Re: has anyone gotten their cholesterol check since ...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/16/2006 2:45:36 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

cheers44@... writes:

think you might be missing the point here a little . . . if you're taking

coconut oil just for the sake dropping weight, most likely you need to just

quit taking it and start Weight Watchers. You're not really concerned with

improving your overall health, just with shedding pounds.

Wow....I am going to guess you are someone who has never had to struggle

with weight? When I first started hearing about vco and all of the health

benefits and one of the *side effects* being ....losing weight. I was very

skeptical as well as hopeful. I think most people are searching on ways to get

healthy. To tell someone to just join ww is so ....not nice....

I just want to thank everyone who has answered my many questions on

different boards about vco. It is still something I am not totally sure of

regarding

the health benefits but it is because of the really loving responses I have

received....since I began my research into this...that has helped me just keep

digging deeper and making new changes.

I think you might have the first sentence of your post backwards.....Maybe

you are the one missing the point....I have read on Sally Fallons board or

whatever the coconut forum board is and they have an entire thread about this

being one of the benefits of taking vco. I never read one mean post on it at

all.....

I hope your post was not meant in the spirit in which it sounds like...email

can be tricky...in misunderstanding someone...I hope this is the case with

yours...Beth

[Guest guest]

Wow, I'm sorry, I really didn't mean that the way it apparently have

sounded. I guess it came out that way because it's a message that I'm

desperately trying to pump into everyone around me right now (my father

nearly died of a heart attack in July, my Husband is battling very high BP

at only 24 years of age), and I'm getting frustrated because no one seems to

believe me. My dad just seems to think that, if he can eat enough low-fat

stuff and lose his excess weight, he'll be healthy. I've tried explaining

to them how many skinny, " fit " people die of heart attacks at 50, but they

just don't get it. No, I don't personally struggle with weight, but I'm

still not healthy. But any time I mention trying to improve my diet, people

roll their eyes and say, " Oh, yeah, like you really need it. " It's such an

erroneous concept that weight and health are synonymous. Granted, I don't

think you can be truly healthy and be overweight, but being thin is by no

means an indication that one is truly any healthier than an obese person.

My husband is quite obese and has been trying for several years to lose over

100 pounds, so I do understand the desperate nature of the desire to lose

weight, and quickly. Watching his struggle and his trying so many different

methods with only minimal success has been difficult. We added coconut oil

to our diet some time ago, basically replacing all other fats with it, and

unfortunately it did not in any way change his weight or his blood

pressure. It just takes more than that. We're trying to adjust our diet in

other ways, slowly, but his weight is still not changing yet. But he's

finally come to accept the fact that he's going to have to maintain steady,

sustained change in his lifestyle, and that the weight loss is going to be a

gradual process. And we've received some very good information lately about

candida, which has led us to believe that it may be partially the source of

many of his health troubles, including being overweight.

Anyway, my apologies, and I do wish you luck in losing weight and achieving

health.

-

On 10/16/06, jun1488@... <jun1488@...> wrote:

>

>

> In a message dated 10/16/2006 2:45:36 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

> cheers44@... <cheers44%40hotmail.com> writes:

>

> think you might be missing the point here a little . . . if you're taking

> coconut oil just for the sake dropping weight, most likely you need to

> just

> quit taking it and start Weight Watchers. You're not really concerned with

> improving your overall health, just with shedding pounds.

>

> Wow....I am going to guess you are someone who has never had to struggle

> with weight? When I first started hearing about vco and all of the health

> benefits and one of the *side effects* being ....losing weight. I was very

>

> skeptical as well as hopeful. I think most people are searching on ways to

> get

> healthy. To tell someone to just join ww is so ....not nice....

>

> I just want to thank everyone who has answered my many questions on

> different boards about vco. It is still something I am not totally sure of

> regarding

> the health benefits but it is because of the really loving responses I

> have

> received....since I began my research into this...that has helped me just

> keep

> digging deeper and making new changes.

>

> I think you might have the first sentence of your post backwards.....Maybe

>

> you are the one missing the point....I have read on Sally Fallons board or

>

> whatever the coconut forum board is and they have an entire thread about

> this

> being one of the benefits of taking vco. I never read one mean post on it

> at

> all.....

