Re: My 2 cents about cholesterol

[Guest guest]

I'm scheduled for annual cholesterol check and physical the end of Mar

(Blood) and early April (physical). Last Mar my results were:

triglyceride (TG) 56 (range 20-149)

cholesterol 242 (range 114-200)

HDL 85 (range 40-80)

LDL 146 (range 70-129)

At first, Dr Tharpe commented that my cholesterol was too high. Then I

reminded her of Dr Barry Sear's book, The Omega Rx Zone, where he states

that the MOST important ratio is the TG/HDL ratio. He says if that ratio is

less than 2, even if you smoke, have hypertension, or are sedentary, your

risk of developing heart disease is still as low as those who have much

better lifestyles or normal cholesterol levels. My ratio was .658 which I

decided was a little too low. So I left off fish oil (which I was taking at

the time) for a couple of months.

Another interesting fact in his book (which Dr Tharpe already knew) is how

you can tell which type of LDL you have.

Again, it's the TG/HDL ratio. If it is less than 2 (again), you have mainly

the large, fluffy HDL which is not going to do you much harm. If your ratio

is greater than 4, you have lots of small dense LDL which can accelerate

atherosclerotic plaques.

Anyway, Dr Tharpe finally said she had NEVER seen anyone get into trouble

with my numbers. I'm anxious to see what this year's results will be.

I think this is good info to have so you can do what you may need to do.

Delores

My 2 cents about cholesterol

> A comment about cholesterol. My cholesterol is naturally low. Has

> been as low as 143. Yes, there can be a cholesterol defiency and no

> one talks about it. This is partly why my doctors never believed I was

> hypo. and of course TSH was low. Frees were in the dirt. I'm assuming

> that HC/armour will improve cholesterol either way. I find it

> interesting that doctors stick to their ridiculous lab ranges(that

> everyone fits into) and then tell us we are normal. But, with things

> such as cholesterol, they want everyone on a drug who is above 200

> ....because it makes lots of money. The total cholesterol doesn't

> really matter much anyway, kind of like TSH. The ratio of HDL and LDL

> is the important part. Triglycerides also give us valuable info. I

> wouldn't worry about cholesterol just yet and see what happens. A low

> sugar/grain/starch diet will help normalize cholesterol levels too. My

> 2 cents.

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, about the ranges and docs wanting everyone over 200 on statins.

That is how I came to do research on cholesterol levels and found the

dangers of too low cholesterol. I've been over 200 for 2 years now,

before that only a hair under 200, and sure enough statins came up at a

cardiologist consltation. Luckily I had done my homework on that.

What has sent me into panic is the sudden extreme drop, which is

completely abnormal for me.

I am eating a low sugar, low carb, moderately highish animal protein

diet (I used to say high protein, but then I started counting again and

found I don't eat as much as I thought). High in good fats, butter,

olive oil, coconut oil. Very limited veg oils.

sol

low_carb_crystal wrote:

> A comment about cholesterol. My cholesterol is naturally low. Has

> been as low as 143. Yes, there can be a cholesterol defiency and no

> one talks about it. This is partly why my doctors never believed I was

> hypo. and of course TSH was low. Frees were in the dirt. I'm assuming

> that HC/armour will improve cholesterol either way. I find it

> interesting that doctors stick to their ridiculous lab ranges(that

> everyone fits into) and then tell us we are normal. But, with things

> such as cholesterol, they want everyone on a drug who is above 200

> ....because it makes lots of money. The total cholesterol doesn't

> really matter much anyway, kind of like TSH. The ratio of HDL and LDL

> is the important part. Triglycerides also give us valuable info. I

> wouldn't worry about cholesterol just yet and see what happens. A low

> sugar/grain/starch diet will help normalize cholesterol levels too. My

> 2 cents.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sol...I am in the same boat you are in. My last chol. was 150 and I

am always around 180-200. But I think what someone wrote about the

triglyceride to hdl ratio is very important. Maybe you can do it

and ease your fears. I just did mine and it is a solid 2, so I'm

not going to fret about it. I will get another lab test done on Sat

and we'll see what's going on. If it's still low, I'll lower my

Cytomel and play around until things normalize again.

I think what you've read about low cholesterol being dangerous, is

in people who are CHRONICALLY low. I don't think being low for a

short while is dangerous, and like Val says, being low thyroid is

probably much more significant.

Don't panic please....that will only hurt your adrenals. This is

just a bump in the road and has a remedy.

Take care.

Naffy

-- In NaturalThyroidHormonesADRENALS , sol

wrote:

>

> Yes, about the ranges and docs wanting everyone over 200 on

statins.

> That is how I came to do research on cholesterol levels and found

the

> dangers of too low cholesterol. I've been over 200 for 2 years

now,

> before that only a hair under 200, and sure enough statins came

up at a

> cardiologist consltation. Luckily I had done my homework on that.

>

> What has sent me into panic is the sudden extreme drop, which is

> completely abnormal for me.

> I am eating a low sugar, low carb, moderately highish animal

protein

> diet (I used to say high protein, but then I started counting

again and

> found I don't eat as much as I thought). High in good fats,

butter,

> olive oil, coconut oil. Very limited veg oils.

> sol

>

> low_carb_crystal wrote:

> > A comment about cholesterol. My cholesterol is naturally low.

