Low carb and lipids

[Red Badger]

"For me, sugar is the poison but I am addicted to chocolate."


ALDI has an excellent Dark Chocolate ( the "good for you chocolate" with proven health benefits).

Low sugar, high fiber, full of antioxidants.

85 % Cacao.

$1.99 for five .88 ounce bars. Can't beat it, but you may need to adjust to the less than "gooey-sweet" taste at first. They also have a good 70% dark chocolate, but the sugars are higher and the fiber is lower, if you need to go a little sweeter to adjust your taste buds initially. Unless you already LIKE the dark stuff.

I sure do.




" 1. Moser Roth 85% Cocoa Dark Chocolate, $1.99 for 4.4 ounces

Moser Roth is Aldi’s premium brand of chocolates and it has WON AWARDS, you guys. And fancy chocolate tasters almost always approve of the stuff — especially once the price tag is revealed. These bars, which are technically made up of five smaller, individually wrapped bars, come in a few varieties (milk, dark sea salt, mint, milk truffle crunch, etc.), but this 85 percent cocoa option is my favorite. It’s rich, indulgent, and doesn’t taste over-roasted the way other dark chocolates can. And it’s just $2! "


https://www.thekitchn.com/aldi-best-chocolates-263049

Guess its off to Aldi today. My before bed time treat - 2 glasses of red wine and a modest amount of dark chocolate.

 

[Golden sunsets]

Just for the record, the cholesterol in what you eat has nothing to do with the cholesterol in your blood.

+1

 

[braumeister]

Is this like a global warming debate?

No, it's more like a sectarian dispute between religious factions.

Seriously though, I suspect you've mainly been reading outdated information, since that's the vast majority of what's available.

 

[Golden sunsets]

I've been on a ketogenic diet for 10 weeks. I also coincidentally had a lipid panel done after the first five weeks of the diet. HDL was up LDL was down and trigs were down.

To the OP. You might want to do some research and try the keto diet for a period of time and retest. You'd lower your protein intake a bit and increase your fat intake. Essentially your only carbs would come from veggies. One benefit of the ketogenic diet, is you will never be hungry.

 

[JAGOTI]

The "cholesterol" mania is, in my opinion, akin to the "low fat" mania that made America massively obese over the past 40 or so years. The medical industry loves obese, sick, drug consumers. It's wildly profitable!

Unless you've already had a heart attack, I wouldn't worry about it.

My advice: Keep doing strength exercises and stay active. Eat "real food". Be present in the moment. Enjoy life!

 

[bmcgonig]

I've done research on it. I've read Gerry Reaven's original paper about the ratio. I've read Ivor Cummins ( the Fat Emperor) book about it, and I follow a load of discussions on Twitter. Problem is there's so much controversy.

As an eg there seems to be huge agreement that low carb should be good for diabetes. Hundreds of people have tried it and possibly reversed T2D. Yet some endos well swear up and down it's a terrible idea. Similar to the statin wars.

Don't want to follow the new advice and find out eventually that the old advice was right after all.

I have had very high total cholesterol and LDL all my life. But very low triglycerides and HDL with terrific ratios, so no, it doesn't bother me at all. It worries some doctors but not others, since there are some positive aspects to it, especially as you get older. You should do some research into it.

 

[braumeister]

Don't want to follow the new advice and find out eventually that the old advice was right after all.

Perfectly understandable.

That's why many of us have experimented on ourselves with different approaches to see what works for us. If you're not prepared to do that, you'll never know, will you?

 

[PatrickA5]

I guess I just want to know what I "should" be doing then. Again, I'm not trying to be controversial like bringing up global warming, or discussing something so incredibly sensitive such as whether to take Social Security early, or later... God no... I'd never go down that road (hahah)... but I do want to do better, and my doctor told me to cut back on red meat and focus more on eating vegetables and fiber.



I consider myself a fairly healthy guy, my blood pressure is great, and I'm not incredibly overweight (about 15 pounds, but I'm 6'3"... I'm 220), but I just want to understand what I'm reading here?

You should do a search on statins here. You'll see that it's "almost" as bad as the Social Security threads when it comes to what/who to believe. The last one got shut down. Do your own research. Discuss what you find out with your doctor.

 

[RAE]

I'm not trying to make trouble here, but literally every website I go to that says "foods to avoid to lower cholesterol" it states red meat / dairy / bacon / eggs, etc.


