What is your total cholesterol levels?

[whacked]

I have no dog in this fight. Just sharing some insight.

For every Big Pharma-driven study of high cholesterol causing heart disease and death, there’s a contrarian version based on low Cholesterol (even low LDL), being unhealthy and leading to diseases and early death.

Ironically, many of these counter-positions are coming from Cardiovascular Specialists, Lipidologists and PhD’s who study the actual epidemiology “objectively” and understand the pathogenicity of CVD. These folks are typically anti-statin as well.

It’s become a battle to figure out which camp to subscribe to but over the last few years; I’ve become more impressed by the latter camp that have everything to lose and little to gain by having the gravitas to speak out against the billion dollar establishments, risking their own licenses and careers to supposedly share the truth.

There is SO much more at play regarding CVD than just lipid values. Just not buying it.

 

[NEMSZ]

There’s so much more to plaque build up and heart disease than total cholesterol levels. In fact, cholesterol levels are low on the list for causing a heart attack. For example, a close friend of mine who is 60 years old had a widow maker heart attack last year while training legs. A piece of plaque broke lose from his main left coronary artery while doing walking lunges when blood pressure was being elevated. The plaque travelled downward into the Left anterior descending artery and the circumflex. Blocked off both of those arteries 100%. My friend was lucky to survive. He now has permanent heart damage with an ejection fraction rate of only 40%. His cholesterol levels are always impeccable.
HDL = 66
LDL = 30
VLDL = 18
Triglycerides= 85

NOTE: this is why you can have a stress test by the cardiologist and he says you are fine (no blockages). You walk out of their office to get into your car and drop dead in the parking lot from a heart attack because some built up plaque broke lose. SCARY!

Going by what the typical doctors say and the current agenda of lipids and CVD etc (which has a lot of push back from people says there’s more to lipids and that low LDL and cholesterol is actually terrible for you and leads to disease and early death as someone said above )

Then is your buddy’s lipids were so perfect; how did he build up plaque in the first place??

He must have at one point had something going on in his body whether it be lipids or inflammation that caused plaque build up to get to that point..

 

[Reno911]

Then is your buddy’s lipids were so perfect; how did he build up plaque in the first place??

He must have at one point had something going on in his body whether it be lipids or inflammation that caused plaque build up to get to that point..

I think in the case go Headtrainers friend, all humans will accumulate plaque (including soft plaque) as they age. A tiny piece of soft plaque can break off causing the MI.

I think anyone 45-50 should get a calcium score scan and anyone over 60 should get a CT angiogram with contrast. The CT angiogram will pick up the soft plaque. The calcium scan will only pick up the calcified plaque. Both have their place but for 60+ the Angiogram is the gold standard.

 

[buck]

I have posted a study on here many times done with 12.8 million people showing that those with total cholesterol levels in the 200-210ish range live noticeably longer then those at "healthy cholesterol" levels.

When i asked 2 cardiologist recently how much longer people live once they start taking a statin as opposed to those that don't, they replied they have never seen such i study done. Even though big pharma has such info available after all their decades or tracking heart attack rates. I would post how people lived longer if it was true, seems like good marketing to me.

The cholesterol levels i posted above are what most would think is a great level to have for your whole life, yet my calcium score is far higher then average for my age group.

Cholesterol doesn't seem to stick to healthy supple arteries. And half the people that have heart attacks have always had healthy cholesterol levels from my reading. I tend to think that ageing or beat up arteries plays a far bigger amount in the heart attack issue. And keeping arteries healthy should be the plan.

 

[romo]

What is your cholesterol levels without the Lipitor?

Cholesterol was 189, hdl 12, ldl 149

 

[romo]

I do believe cholesterol is important. I also believe high ldl and low hdl is bad. Im 57 two years ago i had a quadruple stint placement my father at 58 years old had a quadruple open heart bypass. Liptor had just went on the market they put him on 40 mg a day like me. My dad just turned 91 last Sunday, maybe i will one day. But he never did any gear lol. I have for 20 years now and still am after 4 stints.

