed up in my MyChart account. I uploaded a copy to my VA PCP to have on file.

Because I've only had a VA doctor for the last 12 years, I had to go to my husband's civilian doctor (who I will use in a year when Medicare kicks in) and do an initial visit to get the order for the scan. I can't remember if my husband needed an order 3 years ago but it was required Dec 2022. That added $160 to the $100 scan price. Still a great price to know my calcium score was 0.

 

[Koolau]

Both my husband and I had it done as outpatient imaging at our local hospital that is part of the Orlando Health system. I think I initially googled it and they popped up. I just called the main number to the hospital and told them I wanted to schedule a CT Calcium Score Scan. The operator sent me to the appointments folks and they set everything up. I paid the $100 with a CC over the phone when I made the appointment. They have an online patient portal (MyChart) so I checked a couple of hours after the scan. There was the initial radiologists report that basically said she didn't see anything weird. It was another day or two before the actual score and report showed up in my MyChart account. I uploaded a copy to my VA PCP to have on file.

Because I've only had a VA doctor for the last 12 years, I had to go to my husband's civilian doctor (who I will use in a year when Medicare kicks in) and do an initial visit to get the order for the scan. I can't remember if my husband needed an order 3 years ago but it was required Dec 2022. That added $160 to the $100 scan price. Still a great price to know my calcium score was 0.

Wow. That all seems like a lot of "fuss" to get the test which (as I mentioned above) was just advertised in the local paper and on TV at $49 when I got the test. It was preformed in a clinic that has been around as long as I can remember (different locations/buildings but name never changed.)

Perhaps the consensus now is that a doc should order the test as s/he is better able to evaluate the risk benefit since the test does involve very significant radiation. Or, maybe it just helps everyone involved earn a lot more than $49! That's MY guess but I'm getting skeptical (okay, cynical) in my old age.

I was told that anything under 10 was excellent. From there, they listed %risk of "ischemic event" or some such at intervals of score. At about 600, it said I was some percent - maybe 80%?? - of having an event within 5 years and (maybe 50%??) within 2 years - I can't remember the numbers. BUT, guess what. 2 years later I got 3 stents.

But wow! 0! That is outstanding. I suppose it doesn't mean 0 risk, but it's so low, I'd not think much about it. Congratulations.

One sorta interesting (well, at least to me) thing that happened. I didn't hear anything after the test. Nothing. No letter, no phone call. SO I called them (took a while to figure out as the number was for scheduling - not talking to a person in the know.)

So I finally got someone and they checked. They said they'd tried to reach my doctor in Hawaii, but couldn't figure out how to do it. They said their policy was to only give the numbers to your doctor. I said, the law is that my data is also my personal data to be transmitted to me - with or without doctor. They finally admitted that was true and sent me the report.

The report was scary but my cardiologist sort of poo-poo'd it. Then 2 years later he was off Island when I needed the stents. I was relieved that one of the top docs on the Island was to do my stents. He is one of the few people on the Island who can do a "valve j*b" through a vein, thus replacing the old open-chest, open heart procedure. Not that I needed a new valve - but this guy could have done it. Instead I might have been his 3000th stent patient (that is a wild guess - the guy didn't communicate except for boiler plate risks, etc.)

 

[ElizabethT]

Amethest, my DH is in a similar situation, and yes, it's frustrating, very, very frustrating, but sometimes you simply can't outrun your genetics.

He is lean, fit, a moderate consumer of the bad foods we all know to avoid, and yet his cholesterol remains stubbornly high. So he takes the pills subscribed by his doctor, and continues to live his/our version of the best life possible. Our focus is quality of life over quantity of life, and of the former he has much. Of the later? He/we do our best to accept that most of it is largely out of his control.

 

[Focus]

Just got the results of my yearly-physical blood tests....

My older siblings struggle with obesity, Type 2 diabetes and heart disease, so there's Family History to consider, but honestly, what else can I do?

Your thoughts are welcome.

Your post is very timely. I had an equivalent experience just a couple of weeks ago at my check-up. It had been five years since I'd had a blood screening, because Kaiser's idea of an annual physical consisted almost entirely of sitting me down and asking if anything was wrong. Once ACA subsidies made it possible, I switched back to my old doctor, who always used a blood screening as her main gauge of how I was doing.