>

> I hope your post was not meant in the spirit in which it sounds

> like...email

> can be tricky...in misunderstanding someone...I hope this is the case with

>

> yours...Beth

>

>

[Guest guest]

maybe the glycemic index is key to your husbands weight , I have found

it has helped me to mostly cut the starches .. white things .. Jo

-------------- Original message --------------

From: " " <mrsjtwalker@...>

Wow, I'm sorry, I really didn't mean that the way it apparently have

sounded. I guess it came out that way because it's a message that I'm

desperately trying to pump into everyone around me right now (my father

nearly died of a heart attack in July, my Husband is battling very high BP

at only 24 years of age), and I'm getting frustrated because no one seems to

believe me. My dad just seems to think that, if he can eat enough low-fat

stuff and lose his excess weight, he'll be healthy. I've tried explaining

to them how many skinny, " fit " people die of heart attacks at 50, but they

just don't get it. No, I don't personally struggle with weight, but I'm

still not healthy. But any time I mention trying to improve my diet, people

roll their eyes and say, " Oh, yeah, like you really need it. " It's such an

erroneous concept that weight and health are synonymous. Granted, I don't

think you can be truly healthy and be overweight, but being thin is by no

means an indication that one is truly any healthier than an obese person.

My husband is quite obese and has been trying for several years to lose over

100 pounds, so I do understand the desperate nature of the desire to lose

weight, and quickly. Watching his struggle and his trying so many different

methods with only minimal success has been difficult. We added coconut oil

to our diet some time ago, basically replacing all other fats with it, and

unfortunately it did not in any way change his weight or his blood

pressure. It just takes more than that. We're trying to adjust our diet in

other ways, slowly, but his weight is still not changing yet. But he's

finally come to accept the fact that he's going to have to maintain steady,

sustained change in his lifestyle, and that the weight loss is going to be a

gradual process. And we've received some very good information lately about

candida, which has led us to believe that it may be partially the source of

many of his health troubles, including being overweight.

Anyway, my apologies, and I do wish you luck in losing weight and achieving

health.

-

On 10/16/06, jun1488@... <jun1488@...> wrote:

>

>

> In a message dated 10/16/2006 2:45:36 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

> cheers44@... <cheers44%40hotmail.com> writes:

>

> think you might be missing the point here a little . . . if you're taking

> coconut oil just for the sake dropping weight, most likely you need to

> just

> quit taking it and start Weight Watchers. You're not really concerned with

> improving your overall health, just with shedding pounds.

>

> Wow....I am going to guess you are someone who has never had to struggle

> with weight? When I first started hearing about vco and all of the health

> benefits and one of the *side effects* being ....losing weight. I was very

>

> skeptical as well as hopeful. I think most people are searching on ways to

> get

> healthy. To tell someone to just join ww is so ....not nice....

>

> I just want to thank everyone who has answered my many questions on

> different boards about vco. It is still something I am not totally sure of

> regarding

> the health benefits but it is because of the really loving responses I

> have

> received....since I began my research into this...that has helped me just

> keep

> digging deeper and making new changes.

>

> I think you might have the first sentence of your post backwards.....Maybe

>

> you are the one missing the point....I have read on Sally Fallons board or

>

> whatever the coconut forum board is and they have an entire thread about

> this

> being one of the benefits of taking vco. I never read one mean post on it

> at

> all.....

>

> I hope your post was not meant in the spirit in which it sounds

> like...email

> can be tricky...in misunderstanding someone...I hope this is the case with

>

> yours...Beth

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi everyone,

Just like to share my Cholesterol check before and

after taking VCO.

Before taking VCO (Jun 2004)

HDL=45.54mg/dl or 1.18mmol/L

LDL=116.35mg/dl or 3.01mmol/L

VLDL=13.11mg/dl or 0.34mmol/L

Triglycerides 65.55 mg/dl or 0.74mmol/L

Total Cholesterol 175mg/dl or 4.53mmol/L

After taking VCO for a year (Jun 2006):

HDL=45.56mg/dl or 1.18mmol/L

LDL=130.44mg/dl or 3.39mmol/L

VLDL=12mg/dl or 0.31mmol/L

Triglycerides 60 mg/dl or 0.66mmol/L

Cholesterol 188mg/dl or 4.89mmol/L

For me, I do not see major difference.

Experts, can you please help to interpret my

cholesterol levels?

Thanks,

Willy

__________________________________

What will the world find in 2020?

Leave a part of your 2006 in the Time Capsule. Contribute now!

http://timecapsule./capsule.php?intl=ph

[Guest guest]

Hi Willy,

Thank you for sharing this information with us.

It looks like everything is unchanged except for your LDL, which is up a tiny

bit. That raised your ratio from about 3.8 to about 4.1.

