Back after long hiatus

[UkuleleLady]

Greetings Tex, all,

I had a big move out to Far West Texas, and new job, life changes, etc... haven't been around.

MC/CC is not at all apparent after nearly two years. Life is pretty much normal. I continue to eat gluten free, and mostly dairy free.

However, now I have learned (according to my doctor who is concerned) I have high cholesterol. My LDL is 115, HDL is 53. I panicked and starting to think "what am I gonna do?" and thought I would come to the MC support forum because THESE ARE THE PEOPLE I TRUST THE MOST with my health. No lie.

That said, I went through my paper work from 2013 when I had active MC, and had a battery of all kinds of tests.

Learned that in 2013 then my LDL was 125 and HDL was 43. And no one said anything about that to me.

So it's actually lower from when I went gluten dairy free and started eating a LOT more meat and saturated fats.

I am eating pretty much eating anything I want, all the grains (except gluten) as well meat and fats, and lots of vegetables. I am very lucky my MC is in remission and I can do this with no effect. I have a VERY happy situation and I love my job and there is very little stress in my life. I have a spiritual practice that helps me and I believe reduced stress and increased spirituality is a huge part of my recovery.

Summary: Do I need to be worried about this 115 LDL and is the best way to lower it by eating paleo or low fat? I am thinking paleo.

I'm going to go to the doctor and hear what they have to say even if I don't follow their opinion. I will NOT go on medication for this of any kind.

Cheers and I pray you are all well.
Nancy

[Vanessa]

Hey Nancy,

In my opinion, you are at a desirable level of cholesterol. The so called "normal" values are bunk and I'm convinced it is a ploy with the drug companies to sell more statins....As we age we actually need higher levels for our brain health. There are also tests to see what size your cholesterol particles are. I'm sounding like a total idiot. But there are fluffy ones and dense ones. If you have more of the fluffy ones, that is ok. Hopefully our engineers will chime in with correct verbage. Are you taking good magnesium and D3? I'm under the school of thought "if it ain't broke don't fix it" you are doing so well and strict paleo is a tough gig for most people. Just my 2 cents

[tex]

Hi Nancy,

It's nice to see an update from you and to learn that things are going so well. Congratulations on the job change and the move out of Austin to a more serene setting. That move will probably add years to your life, plus a significantly improved quality of life.

I agree with your conclusions based on what your research into your past test results revealed — your health is improving, not declining. The fact of the matter is that cholesterol has never been a good way to monitor overall health, despite the fact that the mainstream medical community has mistakenly tried to use it as a primary gauge of health for decades. The following quote is taken from the beginning of the chapter on vitamin D in the book Pancreatic Cancer and it documents the problems with current medical attitudes and policies regarding cholesterol.

A derivative of cholesterol, 7-dehydrocholesterol is present on the surface of the skin, and the action of ultraviolet B irradiation converts it into vitamin D3. For decades, mainstream medicine has largely misunderstood many aspects of the role of cholesterol in the human body. This has resulted in widespread inappropriate efforts to suppress cholesterol levels in broad categories of people who are not at risk of cardiovascular events, despite published research studies showing that lowering cholesterol levels does not improve longevity, nor does lowering cholesterol levels reduce cardiovascular risks for the general population (Ramsden et al., 2016).33

There are 2 common forms of vitamin D available as supplements, D2 and D3. Vitamin D2 is the form most often prescribed by physicians to treat vitamin D deficiency, and vitamin D3 is the form produced by our skin when exposed to sunlight. Vitamin D3 seems to be more effective for boosting blood vitamin D levels, and it is the type most often offered in over-the-counter vitamin D supplements.

Researchers have discovered that roughly 80 % of one's cholesterol level is determined by genetics, so obviously diet can only have a relatively minor effect (Thompson, 2015).34 And contrary to the guidelines currently followed by most health "experts", these studies have also demonstrated that raising HDL cholesterol levels does not provide any mortality risk benefits (Keene, Price, Shun-Shin, & Francis, 2014).35

This suggests that most of the medical advice we have received about cholesterol during our lifetimes has been incorrect.
The implications of this research contradict and pretty much nullify much of the conventional wisdom that was previously used as a basis for establishing medical policies regarding cholesterol levels and how they affect (or do not effect) the health of most individuals in the general population. These data demand that the tests currently being used to assess patient cardiovascular health must be reevaluated and a completely revised approach be developed regarding the ways that mainstream medical practitioners apply this information.

But in the meantime, this misguided, decades-long campaign designed to suppress cholesterol levels, plus the widespread use of sunscreen products, has resulted in an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency. The main problem with the existing recommendations is that suppressing cholesterol levels also suppresses the production of vitamin D in the skin. Whether this policy has had a significant adverse effect on the overall health of the general population is yet to be proven, but surely it has contributed to the trend toward inadequate vitamin D levels for many, many people. This limits the effectiveness of the immune system and puts many people at an increased risk of many health issues, including cancer. Compared with their grandparents and great-grandparents, most people today only produce a fraction of the vitamin D that their forebears produced.