 

[UnholyAlliance]

From my last bloodwork at the Dr:

Chol: 133
hdl: 52
ldl: 70
Trig: 54

Not too shabby according to my Dr...and I'm 59.

 

[Zamun]

Why the hell is my LDL the highest in the threat

 

[UnholyAlliance]

I do believe cholesterol is important. I also believe high ldl and low hdl is bad. Im 57 two years ago i had a quadruple stint placement my father at 58 years old had a quadruple open heart bypass. Liptor had just went on the market they put him on 40 mg a day like me. My dad just turned 91 last Sunday, maybe i will one day. But he never did any gear lol. I have for 20 years now and still am after 4 stints.

Bless your dad for still being on this green earth for that long and bet the man had a great life!

 

[UnholyAlliance]

I think in the case go Headtrainers friend, all humans will accumulate plaque (including soft plaque) as they age. A tiny piece of soft plaque can break off causing the MI.

I think anyone 45-50 should get a calcium score scan and anyone over 60 should get a CT angiogram with contrast. The CT angiogram will pick up the soft plaque. The calcium scan will only pick up the calcified plaque. Both have their place but for 60+ the Angiogram is the gold standard.

Good idea and I might go to the cardiologist my elderly mother goes to and get that test done for my peace of mind.

 

[romo]

From my last bloodwork at the Dr:

Chol: 133
hdl: 52
ldl: 70
Trig: 54

Not too shabby according to my Dr...and I'm 59.

Yes. Very good readings.

 

[headtrainer]

Going by what the typical doctors say and the current agenda of lipids and CVD etc (which has a lot of push back from people says there’s more to lipids and that low LDL and cholesterol is actually terrible for you and leads to disease and early death as someone said above )

Then is your buddy’s lipids were so perfect; how did he build up plaque in the first place??

He must have at one point had something going on in his body whether it be lipids or inflammation that caused plaque build up to get to that point..

His blood work has also been excellent and still is. He’s a highly stressed individual who always has to be doing something. He’s very competitive and gets easily frustrated at other drivers when they don’t drive the way he thinks they should. That said, he’s a very nice guy. He used to perform a lot of work sets sets in the gym to all out failure. Stress is the only thing I can find that caused him to have plaque build up/heart attack. I now believe both mental stress and physical stress is the primary reason of heart disease. After all, he had his heart attack while pushing his cardio limits with walking lunges. Many people have heart attacks at the gym that may have never occurred if they had not been over doing it.

 

[headtrainer]

Why the hell is my LDL the highest in the threat

Do you consume a lot of saturated fats?

 

[headtrainer]

I do believe cholesterol is important. I also believe high ldl and low hdl is bad. Im 57 two years ago i had a quadruple stint placement my father at 58 years old had a quadruple open heart bypass. Liptor had just went on the market they put him on 40 mg a day like me. My dad just turned 91 last Sunday, maybe i will one day. But he never did any gear lol. I have for 20 years now and still am after 4 stints.

I think the small “sticky” oxidized LDL is bad. It carries triglycerides though the arteries. I believe stress, diabetes and high blood pressure causes damage to the endothelium ( inner lining of arteries). Once our arteries become damaged, the small ldl can more easily stick—causing plaque build up. That said, having low estrogen levels makes plaque unstable—allowing it to break off and cause a blockage.

 

[headtrainer]

Just a note here.

Last fall I dropped all my "natural supps" and did 5mg Crestor 2x a week and my numbers were a little worse on the Crestor than they were on the natural supps minus the Ezetimibe (I was not on that).

When I went to 5mg Crestor 3x a week I felt like I got hit my a truck after about 2 weeks- sever body/joint pain. So I pulled it and added the Ezetimibe and added back in the natural supps.

So.... I do think the Ezetimibe is also helping to move the dial.

Statins are massively over prescribed. They can cause heart damage, muscle loss, dementia, and diabetes. The most ironic thing of all is statins can cause the gut to absorb “more” LDL cholesterol that comes from diet.