I can't really comment, other than to say that in your case, VCO made a small

impact overall, if any, and no particular positive impact on your blood lipid

levels. The rise in LDL may even be due to other factors. However, I believe

you are still in a safe range. Your triglycerides are nice and low. I'm not

sure why your HDL didn't come up, or what it means that your HDL is below 50.

There are zillions of other factors to a person's health profile. Many people

say that the whole issue is baloney anyway.

What interests me personally is that the impact of VCO on you is so dramatically

different from its impact on me. For me, both my LDL and my HDL have doubled

since starting VCO, with my HDL rising more than my LDL, and my ratio going

down. This food is obviously an adaptogen in some way, having different impacts

on different people, depending on many other factors in a person's life.

Nina

Re: has anyone gotten their

cholesterol check since ...

Hi everyone,

Just like to share my Cholesterol check before and

after taking VCO.

Before taking VCO (Jun 2004)

HDL=45.54mg/dl or 1.18mmol/L

LDL=116.35mg/dl or 3.01mmol/L

VLDL=13.11mg/dl or 0.34mmol/L

Triglycerides 65.55 mg/dl or 0.74mmol/L

Total Cholesterol 175mg/dl or 4.53mmol/L

After taking VCO for a year (Jun 2006):

HDL=45.56mg/dl or 1.18mmol/L

LDL=130.44mg/dl or 3.39mmol/L

VLDL=12mg/dl or 0.31mmol/L

Triglycerides 60 mg/dl or 0.66mmol/L

Cholesterol 188mg/dl or 4.89mmol/L

For me, I do not see major difference.

Experts, can you please help to interpret my

cholesterol levels?

Thanks,

Willy

--

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006

[Guest guest]

Willy, I'd like to add another thought here about cholesterol.

I have read studies that show that VCO overall has no dramatic impact on

cholesterol levels. For me, however, it has. It has occurred to me why this

disconnect is occurring. These studies report out overall statistics and

averages. So, for one person, LDL goes up, HDL goes up more. For another

person, LDL goes up, HDL stays the same. For another person, LDL goes down, HDL

goes up. And so forth.

Their positivist (reductionist, mechanistic science) error is in taking the

overall statistical average and reporting that VCO has no impact on cholesterol.

I believe that is false. It can have a very strong impact on lipid levels, but

the direction of these impacts is different for different people, and may be

unpredictable for any one person.

Positivist science doesn't handle that very well. It's not a good methodology

for studying natural healing, overall.

Nina

Re: has anyone gotten their

cholesterol check since ...

Hi everyone,

Just like to share my Cholesterol check before and

after taking VCO.

Before taking VCO (Jun 2004)

HDL=45.54mg/dl or 1.18mmol/L

LDL=116.35mg/dl or 3.01mmol/L

VLDL=13.11mg/dl or 0.34mmol/L

Triglycerides 65.55 mg/dl or 0.74mmol/L

Total Cholesterol 175mg/dl or 4.53mmol/L

After taking VCO for a year (Jun 2006):

HDL=45.56mg/dl or 1.18mmol/L

LDL=130.44mg/dl or 3.39mmol/L

VLDL=12mg/dl or 0.31mmol/L

Triglycerides 60 mg/dl or 0.66mmol/L

Cholesterol 188mg/dl or 4.89mmol/L

For me, I do not see major difference.

Experts, can you please help to interpret my

cholesterol levels?

Thanks,

Willy

--

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006

[Guest guest]

Cholesterol levels are pretty much a made up medical disease to profit the drug

companies. Cholesterol is needed by the body to function properly. Heart

attacks are the same in both " high " and " normal " level people. The real

questions should be is: How inflammed are your arteries? and What can you do to

avoid or reduce that inflammation if it is present?

---------------------------------

Stay in the know. Pulse on the new .com. Check it out.

[Guest guest]

Is there a blood test for inflammation levels? Is it called Sedimentation Rate?

Bonnie

Re: has anyone gotten their cholesterol

check since ...

Cholesterol levels are pretty much a made up medical disease to profit the

drug companies. Cholesterol is needed by the body to function properly. Heart

attacks are the same in both " high " and " normal " level people. The real

questions should be is: How inflammed are your arteries? and What can you do to

avoid or reduce that inflammation if it is present?

---------------------------------

Stay in the know. Pulse on the new .com. Check it out.

[Guest guest]

Nina,

Thank you very much for interpreting my cholesterol

levels.

Willy

__________________________________

What is the internet to you?

Contribute to the Time Capsule and be a part of internet history.

http://timecapsule./capsule.php?intl=ph

[Guest guest]

bsavers2,

Yes, I got your point. Can you refer some reading for

me regarding your 2 questions?

