my blood work

[ErinB]

Re: my blood work

OK, here is his response about that article ...

I had a chance to look at the web link and I thought it was well written and accurate. The only comment I would have is more about "formating".... she talks about the various ratios, like Cholesterol:HDL Ratio, LDL:HDL Ratio, TG:HDL which kind of implies they're all equally important or can be used interchangeaby. The one that's been clearly established to help rate people's risk of heart problems is the Cholesterol:HDL Ratio, with 4.5 or lower (as she points out) is good, and lower is better, yours is 2.3. In other words, the one to focus on is the Cholesterol:HDL Ratio, and the other ratios are numbers and sort of help compare things, but we don't typically look at those much. Again, nothing inaccurate, she could emphasize that ratio more than the others ratios....

I have tremendous faith in this doctor, has always been a straight shooter with me and if he isn't sure, he will say so, consult with other members of the team.

This is what he told me about my results, compared to the results we have from May 2006:

On the cholesterol, my interpretation would be the overall cholesterol is slightly "worse" than it was in 2006. While the total has decreased from 260 down to 250, your HDL (the good form) decreased from 133 to 108 and the LDL (the bad form) has increased from 111 to 132. Now, first of all, your HDL is incredibly high which is superb. Average HDL is about 40. Because your HDL is so high, this raises your total cholesterol (HDL is part of the total cholesterol). With your HDL being so high, your cholesterol isn't really a concern. We like to see the LDL 130 or below, so 132 is not really bad.

So, he is placing more importance on the CHOL/HDL RATIO than on the other ratios.

[LageNomAi]

Re: my blood work

So, he is placing more importance on the CHOL/HDL RATIO than on the other ratios.

Thank you for sharing. I'd be interested to know why this particular ratio is the significant one because my understanding is that LDL takes on either more or less significance depending whether it's the big fluffy LDL or the small, dense LDL. Specifically, if your LDL number is high and it's mostly the small, dense kind, you are in trouble. If it's high but is the big, fluffy kind, the number is far less significant. I'm not aware that HDL is a direct reflection of the type of LDL that anyone possesses, so focusing on good or bad HDL in the context of your overall cholesterol total strikes me as taking your eye off the ball to some extent.

Then again, I got my M.D. from Google.

In any event, my ratio is 2.7, so it sounds as though I'm healthy, at least by your physician's standards.

[ErinB]

Re: my blood work

Yes, I have read about that, too, here on the "interwebs," always doing the giggle searches, so much information out there. Some of it is true, some not and we each need to figure out what we're going to believe. Also, science marches on and what isn't confirmed as true today may be considered true tomorrow. Or not.

When it comes to medical opinion, however, I put a lot of weight on what is said to me by the doctor who knows me and examines me. If it is really important to me, I ask him, and I am thankful he is so accessible.

And, yes, your cholesterol/HDL ratio is well within the "healthy" range, too.

I will still look for ways to raise HDL and lower LDL, though. I think my HDL came down because I stopped taking psyllium husks a couple of months ago. I thought I was getting enough fiber from more veggies. I plan to add those back. If it does raise HDL, that helps counteract the bad effects of extra LDL.

As for the LDL, I suspect I should increase the ratio of fish to beef in my diet. That's a tough one for me because, even though I live on the west coast where fresh fish is more varied and attainable, I grew up in the midwest where we always had fresh beef and chicken from my uncle's farm. As daughter says, "We do love our 'beast.' "

I'm not sure how else I could reduce saturated fat and fitday tells me I tend to get over 30 percent of my fat grams as saturated fat. I suppose that's not good.

[LageNomAi]

Re: my blood work

As for the LDL, I suspect I should increase the ratio of fish to beef in my diet. That's a tough one for me because, even though I live on the west coast where fresh fish is more varied and attainable, I grew up in the midwest where we always had fesh beef and chicken from my uncle's farm. As daughter says, "We do love our 'beast.' "

I'm not sure how else I could reduce saturated fat and fitday tells me I tend to get over 30 percent of my fat grams as saturated fat. I suppose that's not good.

I, too, should eat more fish than I do. I tend to eat quite a bit of red meat because our grocery store often has fabulous sales on ground beef and I love ground beef. I also eat chicken, but I am a terrible cook and can never make a chicken dish that tastes good , so I tend to avoid it.

I'll be honest and say that I don't even want to know how much saturated fat I get from all the beef I eat. However, I've read that saturated fat actually isn't all bad. Again, Google School of Medicine, LOL, so who knows if this is true.

[Elizellen]

Re: my blood work

I'm not sure how else I could reduce saturated fat and fitday tells me I tend to get over 30 percent of my fat grams as saturated fat. I suppose that's not good.

Lowcarbers are not working to the same 'low fat/fat=bad' theories that the 'normal' diet recommendations are based on, so your numbers seem fine to me, no need to look into reducing sat fat as far as I know.

[liv]

Re: my blood work

exercise is a good way to reduce the LDL

[ErinB]

Re: my blood work

exercise is a good way to reduce the LDL

Six days a week: One hour on the gym's Precor elliptical, interval training, increasing resistance all the time.

Mondays & Thursdays: One hour of upper body weight lifting, increasing weights/reps as I can and changing routine monthly.

Tuesdays & Fridays: One hour of lower body weight lifting, increasing weights/reps as I can and changing routine monthly.

I know Norm does more, but I'm a 65-year-old female. It's the best I can do right now.

I am, however, wondering if my HDL went down because I stopped the psyllium husks (fiber) a couple of months ago and if that allowed LDL to go up. IOW, I wonder if more HDL means lowered LDL. I have no basis for this thought, just my wondering mind ... which can lead me down erroneous paths.