Re: Chylomicrons & CVD Risk

[Guest guest]

According to the " non-HDL " measure, I am much worse off today than

when I was eating trans-fats regularly. Today my TC-HDL is

164-55=109. Several years ago it was 223-56=167.

Can this be correct??? skeptic <=> citpeks

Tony

>>>

From: " Jeff Novick " <jnovick@p...>

Date: Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:00 am

Subject: [ ] Chylomicrons & CVD Risk

In one of the previous discussion on the " choleterol myth " , I think I

mentioned chlyomicrons. This is an interesting article on them that

came out today and here is a discussion on the article.

The most important issue is that most all lipid profiles do not (and

can not) measure chylomicrons, which may be some of the most

atherogenic particles there are. This is why total " non-HDL " (TC -

HDL) may become the best measure of CVD risk.

This is also why the focus on HDL is misguided and why a TC of 150 and

a HDL of 30 may be better than a TC of 200 and a HDL of 40, even

though both have a TC/HDL ratio of 5:1 and the HDL of 40 appears

better than the HDL of 30. The total non HDL of the first one if 120

and the second one 150.

>>>

[Guest guest]

Sorry, I misread the post. I am better off now than before.

Tony