Is this like a global warming debate? Or am I totally misunderstanding all of these websites that say to cut back on these things to lower your bad cholesterol

As others have said, there is a lot of outdated, bad information out there about cholesterol, among other things. More recent studies tend to contradict a lot of this bad information. Here is a short article that summarizes some of the evolution in our thinking about dietary cholesterol, blood cholesterol, and heart disease:

https://reason.com/2018/09/22/new-research-confirms-we-got-cholesterol/

 

[RAE]

To the OP. You might want to do some research and try the keto diet for a period of time and retest. You'd lower your protein intake a bit and increase your fat intake. Essentially your only carbs would come from veggies. One benefit of the ketogenic diet, is you will never be hungry.

I generally agree with this, except that the keto diet is a pretty drastic change for people that have been consuming 150-200g of carbs daily. IMO, it's not really necessary to drop your carb intake from that level down to below 50g daily to see how that affects your health and blood lipid numbers. Just speaking for me personally, I eat probably close to 100g of carbs daily, which is definitely not keto, but it's also not nearly as high in carbs as a lot of Americans eat. At that level of carb consumption, my blood lipids are about where I want them to be, so I don't see the need to drop further into a keto-type diet. My weight is not an issue..........if you are trying to lose weight, then a lower level of carb consumption may be appropriate.

The main thing, I think, is to simply cut your consumption of processed foods, and focus on eating mostly whole/real foods, and see what that does to your blood test numbers (and how you feel). Chances are, if you do that, you will feel better, and your blood test lipid numbers will be fine. Stay away from foods packaged in a box with a long list of ingredients on the side, and eat mostly things like fish, eggs, meat, vegetables, healthy fats (butter, coconut oil, olive oil). Stay away from anything with added sugar. If you do these things, your health and blood lipids will probably be good, and you can avoid taking drugs like statins (which have many undesirable side effects).

 

[Golden sunsets]

I don't disagree, but for someone using keto to lose weight, I believe keto will achieve a better result. I've lost 12 pounds so far. My goal is 17-20, so 5-8 more. I will achieve a bmi of 22-23 at that goal weight. Once I get there, I will increase carbs somewhat. I always find maintenance to be the hardest part of a sustained diet. However I've always had the longest sustained weight loss (years at desired weight and bmi), when I went on a low carb diet.

 

[audreyh1]

Ketogenic diet is good for reversing metabolic disease, as it brings insulin levels way down and drops triglycerides dramatically. Really helps with Type 2 diabetes and corrects fatty liver very quickly. Insulin resistance starts to gradually reverse. Weight loss is kind of a side effect - as the low insulin levels let fat cells release stored fat, and hunger is minimized.

If you don’t have metabolic disease/insulin resistance then simply eating low carb without ketosis will still give benefits.

 

[donheff]

I'm not trying to make trouble here, but literally every website I go to that says "foods to avoid to lower cholesterol" it states red meat / dairy / bacon / eggs, etc.


Is this like a global warming debate? Or am I totally misunderstanding all of these websites that say to cut back on these things to lower your bad cholesterol

I’m not going to look for a lot of references but the second entry on a Google search is the Mayo Clinic’s take on the question. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases...terol/expert-answers/cholesterol/faq-20058468

The problem seems to be that outdated recommendations persist on the net and in popular perception. The same with recommendations to avoid fat but eat lots of pasta. At least that one is fading.

 

[audreyh1]

It's amazing. So many websites talk about reversing insulin resistance. And what do they recommend?

Lose weight. Exercise regularly. Reduce stress. Get more sleep. Cut out junk food. Eat whole foods - the usual suspects.

Almost none of them mention the elephant in the room: attack insulin resistance = reduce insulin by severely cutting carbohydrates! (or by intermittent fasting, but even then low carb is recommended). I think only a couple of sites mentioned it - and even then it was buried way down in the article. Most sites only talked about eating "healthy food" (whatever that means) and no junk food.

And if you are insulin resistant and/or diabetic (type 2), how are you supposed to lose any weight on a high-carb diet anyway?

I mean - my God! This is a huge epidemic in our country, and most sites just don't even want to mention carbohydrate restriction as a very straightforward approach, the first step, that will also help immensely with the other recommendations?