My blood pressure was great and my blood screening results were totally fine except for my cholesterol being "borderline high" at 210, with LDL at 144. My doctor was ready to prescribe a statin, but I insisted on trying lifestyle changes first. I was told that I have a 10% chance of a heart attack in the next 10 years, and based on what I've read, a statin would reduce it to around 7%. Is that really significant?

Like you, I don't have much room for improvement in terms of lifestyle choices. I do strenuous strength training (same as in my 30s) at the gym three or four times a week, and I've eaten a Mediterranean/DASH diet for decades. I eat mainly lean chicken/seafood, plenty of vegetables, a modest amount of grains (all whole), and little sugar. No red meat, except for pork on rare occasions, and alcohol only once in a blue moon.

Have you heard of the Portfolio Diet, which is specifically for lowering cholesterol? I just found out about it. Here's a quote from WebMD:

The portfolio diet substitutes soy-based foods for meat...

The portfolio diet incorporates as much sticky fiber as possible. Those on the portfolio diet take three daily servings of the natural psyllium product Metamucil -- many use it to thicken their soymilk. Oats and barley replace other grains; preferred vegetables include eggplant and okra.

The portfolio diet replaces butter and margarine with plant sterol-enriched margarine. U.S. brands include Benecol and Take Control and brands in other countries are Becel and Flora pro-activ. Plant sterols are also available in capsule form as dietary supplements.

The portfolio diet includes nuts. Study participants ate a handful of almonds every day. The Almond Board of California backs portfolio diet research and offers portfolio diet recipes on its web site. However, other tree nuts also help reduce cholesterol.

I already eat a handful of nuts per day, but I'm going to up my soy/pea protein and fiber; however, I'm going to keep eating chicken/seafood. I'm also going to increase my cardio training and try to shed the 7 pounds I gained in the past year, which might be a factor. And I'm going to avoid all alcohol and red meat.

One thing I'm not dropping yet is my daily latte consisting of two espresso shots and 2% milk. Unfiltered coffee is said to be bad for cholesterol, and the espresso process only removes about half of the chemicals in question (cafestol and kahweol). I might try using an Aeropress filter in my espresso machine portafilter, but not sure it's worth the trouble. The Portfolio Diet suggests replacing cow milk with soy milk, which I'm fine with except in this one instance, due to taste.

I have no doubt that our situation is genetically driven, based on your family history and mine. So we can only do our best to counterbalance that while not diminishing our quality of life. Good luck to us both!

 

[RetireAge50]

Just had my blood screening and everything in the green except cholesterol. Total cholesterol 210, HDL 53, Triglycerides 86, LDL 142.

Numbers haven’t changed much in 10 years but HDL and Triglycerides are going slightly higher.

I had a Russian doctor last time for my physical and she was totally fine with my cholesterol given that I eat pretty close to a Keto diet. The new doctor gave me a similar message to the OP.

Seems odd to me that everything is in the green and I feel healthy and strong yet somehow my cholesterol is supposedly too high. Or perhaps high cholesterol is good and everybody else is unhealthy lol.

 

[RAE]

My Total cholesterol and LDL levels are higher than yours. Last LDL was 167. But my doctors think my blood levels are great because my HDL is high (69) and my triglycerides are quite low (63), and this gives a ratio below 1. That low ratio indicates large fluffy LDL particles dominate. We target triglycerides below 80.

A low-fat high carb diet does help keep LDL levels lower, but I’m not convinced that should be the goal. I think triglycerides and blood sugar staying low is very important. My high fat low carb (and no processed food/junk) diet keeps triglycerides and blood sugars way down. Developing pre-diabetes and diabetes is what significantly raises heart disease risks and avoiding that is more my focus. I do have A1C measured, and it is in a healthy range.

Yes, I agree with Audrey. Forget about cholesterol, it is a very poor indicator of heart health, despite what you may have heard. Look at your triglyceride/HDL ratio.......that is the important marker. If you are near 1.0, or below 1.0, you have no worries. If you are between 1.0 and 2.0, you are still okay, but may need to make a few changes to get it a little lower. Triglycerides are related to carb consumption.....if you cut back on the carbs, your triglyceride should come down. I would not worry at all about your cholesterol, nor would I ever consider taking a statin with your number. https://philmaffetone.com/tg-hdl-ratio-the-blood-fat-number-to-know/

 

[oldtrig]

My total cholesterol is typically over 200, but the breakdown I think is very atypical. Last year was HDL 92, tri 48, LDL 119. My doctor isn't concerned. I never was either, until I started reading this year that very high levels of HDL aren't protective. But then my triglycerides are seemingly very low, so I don't know if that counters that.