And here are the references from that quote.

33. Ramsden, C. E., Zamora, D., Majchrzak-Hong, S., Faurot, K. R., Broste, S. K., Frantz, R. P., . . . Hibbeln, J. R. (2016). Re-evaluation of the traditional diet-heart hypothesis: analysis of recovered data from Minnesota Coronary Experiment (1968-73). BMJ, 353. Retrieved from http://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i1246

34. Thompson, T. (2015, February 10). U.S. Advisers Rethink Cholesterol Risk From Foods: Report. Healthday [Web log message]. Retrieved from https://consumer.healthday.com/cardiova ... 96375.html

35. Keene, D., Price, C., Shun-Shin, M. J., & Francis, D. P. (2014). Effect on cardiovascular risk of high density lipoprotein targeted drug treatments niacin, fibrates, and CETP inhibitors: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials including 117 411 patients. BMJ, 349. Retrieved from http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g4379

Numerous research studies have revealed that conventional medical policies regarding animal fat in the diet are just plain incorrect. Fat in the diet is essential for not only good health, but for basic survival. Carbs are totally unnecessary and they can safely be totally avoided, but dietary protein and fat are essential for health. Animal fat is one of the healthiest forms of fat that one can eat. Here is a quote from the chapter on "fat" from that same book.

Nonetheless, in very recent years, studies have been published that examined that same original research data, and the newer studies dispute many of the conclusions claimed by those earlier research articles. For example, a study of dairy fat consumption published in 2016 was based on data retrieved from 9 databases in 15 different countries, involving 636,151 different patients, spanning a period of 6.5 million person-years of follow-up. This newer study resulted in a totally different conclusion that contradicts the claims stated in earlier studies. Pimpin, Wu, Haskelberg, Del Gobbo, and Mozaffarian (2016) concluded that the consumption of butter had only a neutral to a small (relatively insignificant) effect on mortality, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes.68 They found no justification for dietary guidelines (either pro or con) regarding the consumption of butter.

Replacing animal fat in the diet with plant-based fat does not reduce mortality risks.
Other recent research has shown that replacing animal fat in the diet with plant-based polyunsaturated fatty acids such as linoleic acid tends to lower the blood cholesterol level but it does not reduce the risk of death from coronary heart disease, nor does it reduce all-cause mortality risk (Ramsden et al., 2016).69

68. Pimpin, L., Wu, J. H. Y., Haskelberg, H., Del Gobbo, L., & Mozaffarian, D. (2016). Is butter back? A systematic review and meta-analysis of butter consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and total mortality. PLoS ONE 11(6): e0158118. Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/articl ... ne.0158118

69. Ramsden, C. E., Zamora, D., Majchrzak-Hong, S., Faurot, K. R., Broste, S. K., Frantz, R. P., . . . Hibbeln, J. R. (2016). Re-evaluation of the traditional diet-heart hypothesis: analysis of recovered data from Minnesota Coronary Experiment (1968-73). The BMJ 353, i1246. Retrieved from http://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i1246

My LDL is much higher than yours. FWIW, I never worry about my cholesterol level unless it is too low (which is a very dangerous condition). But I do tend to try to keep an eye on my triglyceride level. As long as it's well down in the normal range, I'm a happy camper. I will point out that I have noticed that every time that I have experienced a major health crisis (a life-threatening situation), my triglyceride level has surged well out of the normal range. That has made it a marker that I take note of.

Incidentally, I highly recommend the book I mentioned because it contains a lot research-documented health tips that you won't learn at your doctor's office. You can download it free in digital form (or at minimal cost in printed form) as per the details in the post at the following link:

http://www.perskyfarms.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=22640

All in all, you appear to be doing great. Congratulations, and thanks for the update.

Tex

[humbird753]

Hi Nancy - It's great to hear your success story. It definitely sounds like the changes you've made are agreeing with you.

[Gabes-Apg]

Great to hear from you...... Tex has provided the answers re cholesterol....

Keep enjoying life!

[Marcia K]

Hi, Nancy. I never had high cholesterol in spite of family history of it. My recent lab results indicate that my LDL is 135. Like you, I'm not taking anything for it. My doctor has not called me so apparently it's not on his radar, either. I eat more meat than I did before the, LC but I need the protein so I'm not changing my diet. This was the first place I came for advice, too! The best! I'm glad your life is going so well.

[UkuleleLady]

Thanks everyone! Good to "see" you Tex, Gabes, Marcia, Paula, Vanessa and all of you all again, and some new faces too. Oddly when I logged in after so long, someone had recently left a PM regarding some posts I made about my past with IC.

Putting this information out there for others is extremely valuable even as time goes on.

Grateful for my journey here. I really made it, for now, although I know that everything changes and I'm not really in charge, ultimately.

Thanks for y'all talking me of the ledge so to speak with the Cholesterol. I did panic at first but when I saw those older, higher scores had a suspicion I wasn't too bad off.

I know the risks of statins, etc., mainly from you guys. Couldn't pay me to take 'em.
Thanks for being here.
Nancy