On Sat, 29 Aug 1998, James Crocker wrote:

> You tell me.  The reason I minimize (not eliminate) cholesterol is
> because that is recommended from my CR diet sources.  We CR'ers go from
> every angle for lifespan increase, and I believe there have been a few
> studies about cholesterol linked to heart disease.  BTW - that is why I
> am persuing my CR program via paleo - to go for the best in every way
> towards a maximum lifespan.

There is very little evidence linking dietary cholesterol to
heart disease.  If you eat more of it, your liver makes less, and
vice versa.

Even the alleged links between serum cholesterol and heart
disease are not as clear as you might think.  The following web
page has some very interesting reading on this subject:

http://home2.swipnet.se/~w-25775/index.htm

This is not to say that anyone has all the answers.  Recent
research indicates that triglyceride:HDL is a more important
ratio to watch, although in some people it can be very hard to
raise HDL without raising LDL through the roof.

> Afraid isn't quite the right word, but that is the main reason I minimize
> it (to 100 mg/day, just a rough guide).  In subsequent years, my total
> cholesterol was 116, 126, 160 something.  I know most people will jump
> all over me for thinking 160 is a little high (for me it is), but I
> didn't like the trend.  BTW, I talked to my doctor about it, and he said
> that the old cutoff for "high" cholest. used to be ~200, but now the
> trend is toward 180.  Very important is of course the HDL/total lipid
> ratio, also.  (I realize this info is taken in the context of a SAD diet,
> which I believe skews the results - I just like to be conservative and
> consider that it may be good information).

According to Eaton, the average cholesterol of contemporary
hunter-gatherers, and other primates, is about 125.  I believe
that would be unusually low not only for most Americans, but also
for most Neanderthin practitioners.  I don't think anyone has an
explanation for this discrepancy yet.  Perhaps stress, which also
stimulates the liver to produce more cholesterol, is part of the
explanation.

Incidentally, I printed out the Ravnskov web stuff mentioned
above and gave a copy to my doctor.  He admitted that the logic
of the "received" view is very muddled.  In fact, he also
admitted that most doctors put patients on cholesterol-lowering
drugs more out of fear of lawsuits than fear of heart attacks.
He's well aware that there are plenty of healthy people, with no
signs of impending heart disease, who have "high" cholesterol.
But if a person with high cholesterol has a heart attack, a
doctor who knew about the high cholesterol and didn't at least
recommend drug therapy is in a legally vulnerable position.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]