 

[headtrainer]

I have no dog in this fight. Just sharing some insight.

For every Big Pharma-driven study of high cholesterol causing heart disease and death, there’s a contrarian version based on low Cholesterol (even low LDL), being unhealthy and leading to diseases and early death.

Ironically, many of these counter-positions are coming from Cardiovascular Specialists, Lipidologists and PhD’s who study the actual epidemiology “objectively” and understand the pathogenicity of CVD. These folks are typically anti-statin as well.

It’s become a battle to figure out which camp to subscribe to but over the last few years; I’ve become more impressed by the latter camp that have everything to lose and little to gain by having the gravitas to speak out against the billion dollar establishments, risking their own licenses and careers to supposedly share the truth.

There is SO much more at play regarding CVD than just lipid values. Just not buying it.

I agree with you %

 

[headtrainer]

I have posted a study on here many times done with 12.8 million people showing that those with total cholesterol levels in the 200-210ish range live noticeably longer then those at "healthy cholesterol" levels.

When i asked 2 cardiologist recently how much longer people live once they start taking a statin as opposed to those that don't, they replied they have never seen such i study done. Even though big pharma has such info available after all their decades or tracking heart attack rates. I would post how people lived longer if it was true, seems like good marketing to me.

The cholesterol levels i posted above are what most would think is a great level to have for your whole life, yet my calcium score is far higher then average for my age group.

Cholesterol doesn't seem to stick to healthy supple arteries. And half the people that have heart attacks have always had healthy cholesterol levels from my reading. I tend to think that ageing or beat up arteries plays a far bigger amount in the heart attack issue. And keeping arteries healthy should be the plan.

I agree with your analysis!

 

[headtrainer]

I think in the case go Headtrainers friend, all humans will accumulate plaque (including soft plaque) as they age. A tiny piece of soft plaque can break off causing the MI.

I think anyone 45-50 should get a calcium score scan and anyone over 60 should get a CT angiogram with contrast. The CT angiogram will pick up the soft plaque. The calcium scan will only pick up the calcified plaque. Both have their place but for 60+ the Angiogram is the gold standard.

I cannot disagree with you. But a calcium score scan can make people panic while at the same time not being able to do anything to prevent a future heart attack. Many people have calcified arteries but their arteries are not narrow enough to stop blood flow. In addition, a calcium score scan can not prevent plaque from breaking off. Furthermore, most insurance companies won’t pay for a calcium score scan unless you’re experiencing serious issues. Same goes for a CT angiogram. In fact, a CT angiogram can cause you to have a heart attack or stroke. Therefore, doctors won’t perform this diagnostic test unless you fail a stress test. Having a heart attack is very similar to getting cancer. You just never really know when it’s going to happen. But most of us will eventually die from those two diseases.

 

[Reno911]

Statins are massively over prescribed. They can cause heart damage, muscle loss, dementia, and diabetes. The most ironic thing of all is statins can cause the gut to absorb “more” LDL cholesterol that comes from diet.

To each their own but I think you're being pretty dogmatic here. I have personally come full circle with my thoughts on Statins but I think your claims are a bit exaggerated.

The biggest advantage of a statin is the plaque stabilization effect. Are they without fault? No. But what other drug will provide the plaque stabilization benefit?

As PED users, we have no issues using ancillaries and BP meds to control things but then when it comes to statins "OH NO, horrible- don't take them"!! It doesn't make a lot of sense. For years bodybuilders would not use BP meds. Now BP meds are common place because our community has seen the benefits on kidney health for keeping BP in range.

Another note to think about in regards to your statement of statins being "massively overprescribed". My question is how well does it work for a Doctor to tell someone with shitty lipids to exercise, eat healthy, and take a bunch of cholesterol support supplements? It works about 1% of the time. The rest of the time the best option for the doctor is to prescribe a med. Same can be said for blood pressure.

 

[Hatchet]

Low lipid levels (like that 120) is responsible for more heart attacks than someone who is 220.
Cholesterol is important and protective... Too low is not good...