• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cholesterol and diet

Badly Shaved Monkey

Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
Badly Shaved Monkey
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
5,363
Forgive me if this has been subject to discussion previously and please feel free to point me towards such a discussion.

How tightly does variation in dietary fat intake correlate with blood cholesterol (including LDL and HDL)?

Clearly the one must influence the other, that's why people with high cholesterol are advised to alter their diet, but how long does it take? Follow-up testing seems to be done on a timescale of months not days or weeks, which suggests that there is a long lag.

I have various scenarios in mind.

1. Chronic high-fat diet, switches to low-fat. When do the effects appear?

2. Baseline low-fat diet, but with excursions into high fat, say eating a plate of greasy fish and chips. Does that show up the next day or next week? Or does it never show up because one acute deviation on the input side is not accurately reflected in the output side?
 
If your genetic make up predisposes you to high cholesterol, you are pretty much up a river. Changing the diet can help but at least half of your cholesterol profile will be given to you by your ancestors.
 
Nosi said:
If your genetic make up predisposes you to high cholesterol, you are pretty much up a river. Changing the diet can help but at least half of your cholesterol profile will be given to you by your ancestors.
Click to expand...

It's a bit more complicated than that...

http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/EHC/ehc41.pdf

Take a look at the bar chart on page 4.

Also the ratio of HDL to LDL is a better predictor than TC of risk.

ETA: After re-reading your post, you probably meant the chances of changing one's TC with diet alone is fairly limited, which is correct.
 
Last edited:
Nosi said:
If your genetic make up predisposes you to high cholesterol, you are pretty much up a river. Changing the diet can help but at least half of your cholesterol profile will be given to you by your ancestors.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but it is the time-relation of dietary change to change in the blood parameters that I am interested in at the moment given that one's genes are not open to simple manipulation.
 
Does anybody actually lower their TC by low fat diet alone?

Mine dropped to good, but I started eating less, exercising more, and the major drop was in my high triglycerides. Everything got damn good, except HDL. It stayed low until I also started taking Niaspan. Always on my usual high fat diet. Then lately I discovered a recipe for home made gluten free bread. A few weeks of live with toast, numbers went hay wire again.

Sorry, no help with the timing. BUT it seems that having a cup of coffee with cream, and telling the lab tech that you ARE fasting, changes everything for the better. I think fasting raises TC?
 
Badly Shaved Monkey said:
Indeed, but it is the time-relation of dietary change to change in the blood parameters that I am interested in at the moment given that one's genes are not open to simple manipulation.
Click to expand...

Probably not exactly what you're after:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8353510.stm

'No fasting' for cholesterol test

Patients do not need to fast before having their cholesterol tested, a major report has found.

After analysing data from 300,000 people, Cambridge researchers found results were just as accurate if the patient had eaten before the test.

While a number of studies have pointed to this, the "no need to fast" message has not yet been absorbed, experts say.

It is hoped the review in the Journal of the American Medical Association will inform guidelines everywhere.

Cholesterol tests have long been a key part of assessing a patient's risk of cardiovascular problems.

Fasting was recommended as it had been thought the body needed enough time to digest food in the system and to clear any fatty particles from the blood. This was in order to produce an accurate reading of so-called "bad" cholesterol - or low-density lipoprotein (LDL).
Click to expand...
 
When I was first found to have very high cholesterol (over 360 total) years ago, my doc put me on Lipitor and also recommended a low fat diet.
The results were very good; numbers went into the "ideal" range. However, after a year or so of annoying low-fatted-ness, I started fudging.
Numbers remained the same....

It has seemed since that in my case at least, diet has very little to do with things; I'm genetically disposed towards high numbers.
 
Badly Shaved Monkey said:
Forgive me if this has been subject to discussion previously and please feel free to point me towards such a discussion.

How tightly does variation in dietary fat intake correlate with blood cholesterol (including LDL and HDL)?

Clearly the one must influence the other, that's why people with high cholesterol are advised to alter their diet, but how long does it take? Follow-up testing seems to be done on a timescale of months not days or weeks, which suggests that there is a long lag.

I have various scenarios in mind.

1. Chronic high-fat diet, switches to low-fat. When do the effects appear?

2. Baseline low-fat diet, but with excursions into high fat, say eating a plate of greasy fish and chips. Does that show up the next day or next week? Or does it never show up because one acute deviation on the input side is not accurately reflected in the output side?
Click to expand...


I experiment with my diet all the time and have access to testing my blood whenever I want to as I work in a diagnostic lab.

The medical advice is that changes in your diet take three months to show up in cholesterol.

