PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Paleo Phil <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 24 Apr 2007 19:19:44 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (65 lines)
Paula H.:
> He wants her LDL as low as possible - but he said in the process it
> would
> pull her TC down but that did not matter because no # was too low for
> LDL or
> TC.  

Ah, so he did make the claim for LDL as well as total cholesterol. That
removes the confounding factor of good HDL and be addressed more clearly. As
long as he doesn't pull down her HDL I wouldn't be too concerned, though I
could be wrong of course.

> That raised a warning flag for me because I remember the Eades'
> graph
> on deaths from all causes rising when TC goes below 182 I think.  

Interesting, I'd like to see that if you come across it again.

> It
> irritated me that he stressed that there were NO studies to show
> otherwise
> when there definitely are.  Here is one:
> http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/311/7002/409

That study is unlikely to convince the cardiologist, since the conclusion
contradicts your point:

"Conclusion: The association between comparatively low serum total
cholesterol concentrations and excess mortality seemed to be due to
preclinical cancer and other non-cardiovascular diseases. This suggests that
public health programmes encouraging lower average concentrations of serum
total cholesterol are unlikely to be associated with increased cancer or
other non-cardiovascular mortality."

The strongest associations appear to be with depression, rather than cancer,
and even there the evidence is preliminary and the correlations could be
caused by other factors (correlation does not equal causation). I wasn't
able to find much more about the dangers of low ldl and TC beyond what is on
that Second Opinions site.

I thought I read something in the past that said that either triglycerides
or LDL shouldn't be below 30, but I haven't been able to find it. Dr.
Cordain and associates wrote a review in which they reported that the range
of LDL among hunter-gatherers is 50-70.

> I just had blood work done through my natural Gyn, and my numbers after
> eating LC/Paleo for 10.5 years (I eat fatty meats and all visible fat
> along
> with a lot of veggies, fruits, nuts, seeds):
> 
> TC - 163
> LDL - 80
> HDL - 76
> Triglycerides - 33
> Fasting Glucose - 89
> CRP - .2
> 
> And here, the health powers that be would have you believe that I
> should be
> dead from all the sat fat I consume!
> 
> Paula H.

Very good numbers Paula, congrats!

ATOM RSS1 RSS2