Has

> > been as low as 143. Yes, there can be a cholesterol defiency and

no

> > one talks about it. This is partly why my doctors never believed

I was

> > hypo. and of course TSH was low. Frees were in the dirt. I'm

assuming

> > that HC/armour will improve cholesterol either way. I find it

> > interesting that doctors stick to their ridiculous lab ranges

(that

> > everyone fits into) and then tell us we are normal. But, with

things

> > such as cholesterol, they want everyone on a drug who is above

200

> > ....because it makes lots of money. The total cholesterol doesn't

> > really matter much anyway, kind of like TSH. The ratio of HDL

and LDL

> > is the important part. Triglycerides also give us valuable

info. I

> > wouldn't worry about cholesterol just yet and see what happens.

A low

> > sugar/grain/starch diet will help normalize cholesterol levels

too. My

> > 2 cents.

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

That is great info Delores.

I just did my ratio and it is a solid 2. I'd like to be below, but

have other health issues right now and will work on it later. I'm

sure not exercising plays a huge role.

I remember the lab guy once telling me there was a 'test' to see if

you had the 'bad' ldl or the 'okay' one. I had previously thought

all ldl was bad, but I do remember him mentioning the configuration,

and that one sticks to the artery wall and the other just floats

around. So what you've just posted coincides with that .....not all

ldl will cause heart disease.

Thanks

Naffy

>

> I'm scheduled for annual cholesterol check and physical the end of

Mar

> (Blood) and early April (physical). Last Mar my results were:

>

> triglyceride (TG) 56 (range 20-149)

> cholesterol 242 (range 114-200)

> HDL 85 (range 40-80)

> LDL 146 (range 70-129)

>

> At first, Dr Tharpe commented that my cholesterol was too high.

Then I

> reminded her of Dr Barry Sear's book, The Omega Rx Zone, where he

states

> that the MOST important ratio is the TG/HDL ratio. He says if

that ratio is

> less than 2, even if you smoke, have hypertension, or are

sedentary, your

> risk of developing heart disease is still as low as those who have

much

> better lifestyles or normal cholesterol levels. My ratio was .658

which I

> decided was a little too low. So I left off fish oil (which I was

taking at

> the time) for a couple of months.

>

> Another interesting fact in his book (which Dr Tharpe already

knew) is how

> you can tell which type of LDL you have.

> Again, it's the TG/HDL ratio. If it is less than 2 (again), you

have mainly

> the large, fluffy HDL which is not going to do you much harm. If

your ratio

> is greater than 4, you have lots of small dense LDL which can

accelerate

> atherosclerotic plaques.

>

> Anyway, Dr Tharpe finally said she had NEVER seen anyone get into

trouble

> with my numbers. I'm anxious to see what this year's results will

be.

>

> I think this is good info to have so you can do what you may need

to do.

>

> Delores

>

> My 2 cents about cholesterol

>

>

> > A comment about cholesterol. My cholesterol is naturally low.

Has

> > been as low as 143. Yes, there can be a cholesterol defiency and

no

> > one talks about it. This is partly why my doctors never believed

I was

> > hypo. and of course TSH was low. Frees were in the dirt. I'm

assuming

> > that HC/armour will improve cholesterol either way. I find it

> > interesting that doctors stick to their ridiculous lab ranges

(that

> > everyone fits into) and then tell us we are normal. But, with

things

> > such as cholesterol, they want everyone on a drug who is above

200

> > ....because it makes lots of money. The total cholesterol doesn't

> > really matter much anyway, kind of like TSH. The ratio of HDL

and LDL

> > is the important part. Triglycerides also give us valuable

info. I

> > wouldn't worry about cholesterol just yet and see what happens.

A low

> > sugar/grain/starch diet will help normalize cholesterol levels

too. My

> > 2 cents.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

I really agree with this.

I have low cholesterol--always have.

This last visit to a cardiologist, mine was 135.

I KNOW this has something to do with being HYPO.

I'm scared to google " Low Cholesterol " now!! HA!!

>

> low_carb_crystal wrote:

> >I find it

> > interesting that doctors stick to their ridiculous lab ranges(that

> > everyone fits into) and then tell us we are normal. But, with things

> > such as cholesterol, they want everyone on a drug who is above 200

> > ....because it makes lots of money.

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

So far as I can tell from my reading, the risks of low cholesterol are

very real, and serious. And int he case of low cholesterol the ratios

are nearly automatically ok, but that is a function of all the numbers

being very low, and thus is irrelevant. Those ratios are only pertinent

to heart risk anyway. They have nothing to do with the greatly increased

risk of cancer, stroke, and so on that come with low cholesterol.

Thus there is NO comfort in a low ratio when cholesterol is too low. I'm

also not convinced such a large drop in such a short time won't have

adverse consequences to liver health and other organs and body systems,

even if it reverses quickly. I don't know what happens if cholesterol

bounces up and down widely in a short space of time, I don't think

anyone knows. I plan to find out if possible, you can be sure of that.

sol

P.S. I had to do a small stress dose, because I got into such an awful

state today. So I am trying to not let this wipe out adrenal gains I

might have made up to yesterday.

nafoel wrote:

> Sol...I am in the same boat you are in. My last chol. was 150 and I

> am always around 180-200. But I think what someone wrote about the

> triglyceride to hdl ratio is very important. Maybe you can do it

> and ease your fears. I just did mine and it is a solid 2, so I'm

> not going to fret about it. I will get another lab test done on Sat

> and we'll see what's going on. If it's still low, I'll lower my

> Cytomel and play around until things normalize again.

>

> I think what you've read about low cholesterol being dangerous, is

> in people who are CHRONICALLY low. I don't think being low for a

> short while is dangerous, and like Val says, being low thyroid is

> probably much more significant.

>

> Don't panic please....that will only hurt your adrenals. This is

> just a bump in the road and has a remedy.

>

>