It is ignorance? Is it willful ignorance? This just makes me think of the insanity definition: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

 

[audreyh1]

I’m not going to look for a lot of references but the second entry on a Google search is the Mayo Clinic’s take on the question. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases...terol/expert-answers/cholesterol/faq-20058468

That Mayo clinic article is still telling you to

Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends eating only 100 to 300 milligrams (mg) of cholesterol a day depending on your caloric level. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, one large egg has about 186 mg of cholesterol — all of which is found in the yolk.

The US Dietary Guidelines dropped that recommendation in 2015, announcing that "dietary cholesterol is no longer a nutrient of concern."

This article was published in April, 2018 - several years after the 2015 Dietary Guideline revisions explicitly dropping all dietary cholesterol limits. Yet Mayo Clinic staff persist in publishing old recommendations that have since had significant changes.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

I know lots of people do keto and low carb here so have you also had jumps in cholesterol like this? And does it worry you?

Have you looked at the eco-Atkins diet studies? Those results may be of interest to you.

 

[RAE]

I mean - my God! This is a huge epidemic in our country, and most sites just don't even want to mention carbohydrate restriction as a very straightforward approach, the first step, that will also help immensely with the other recommendations?

It is ignorance? Is it willful ignorance? This just makes me think of the insanity definition: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Yeah, some things change very, very slowly, Audrey. It is frustrating to some of us, but there are probably many reasons for that, among them resistance by the big processed food companies, resistance by the big drug companies (both related to money/profit motives), and also probably resistance from big-name nutrition researchers and medical institutions (like Mayo Clinic) who have preached the low-fat, high-carb way of eating for years, and simply can't admit that they may have been wrong. Carb restriction doesn't work for everyone, either, so they can always point to some individuals who lost weight and/or improved their health by sticking to the old low-fat plan (Dean Ornish comes to mind). But for a whole lot of people, including many diabetics, restricting carb consumption and consuming more healthy fats will improve their health, as a whole lot of recent studies have shown. But as Braumeister said, folks should do their own research and try different approaches, to see what works best for them.

 

[aja8888]

The US Dietary Guidelines dropped that recommendation in 2015, announcing that "dietary cholesterol is no longer a nutrient of concern."

This article was published in April, 2018 - several years after the 2015 Dietary Guideline revisions explicitly dropping all dietary cholesterol limits. Yet Mayo Clinic staff persist in publishing old recommendations that have since had significant changes.

The Mayo Clinic needs patients, a steady supply of new ones for years to come.

 

[audreyh1]

Carb restriction doesn't work for everyone, either, so they can always point to some individuals who lost weight and/or improved their health by sticking to the old low-fat plan (Dean Ornish comes to mind). But for a whole lot of people, including many diabetics, restricting carb consumption and consuming more healthy fats will improve their health, as a whole lot of recent studies have shown. But as Braumeister said, folks should do their own research and try different approaches, to see what works best for them.

Of course. Just to note at that I was specifically talking about sites which gave advice on reversing insulin resistance. In this case excessive insulin must be treated directly - reduced, and that would be by significantly lowering blood sugars - thus avoiding foods that raise blood sugar more than a very small amount, (and/or eating too often).

Not everyone has insulin resistance. But a huge number of people in the US do!

 

[bmcgonig]

Perfectly understandable.

That's why many of us have experimented on ourselves with different approaches to see what works for us. If you're not prepared to do that, you'll never know, will you?

I think the point of my original post was that I did experiment, right?

My issue with it was that before the low carb all my numbers were "good". After the low carb, my triglycerides and HDLs were great, but my cholesterol numbers are "bad" (according to standard tests etc)

So I still don't "know" anything for sure. If you believe the first numbers were better then it didn't work for me. If you believe them worse, then it did work.

 

[bmcgonig]

Of course. Just to note at that I was specifically talking about sites which gave advice on reversing insulin resistance. In this case excessive insulin must be treated directly - reduced, and that would be by significantly lowering blood sugars - thus avoiding foods that raise blood sugar more than a very small amount, (and/or eating too often).

Not everyone has insulin resistance. But a huge number of people in the US do!

Insulin isn't even tested in a normal blood test. That's how out of whack the new ideas are with the old.

 

[bmcgonig]

+1, that is correct, although many people still don't understand that. Also, referring to LDL as the "bad cholesterol" is also a misleading and outdated concept. The short article below provides an explanation of what LDL really is, and why getting a high LDL lipid number on your blood test is not such a bad thing (and why triglycerides are what you should really be watching):

https://www.drperlmutter.com/ldl-friend/

That's confusing to me. If the cholesterol that we eat doesn't affect that in the blood then why did mine jump so much, almost 50% on LDLc, just by going low carb? And isn't it known that many on keto experience something similar?

