Have High Hemoglobin bad LDL levels, some advice plz
- 02-11-2013, 03:40 AM
- 02-11-2013, 03:43 AM
- 02-11-2013, 06:43 AM
02-11-2013, 06:49 AM
coop you mention sfa reduction will lower ldl-p.... do you have a link?
there are a couple of studies floating around where sfa has been associated with large buoyant ldl am keen to check this out
02-11-2013, 05:58 PM
02-12-2013, 12:35 AM
Seen this cooper? JJ you might have; Relevant I think.
Statins Do Not Arteriosclerosis
Effect of Intensive Versus Standard Lipid-Lowering Treatment With Atorvastatin on the Progression of Calcified Coronary Atherosclerosis Over 12 Months
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial
Axel Schmermund, MD et al
From the Departments of Cardiology (A.S., R.E.) and Pharmacology (W.S.), University Clinic Essen, Essen, Germany, et al
Correspondence to Axel Schmermund, MD, Cardioangiologisches Centrum Bethanien, Im Prüfling 23, 60389 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. E-mail A.Schmermund@ccb.de
Background— Recent clinical trials have suggested that intensive versus standard lipid-lowering therapy provides for additional benefit. Electron-beam computed tomography provides the opportunity to quantify the progression of coronary artery calcification (CAC) in serial measurements.
Methods and Results— In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, 471 patients (age 61±8 years) who had no history of coronary artery disease and no evidence of high-grade coronary stenoses (>50% diameter reduction) were randomized if they had ≥2 cardiovascular risk factors and moderate calcified coronary atherosclerosis as evidenced by a CAC score ≥30. Patients were assigned to receive 80 mg or 10 mg of atorvastatin per day over 12 months. Progression of CAC volume scores could be analyzed in 366 patients. After pretreatment with 10 mg of atorvastatin for 4 weeks, 12 months of study medication reduced LDL cholesterol from 106±22 to 87±33 mg/dL in the group randomized to receive 80 mg of atorvastatin (P<0.001), whereas levels remained stable in the group randomized to receive 10 mg (108±23 at baseline, 109±28 mg/dL at the end of the study, P=NS). The mean progression of CAC volume scores, corrected for the baseline CAC volume score, was 27% (95% CI 20.8% to 33.1%) in the 80-mg atorvastatin group and 25% (95% CI 19.1% to 30.8%) in the 10-mg atorvastatin group (P=0.65). CAC progression showed no relationship with on-treatment LDL cholesterol levels.
Conclusions— We did not observe a relationship between on-treatment LDL cholesterol levels and the progression of calcified coronary atherosclerosis. Over a period of 12 months, intensive atorvastatin therapy was unable to attenuate CAC progression compared with standard atorvastatin therapy. The possibility remains that the time window was too short to demonstrate an effect.
This starts to get at how statins might, and might not work and why they are not particularly effective for primary prevention.
02-12-2013, 03:09 AM
02-12-2013, 12:54 PM
Your body needs cholesterol for all kinds of stuff! Reducing cholesterol to combat heart risk is like getting rid of blood to reduce clotting risk. (All we need to do is reduce your blood volume permanently by 30%, then you'll be good to go!)
Not only is the approach flawed from a basic common sense stand point, the medication does pose side effect risk. Mitochondrial damage is just one of the potential problems these drugs can present. (can't post link)
Does anyone know of any order of priority in which the body uses cholesterol? I thought I remembered seeing that the body will use available cholesterol to cope with inflammation (like arterial inflammation) before almost anything else.
Anything else may include: the manufacture of steroid hormones and vitamin D. Production of bile so you can digest fat and properly absorb Vitamins A, D, E and K.
All I'm saying is that I've been led to believe that you can reduce your cholesterol by 50% via changes to diet, via statins, via cutting out your liver, via whatever but reducing your cholesterol might not really reduce the supply that is flagged for use by the body to inflamed areas, it may just short your body on the supply used for other clearly important tasks. (maybe this is inferred by studies that show statins which do lower total cholesterol don't reverse arteriosclerosis)
I'm no doctor but look into it.
Similar Forum Threads
- By djtolbert619 in forum General ChatReplies: 0Last Post: 01-19-2013, 12:22 PM
- By howwedo107 in forum Training ForumReplies: 7Last Post: 01-19-2012, 01:29 AM
- By EctoMeso in forum Powerlifting/StrongmanReplies: 8Last Post: 03-24-2010, 06:55 AM
- By GnastyMcNasty in forum AnabolicsReplies: 0Last Post: 03-02-2010, 01:52 PM
- By MickeyMouse in forum AnabolicsReplies: 5Last Post: 02-01-2005, 09:23 AM