Thanks,

Willy

__________________________________

What is the internet to you?

Contribute to the Time Capsule and be a part of internet history.

http://timecapsule./capsule.php?intl=ph

[Guest guest]

CRP (C-reactive protein) measures inflammation, but it is falling out of

favor as a valid predictor of anything.

Nina

Re: Re: has anyone gotten their

cholesterol check since ...

Is there a blood test for inflammation levels? Is it called Sedimentation

Rate?

Bonnie

--

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006

[Guest guest]

Hi BSavers,

I know it is tempting to conclude that cholesterol levels are a made-up disease,

and some people do argue this, but I'm not sold on the argument at this point.

Although I am as down on the pharmaceutical industry as anyone, I think the

subject of cholesterol is more a matter of confusion, misinformation and lack of

clarity than it is deliberate obfuscation for drug company profits.

For example, Wm Castelli, of the Framingham Heart Study, said that he never saw

a heart attack in (1) anyone with a total cholesterol under 150, and (2) anyone

with an HDL over 70. He has records on many thousands of people. I don't think

he made this up, and I think that we ignore findings like this at our own peril.

What this would mean to me is that a healthy person can go either way - a low

LDL or a high HDL. My understanding is that some researchers think that two

points of HDL offset one point of LDL, so that if your LDL/HDL is under 2, you

are doing well.

The point for me is that " total cholesterol " is the sum total of both helpful

and harmful components, so on the face of it, it's not going to be a meaningful

figure. Total cholesterol divided by HDL is more meaningful, because it can

account for both the good low cholesterol and high HDL levels that Castelli

talks about. I saw a researcher say that total/HDL is a better predictor than

LDL/HDL.

This cholesterol ratio may not be the most significant predictor of heart

disease, but in my opinion, the body does everything for a reason. If your LDL

is high and your HDL is low, that is a very informative message as to how your

body is functioning right now. I prefer to learn from it than to pooh-pooh it.

Nina

Re: has anyone gotten their cholesterol

check since ...

Cholesterol levels are pretty much a made up medical disease to profit the

drug companies. Cholesterol is needed by the body to function properly.

Heart attacks are the same in both " high " and " normal " level people. The

real questions should be is: How inflammed are your arteries? and What can

you do to avoid or reduce that inflammation if it is present?

[Guest guest]

Back in 2001, when I was first diagnosed with diabetes, I

began to read voraciously once I had dealt with my initial severe

depression arising from giving up sugar. Diabetics are told to cut

way back on cholesterol. One of the key studies the docs point to

is the Framingham study. Well, people I read quoted the Framingham

study, and the researchers involved in the study, and Framingham

really indicates very different conclusions than what the

anti-cholesterol people say it does.

" In Framingham, Massachusetts, the more saturated fat one ate, the

more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower

people's serum cholesterol...we found that the people who ate the most

cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories weighed

the least and were the most physically active. "

— Dr Castelli 1992 (Director of the Framingham study)

http://www.redflagsweekly.com/kendrick/2002_nov28.html

" If you believe that you can ward off death from heart disease by

altering the amount of cholesterol in your blood, whether by diet or

by drugs, you are following a regime that still has no basis in fact.

Rather, you as a consumer have been taken in by certain commercial

interests and health groups who are more interested in your money than

your life "

( Pinckney, MD, Former Co-editor of the Journal of the Medical

Association, the most prestigious medical journal in the world)

" The diet-heart idea (the notion that saturated fats and cholesterol

cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our

times. This idea has been repeatedly shown to be wrong, and yet, for

complicated reasons of pride, profit and prejudice, the hypothesis

continues to be exploited by scientists, fund-raising enterprises,

food companies and even governmental agencies. The public is being

deceived by the greatest health scam of the century. "

( Mann, MD, Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee

and co-director of the Framingham Heart Study)

" The idea that saturated fats cause heart disease is completely wrong,

but the statement has been published so many times over the last three

decades that it is very difficult to convince people otherwise unless

they are willing to take the time to read and learn what all the

economic and political factors were that produced the

anti-saturated-fat agenda "

( Enig, International expert in the field of lipid biochemistry,

President of land Nutritionists organization)

" Whatever causes coronary heart disease, it is not because of a high

intake of saturated fat and cholesterol. "

( Gurr, PhD, Renowned lipid chemist)

Alobar

[Guest guest]

Probably a good place to start is a book called The Cholesterol Myths. There's

a lot of info out there. Here's a website:

http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm

---------------------------------

How low will we go? Check out Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates.