Lowering cholesterol without statins - I did it!!!

[mamadogmamacat]

35 is just fine. It was considered healthy and protective for years. If any "new studies" showed it should be higher that means they don't know what their talking about OR they are pimping for money. Either they were lying before or they're lying now. So, their word is useless and even dangerous on the subject. Things like this simply do not change from healthy to unhealthy just before they do another study.

That's why I always ask: So, what's the actual difference between this number or another number? What does it mean? And I never get an answer. Just some mumbling about "risk", which itself they are never able to define.

exactly correct
and, to add injury to insult (yes I did mean to reverse those), my Dr in her lazy ignorance (there were studies that showed the dangers of statins for post menopausal women in particular) just looked at the total number being over 200 and pushed statins, so I took them for six weeks 5 yrs ago, and suffered the terrible consequences. Never again, no matter where my numbers go from here.

But to get back to the OP's question, I very much recommend the low carb diet and the vitamins, minerals, and supplements recommended in the books I mentioned (none sold by the authors either, by the way, all available relatively cheaply at Amazon or in local stores). I feel a lot better too, and not hungry all the time anymore either.

 

[gerntz]

35 is just fine. It was considered healthy and protective for years. If any "new studies" showed it should be higher that means they don't know what their talking about OR they are pimping for money. Either they were lying before or they're lying now. So, their word is useless and even dangerous on the subject. Things like this simply do not change from healthy to unhealthy just because they do another study.

That's why I always ask: So, what's the actual difference between this number or another number? What does it mean? And I never get an answer. Just some mumbling about "risk", which itself they are never able to define.

So you're happy with your 35 HDL?

 

[RAE]

I don't worry about total cholesterol. There are several studies indicating that people with relatively high cholesterol actually live LONGER. The ratios that Braumeister posted are a far better indicator of the risk for CVD.

Guys (especially) should also monitor their ferritin levels, although most docs will not test for ferritin unless you ask them to. My ferritin was too high a few years ago, and it was affecting my heart. All you have to do to reduce ferritin is donate blood a couple times a year or so.

I also eat a diet consisting primarily of whole foods, with plenty of healthy fats and minimal processed foods, and my ratios are all good. Daily exercise helps also. I can't envision myself ever taking statins.

 

[braumeister]

An interesting tidbit that I've found some doctors unwilling to discuss:

In 2009 there was a large nationwide study of patients admitted to hospitals for a heart attack, who had their cholesterol levels tested within the first 24 hours of admission.
The bottom line was that their cholesterol levels were apparently unrelated to their heart attacks.
Nearly half had LDL levels considered optimal under current guidelines (below 100 mg/dL), and nearly a fifth had LDL levels below 70.

Most heart attack patients' cholesterol levels did not indicate cardiac risk

 

[razztazz]

An interesting tidbit that I've found some doctors unwilling to discuss:

In 2009 there was a large nationwide study of patients admitted to hospitals for a heart attack, who had their cholesterol levels tested within the first 24 hours of admission.
The bottom line was that their cholesterol levels were apparently unrelated to their heart attacks.
Nearly half had LDL levels considered optimal under current guidelines (below 100 mg/dL), and nearly a fifth had LDL levels below 70.

Most heart attack patients' cholesterol levels did not indicate cardiac risk

Low total and low LDLs have been associated in more than one study with higher rates of death by all causes. Memory hole material.

 

[easysurfer]

Probably should, but don't have my cholesterol numbers committed to memory.

In the safe range in that don't have to take any meds to keep under control. Doc says keep on exercising and watching my weight. He's amazed that my weight pretty much doesn't fluctuate but only a few pounds up or down each year.

 

[harley]

No one here that I read with HDL in the 40 +/- range have said they wouldn't take a statin. It's all 60+ folks. Lucky you.

My HDL has historically and genetically been below 25. They can't accurately measure it, so it just shows up as <25. I got it up over 40 by taking niacin, but when I quit taking statins (4-5 years ago) I also quit taking the niacin. The science just isn't there to show that either med makes any significant difference in life expectancy, while both put a strain on your liver and the statins had (for me) fairly strong negative side effects. So now my HDL is back down, although at least measurable now in the mid 30s. My total is a tad over 200, and my doctor keeps suggesting statins again. But I'm not doing it. At least until after I've had a CV event.

 

[razztazz]

My HDL has historically and genetically been below 25. They can't accurately measure it, so it just shows up as <25. I got it up over 40 by taking niacin, but when I quit taking statins (4-5 years ago) I also quit taking the niacin. The science just isn't there to show that either med makes any significant difference in life expectancy, while both put a strain on your liver and the statins had (for me) fairly strong negative side effects. So now my HDL is back down, although at least measurable now in the mid 30s. My total is a tad over 200, and my doctor keeps suggesting statins again. But I'm not doing it. At least until after I've had a CV event.

Hey, when I was on statins my HDLs went down into the teens. The doctors said don't worry, HDLs don't mean anything. Until "latest studies showed..." that they did. Then he calls me at home insisting I needed the new drug that raises HDLs. Also, as a vegetarian at the time my triglycerides were in the 600-800 range. Don't worry, trigs don't count. Until they did. I forget the name of the drug that advertised "When lowering your cholesterol is not enough!" When I was eating a ton of sat-fat my HDL's were sky high. Boo! sat-fat baaaaad! Didn't care about ratios. Just Baaaad! No further knowledge of human biology needed. I'm a doctor. You have to believe me. But don't ever hold me responsible. I make a lot of money.

Every doctor. not just one. Every one. And every study I am aware of until I stopped needing to know about steaming piles, thus far that has attempted to reduce heart attacks by directly drugging people into higher HDL's has blown the intended results down it's leg. Another ghost. More profit seeking, death causing, no-responsibility required, wishful thinking.

 

[Another Reader]

Hey, when I was on statins my HDLs went down into the teens. The doctors said don't worry, HDLs don't mean anything. Until "latest studies showed..." that they did. Then he calls me at home insisting I needed the new drug that raises HDLs. Also, as a vegetarian at the time my triglycerides were in the 600-800 range. Don't worry, trigs don't count. Until they did. I forget the name of the drug that advertised "When lowering your cholesterol is not enough!" When I was eating a ton of sat-fat my HDL's were sky high. Boo! sat-fat baaaaad! Didn't care about ratios. Just Baaaad! No further knowledge of human biology needed. I'm a doctor. You have to believe me. But don't ever hold me responsible. I make a lot of money.

Every doctor. not just one. Every one. And every study I am aware of until I stopped needing to know about steaming piles, thus far that has attempted to reduce heart attacks by directly drugging people into higher HDL's has blown the intended results down it's leg. Another ghost. More profit seeking, death causing, no-responsibility required, wishful thinking.

Yep. I take NO drug, except the occasional aspirin, unless it is required for me to stick around. Too many bad reactions.

 

[harley]

Yep. I take NO drug, except the occasional aspirin, unless it is required for me to stick around. Too many bad reactions.

Well, I take lots of drugs, but I prefer the ones that give me good reactions.

 

[RTbyFiveThree]

Interesting reading on statins here. For those without known heart disease, who took a statin for 5 years:

Benefits in NNT (number needed to treat)
- None were helped (life saved)
- 1 in 60 were helped (preventing heart attack)
- 1 in 268 were helped (preventing stroke)

Harms in NNT
- 1 in 50 were harmed (develop diabetes*)
- 1 in 10 were harmed (muscle damage)

As stated in the article:
"There is controversy about whether mortality is reduced by statins in this group. We do not believe so, but are aware that others interpret these data differently. "

Wow, 1 in 10 with muscle damage! That seems really high. One point that isn't talked about enough is the fact that statins can lower CoQ10 levels. CoQ10 is needed by our organs (including muscle!) and low levels can keep our cells from making energy the need. Thankfully, more doctors are becoming aware of this and are recommending CoQ10 to their patients on statins.

 

[lucky penny]

Wow, 1 in 10 with muscle damage! That seems really high. One point that isn't talked about enough is the fact that statins can lower CoQ10 levels. CoQ10 is needed by our organs (including muscle!) and low levels can keep our cells from making energy the need. Thankfully, more doctors are becoming aware of this and are recommending CoQ10 to their patients on statins.

According to that website (created by a small group of doctors), almost every therapy, drug or screening, including mammography screening for breast cancer, harms more people than it helps. Bias?

But they do concede no one has been harmed by the Mediterranean Diet!

 

[razztazz]

Wow, 1 in 10 with muscle damage! That seems really high. One point that isn't talked about enough is the fact that statins can lower CoQ10 levels. CoQ10 is needed by our organs (including muscle!) and low levels can keep our cells from making energy the need. Thankfully, more doctors are becoming aware of this and are recommending CoQ10 to their patients on statins.

Just think what Drs would say if patients went in and told them Hey Doc, I'm doing this wonderful/necessary/life enhancing/disease avoiding thing. I go to Walmart and buy some "weeds 'n' seeds" in a bottle and it's good for me.

Of course they don't like that, don't agree with it, and would even admonish you for trusting that stuff and tell you it has no known value.

But when it works for their case of giving you official drugs of no discernible value and much known danger, sure. Then they'll tell you, to avoid the poisoning from dangerous drugs he says you need, you should go to Walmart and buy some weeds 'n' seeds as the antidote.

 

[Chuckanut]

According to that website (created by a small group of doctors), almost every therapy, drug or screening, including mammography screening for breast cancer, harms more people than it helps. Bias?

Worse than that, they accept no outside funding or advertising!! Yikes!

FWIW, I have read the little sheet of paper that comes with one of the big name statin drugs. Nowhere on that sheet do they claim to have any evidence that statins help people who do not have diagnosed CVD. At least I did not see it. Somebody correct me if I am wrong. There is a small, statistically valid benefit for diagnosed CVD patients.