My fasting glucose is also usually high, around 105-110, occasionally in the upper 90s. But my a1c numbers have been 5.2-5.7. So I don't know if I should be concerned about this either.

Mostly I find the numbers interesting but not that helpful.

I wouldn't worry about the a1c numbers. Mine was 5.7 twenty years ago this month. I got it checked at the VA this past Thursday and it was 5.8. I will be 76 in August. I eat what I want but I do try and walk everyday. My total cholesterol was 142 and I take no meds for it. Never been high. B/P was 135/80 which was good for me. I get nervous when they check it. They did complete blood work on me and everything was perfect.


I do take 20 mg of Losartan with a 12.5 of something which is too long to type I am 5ft 10 and weight 178. My fasting number was 95 and that is good. I am not going to live forever .


I also was talked into taking the calcium scan two and 1/2 years ago because of irregular heart beat. It was high ( 261 ) and not worrying about that either. I won't ever take another one. Just something else to scare people. They also told me I had Bradycardia which the heart doctor said it was really no way to treat . He said take aspirin but it burned my stomach, even the baby ones.

I will have blood work again in 12 months at the VA. Cheers to you and good luck.

 

[Koolau]

I wouldn't worry about the a1c numbers. Mine was 5.7 twenty years ago this month. I got it checked at the VA this past Thursday and it was 5.8. I will be 76 in August. I eat what I want but I do try and walk everyday. My total cholesterol was 142 and I take no meds for it. Never been high. B/P was 135/80 which was good for me. I get nervous when they check it. They did complete blood work on me and everything was perfect.


I do take 20 mg of Losartan with a 12.5 of something which is too long to type I am 5ft 10 and weight 178. My fasting number was 95 and that is good. I am not going to live forever .


I also was talked into taking the calcium scan two and 1/2 years ago because of irregular heart beat. It was high ( 261 ) and not worrying about that either. I won't ever take another one. Just something else to scare people. They also told me I had Bradycardia which the heart doctor said it was really no way to treat . He said take aspirin but it burned my stomach, even the baby ones.

I will have blood work again in 12 months at the VA. Cheers to you and good luck.

Drug with long name and 12.5 mg: Hydrochlorothiazide often abbreviated as Hctz. It's a "water pill" (diuretic.)

 

[Koolau]

I wouldn't worry about the a1c numbers. Mine was 5.7 twenty years ago this month. I got it checked at the VA this past Thursday and it was 5.8. I will be 76 in August. I eat what I want but I do try and walk everyday. My total cholesterol was 142 and I take no meds for it. Never been high. B/P was 135/80 which was good for me. I get nervous when they check it. They did complete blood work on me and everything was perfect.


I do take 20 mg of Losartan with a 12.5 of something which is too long to type I am 5ft 10 and weight 178. My fasting number was 95 and that is good. I am not going to live forever .


I also was talked into taking the calcium scan two and 1/2 years ago because of irregular heart beat. It was high ( 261 ) and not worrying about that either. I won't ever take another one. Just something else to scare people. They also told me I had Bradycardia which the heart doctor said it was really no way to treat . He said take aspirin but it burned my stomach, even the baby ones.

I will have blood work again in 12 months at the VA. Cheers to you and good luck.

Drug with long name and 12.5 mg: Hydrochlorothiazide often abbreviated as Hctz. It's a "water pill" (diuretic.) By the way, I'm not a doctor so YMMV.

 

[oldtrig]

Drug with long name and 12.5 mg: Hydrochlorothiazide often abbreviated as Hctz. It's a "water pill" (diuretic.) By the way, I'm not a doctor so YMMV.

I knew what it was. I just didn't feel like spelling it out. I can't even tell you if it works. I just take it. I think I have been taking it for 20 years.