 

[bmcgonig]

Congrats on your great HDL and Triglyceride numbers!

Edited to add: if you have read material by Fat Emperor you must be up on the latest LDL testing.

Thanks!

Yes, Ivor is big over here in Ireland [emoji16]. But again he gets attacked/challenged a lot. One MD accused him last week of almost killing his patients. (Twitter)

https://twitter.com/x/status/1158116379377184768

 

[audreyh1]

Insulin isn't even tested in a normal blood test. That's how out of whack the new ideas are with the old.

Yes, exactly!

If fasting insulin were part of the standard blood tests, then insulin resistance would be detected far sooner, as long as the appropriate range was used.

I believe the NMR lipids panel also detects it through some complex calcs.

But that is not “standard of care”, so not looked at.

 

[audreyh1]

That's confusing to me. If the cholesterol that we eat doesn't affect that in the blood then why did mine jump so much, almost 50% on LDLc, just by going low carb? And isn't it known that many on keto experience something similar?

The distinction is that eating cholesterol itself does not raise cholesterol as your body makes all the additional cholesterol it needs. That doesn’t mean that diet in general doesn’t raise or lower your cholesterol.

A higher fat diet, particularly increased saturated fat, can raise both HDL and LDL cholesterol together. In the case of lower triglycerides, the increased LDL will normally be of the large fluffy type not associated with heart disease risk.

So understanding your situation requires a more detailed look at your LDL composition which more advanced tests can reveal. Alternatively, it can be reasonably estimated from the Trig:HDL ratio (for results in mg/dL).

the ratio of blood triglyceride level to HDL-cholesterol level (known as the Trig:HDL ratio) provides an indirect but reasonably accurate estimate of LDL-cholesterol particle size.

https://www.cooperinstitute.org/201...or-determining-risk-of-coronary-heart-disease

I calculate your ratio as 0.9 (down from 1.9) which is quite low indicating you now have more large fluffy LDL particles rather than small dense particles. That looks like a great ratio:

Low TG:HDL is desirable. As long as the TG is not below 40, your ratio can be below 1:1, as it is in many well-trained and properly nourished athletes, for example a TG of 50 mg/dL and HDL of 80 mg/dL provides a low TG:HDL ratio of 0.6.

High TG:HDL, especially >3, indicates significant risk of heart attack and stroke. I realize that high cholesterol, especially LDL, gets most of the press, and this is [due] primarily to the interest in pharmaceutical industry interests hard-selling the cholesterol story. The research and relevance about the TG:HDL ratio is detailed further below if you like reading about research.

https://www.thebloodcode.com/know-your-tghdl-ratio-triglyceride-hdl-cholesterol/

Another discussion of ratios and risks and lipid numbers in general versus diet gives these ranges:

If lipid values are expressed as mg/dl (like in the US);

TG/HDL-C ratio less than 2 is ideal

TG/HDL-C ratio above 4 is too high

TG/HDL-C ratio above 6 is much too high

https://www.docsopinion.com/2014/07/17/triglyceride-hdl-ratio/

Low-fat diets are usually not effective in lowering TG. In fact, low-fat, high-carbohydrate diets may raise TG. Adding omega-3 fatty acids, regular exercise and limiting alcohol may be helpful to reduce TG.

Similar methods may be useful for raising HDL-C. Losing weight, exercising and not smoking may help. In controlled trials, low-fat, high-carbohydrate diets decrease HDL-C, thereby raising the TG/HDL-C ratio.

In 1961, a group of investigators from the Rockefeller Institute, led by Pete Ahrens published a paper entitled “Carbohydrate-induced and fat-induced lipemia”.

The authors pointed out that fat-induced increase in TG following a meal is a postprandial phenomenon (we all have high TG for a few hours following a fatty meal) caused by chylomicrons is different from the carbohydrate-induced rise in TG (later found to be caused by an elevation of VLDL).

These findings have been confirmed in several more recent studies. Despite this, low fat, high carbohydrate diets are still being recommended as a primary option to reduce the risk of heart disease.

Although low-fat diets may help to lower LDL-C, low-carbohydrate diets are more effective in improving the TG/HDL-C ratio.

This suggests that solely selecting LDL-C as a target in cardiovascular prevention is an oversimplification, and may have led to wrong conclusions regarding the relationship between diet and heart disease.