FWIW, my trig/HDL ratio is very good when I consistently avoid over consumption of sugar and highly processed carbs, and limit carby foods to those that that are processed more slowly by the body (like whole fruit, sweet potatoes and beans).

Here's a video I like. Note that the speaker has published several books and probably makes a good income from their sales. Still, for me, his approach works very well.

Human health is full of bad and contradictory science. Do what works for you.

 

[mamadogmamacat]

Thanks for the video. Ludwig's approach works very well for me also. I've mentioned his book (I've only read one, was not aware there were any others) a few times on various threads, and until now, crickets at best. Thanks again

 

[braumeister]

FWIW, I have read the little sheet of paper that comes with one of the big name statin drugs. Nowhere on that sheet do they claim to have any evidence that statins help people who do not have diagnosed CVD. At least I did not see it. Somebody correct me if I am wrong. There is a small, statistically valid benefit for diagnosed CVD patients.

You are correct.
And the benefit for those with existing CVD is, as you say, small.

 

[H2ODude]

I've always been suspicious of the statin sale. Good friend about lost use of his legs from them, I swore then never for me. I love my old GP who retired 16 months ago. Over last two years with him he had raised his eyebrows (only slightly) on my LDL's that had gotten to 130 or 140 (not home so don't have the records). Recommended cutting back the meats, which we did but certainly not with religious fervor. Dropped it down to something like 115 when new doc did the annual wellness check, blood work. Never said anything to me. Then the pharmacy calls and says by scrip is ready. WTF? What is it? It's a generic statin. Told them to put it back on the shelf. Will be asking for a new gp. Cannot believe he prescribed it without even discussing it with me, and am sure he did not look at my historic decline.

Miss my old doc. Used to take at least 5 minutes of every appointment bitching about what was wrong with American medicine. I'm a science fan, but it disturbs me how it is used to distort the promotion of crap we don't need.

 

[Chuckanut]

Thanks for the video. Ludwig's approach works very well for me also. I've mentioned his book (I've only read one, was not aware there were any others) a few times on various threads, and until now, crickets at best. Thanks again

The second book is actually by his wife who is a chef. It's a book of recipes that meet the goals he advocates for good, healthy eating. In fact, I am making one tonight - Moroccan chicken stew.

 

[mamadogmamacat]

Thanks, will see if my library has it. I really enjoy the recipes in his book, as they are easy to make and do not require odd hard to find ingredients, unlike many "diet" books. Especially like the Mexican shredded chicken and carrot ginger soup and creamy cauliflower soup.

 

[razztazz]

You are correct.
And the benefit for those with existing CVD is, as you say, small.

And on top of that statins don't help even those people via the cholesterol lowering effect. That would take years to impact. The people with existing CVD benefit from some, apparently, not-too-well understood anti-inflammatory effect. Maybe they have more data and a better understanding of it by now.

 

[Elbata]

I'm not sure this would matter, but might lowering cholesterol happen if we ate foods that contain no cholesterol?

 

[ShokWaveRider]

Story of my Life, High blood Pressure and High Cholesterol. I do take BP meds but not Statins. My Ratios are fairly good.

Total Cholesterol: 270 (Has been as low as 220 but not for long)
HDL 72, LDL 175

Triglycerides: 104

Chol/HDLC Ratio: 3.8 (Good)

 

[walkinwood]

To the OP,

What about alcohol? Did you reduce your intake, change it?

Do you use tobacco?

Any other lifestyle changes? Like sleeping more regularly, stress etc.?

Congratulations! You deserve to celebrate your accomplishment. And thank you for sharing it.

 

[msieweke]

I'm not sure this would matter, but might lowering cholesterol happen if we ate foods that contain no cholesterol?

Yes, but not very much. Your body produces cholesterol because it is an essential building block. If you don't eat much cholesterol, your body will produce more to have all it needs.

Keep in mind that there has never been a study which proved that lowering cholesterol benefits your health. The WHI (Women's Health Initiative) and MRFIT (Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial) studies tried to prove just that and failed. All the drug trials don't prove anything because the drugs have pleiotropic effects that probably are responsible for their tiny benefits.

 

[Chuckanut]

I'm not sure this would matter, but might lowering cholesterol happen if we ate foods that contain no cholesterol?

That was the theory behind limiting egg consumption (at least egg yolks) for several decades. It was shown to be false. Eggs are now officially off the hook. There is a lot of bad science in the field of human health.

The other big error was that eating fat makes you fat. Sure, it can help make you fat if the foods you consume are loaded with added fats , but eating sugar and highly processed carbs (chips, pretzels, most flours, etc.) now seems to be a bigger culprit in making us fat due to how our bodies respond to these foods.

There is lots of bad science in the field of human health. I said that already, right?

The OP deserves a lot of credit for finding a way to meet his health goals without using drugs or other extreme measures. Good Work!