I was also wrong on my cholesterol numbers. I just looked on the portal .

cholesterol 139
triglycerides 96
HDL 44
LDL 76
I have never had any problems with cholesterol and I think these numbers are pretty good being I eat anything I want.
The calcium scan being 261. I am not sure. I passed a stress test and all the other tests showed I am good. Heart doctor said he was 99.9 % I had no blockage.


I have a good friend who just had this heart calcium scan. His number was almost 400. He also went thought all the tests and they told him the calcium was outside his heart and for him to not worry about it. His dad is 104 and and his mother just passed away at 97. He told me his dad had always had high cholesterol . He said he never took any medicine for it even though he was told to. His cholesterol was close to 300.

 

[aja8888]

I wouldn't worry about the a1c numbers. Mine was 5.7 twenty years ago this month. I got it checked at the VA this past Thursday and it was 5.8. I will be 76 in August. I eat what I want but I do try and walk everyday. My total cholesterol was 142 and I take no meds for it. Never been high. B/P was 135/80 which was good for me. I get nervous when they check it. They did complete blood work on me and everything was perfect.


I do take 20 mg of Losartan with a 12.5 of something which is too long to type I am 5ft 10 and weight 178. My fasting number was 95 and that is good. I am not going to live forever .


I also was talked into taking the calcium scan two and 1/2 years ago because of irregular heart beat. It was high ( 261 ) and not worrying about that either. I won't ever take another one. Just something else to scare people. They also told me I had Bradycardia which the heart doctor said it was really no way to treat . He said take aspirin but it burned my stomach, even the baby ones.

I will have blood work again in 12 months at the VA. Cheers to you and good luck.

Oldtrig, I'm about the same size and weight as you and take only Tamsulosin for minor BHP. All my Lipid numbers are great and A1C is between 5/2 and 5.7. I'm a low carb guy and TURN 80 this Fall. No statins needed.

I still take a baby aspirin and Vit D with no issues. Never took the calcium scan.

I had a bout of SVT 4 years ago and they fixed it with an ablation procedure. I walk 10 K steps a day on average.

I see my doc annually (August) and hope for the best again. Good luck Amethyst.

 

[Amethyst]

If I cut back on carbohydrates, it leaves very little for me to eat, and I do not need to lose weight! I totally agree with eating very little sugary or processed carbohydrates, but if I have to give up cereals, breads, beans, and fruits, I'm gonna look like a skeleton, and snap like a twig.

I dislike fatty food, always have since childhood. I know everybody else here seems to adore bacon, cheese, etc. but they are just not for me in any quantity.

Triglycerides are related to carb consumption.....if you cut back on the carbs, your triglyceride should come down. https://philmaffetone.com/tg-hdl-ratio-the-blood-fat-number-to-know/

 

[braumeister]

If I cut back on carbohydrates, it leaves very little for me to eat, and I do not need to lose weight! I totally agree with eating very little sugary or processed carbohydrates, but if I have to give up cereals, breads, beans, and fruits, I'm gonna look like a skeleton, and snap like a twig.

I dislike fatty food, always have since childhood. I know everybody else here seems to adore bacon, cheese, etc. but they are just not for me in any quantity.

I suppose it's easy to forget, but there are only three macronutrients: fat, protein, and carbohydrates. If you cut down on one, you have to increase one of the others. In general, nobody can eat a huge amount of protein (something in the neighborhood of 20% of your calories seems to be the limit), so it's just a matter of juggling the carbs and fat to get your daily calories.

I'll second the recommendation to read Metabolical by Lustig, especially the first half of the book where he breaks it all down.

 

[Ronstar]

If I cut back on carbohydrates, it leaves very little for me to eat, and I do not need to lose weight! I totally agree with eating very little sugary or processed carbohydrates, but if I have to give up cereals, breads, beans, and fruits, I'm gonna look like a skeleton, and snap like a twig.

I dislike fatty food, always have since childhood. I know everybody else here seems to adore bacon, cheese, etc. but they are just not for me in any quantity.

This might be good for cholesterol and other important numbers, but I just saw an interview with a guy who eats nothing but McDonalds. IIRC, he has lost about 50 lbs while eating only McDonalds.

The key for him was to reduce portion size. At breakfast, he would split the order, eat half and keep the other half for the next day. At lunch, he ate half of hamburger and fries, and ate the other half for dinner that night.

While it may not be healthy, it's working for him. It's all about volume control.