However, I have found that my cholesterol will drop within four weeks of changing my diet, I have had it change from 7 mmol/L++ to around 5 mmol/L.

My cholesterol shoots up when I eat cheese and butter.

Eating fatty food will increase the triglycerides in your blood, and that is only going to be for a few hours, unless of course there are other issues like hypercholesterolaemia, hyperlipidaemia or issues with your thyroid function.
 
Bikewer said:
When I was first found to have very high cholesterol (over 360 total) years ago, my doc put me on Lipitor and also recommended a low fat diet.
The results were very good; numbers went into the "ideal" range. However, after a year or so of annoying low-fatted-ness, I started fudging.
Numbers remained the same....

It has seemed since that in my case at least, diet has very little to do with things; I'm genetically disposed towards high numbers.
Click to expand...


Mine was 440 at one point. I also was suffering from sciatica. The pain and nerve damage was so bad I walked with a limp. Still do after two surgeries and 25 years.

Anyway, stress is a major factor in TC.

I do have CAD. My episodes of angina are brought on by gluten. I've had too many challenges brought on by hidden gluten to disbelieve it. Soy sauce and "modified food starch" are in lots of stuff.

I'm betting my life that CAD is an allergic process. It's mast cells that attack artery linings, starting the inflammation process. Cholesterol is almost an innocent bystander. I also know too many people who watch what they eat, take their statins, and get repeated artery clogs. I've read ont he net that plaques have 20 times as many mast cells as healthy artery walls.

Everybody knows Statins are anti-inflammatories. Hence the latest studies that show the statins help even in people with low cholesterol. I can't take statins due to muscle problems. I'm going with anti-histamine (Claratin) to fight the inflammatory process.

Hmmm, I'm off to google for < statins "mast cell levels in artery plaque"> . Care to join me?

ETA: 2,000 hits for <"mast cells" " artery plaque" statins>
 
Last edited:
I'm a little lost on this topic.

I have heard this stated a few times that for diet all you really need to worry about is your caloric intake. Too many calories means all sorts of problems including high amounts of sticky, gooey sugar in the blood which may be the real reason for problems leading to strokes, etc... this was the general message I took from it . One doctor was delighted to hear that his patient was eating bacon and eggs for breakfast, steak for dinner, and losing weight doing it. The emphasis was on weight loss, and there was no mention about cholesterol (which was my first thought reading the statement). What bugs me about reading this is it sounds eerily like a promotion of atkins/south beach since it's all about reducing carbs and focusing on low-calorie foods that help you to feel full sooner (leafy greens, protein-rich foods like meat, etc.). I am biased in that I hate fad diets and am inclined to reject anything sounding like atkins.

I did a bit of searching on the net, but pubmed is over my head and google results netted an equal amount of pseudoscience on both sides ("bad cholesterol is a myth, buy our natural supplement" vs "our natural supplement helps lower bad cholesterol" -- lol). I'd like to do a bit of research on this.. any suggestions on important papers would be fantastic. Specifically the subject of whether there is a "bad" cholesterol, and if it is in any way related to so-called "clogging" arteries and risk of heart problems. I know about HDL and LDL but it seems that neither is "bad."

What is the current consensus of the skeptical community?
 
Last edited:
Bloodtoes said:
I did a bit of searching on the net, but pubmed is over my head and google results netted an equal amount of pseudoscience on both sides ("bad cholesterol is a myth, buy our natural supplement" vs "our natural supplement helps lower bad cholesterol" -- lol). I'd like to do a bit of research on this.. any suggestions on important papers would be fantastic. Specifically the subject of whether there is a "bad" cholesterol, and if it is in any way related to so-called "clogging" arteries and risk of heart problems. I know about HDL and LDL but it seems that neither is "bad."
Click to expand...
Read more about the functional differences between HDL and LDL. Start with wikipedia or find a relatively recent nutrition and/or anatomy and physiology textbook. "Bad cholesterol" is a bit of a misnomer in that the cholesterol itself is the same. However, LDL increases the risk of plaque formation and thus is "bad"; whereas HDL decreases it and thus is good.
 
A very good general rule of thumb is that weight loss is all about balancing the calories in vs the calories out.

However, for well-being, the ratio of the macronutrients (protein, carbs and fat) that you eat is really highly individual.

Some people will do really well on a high protein, high fat diet, and saturate animal fats, others will find that it isn't great for their lipid profiles.

Most people can't be bothered to experiment and find out what works best for them, how they feel, if their bodies function better, and with diagnostic blood tests.

I have found that a diet of approximately 40% protein, 40% carbohydrates and 20% fat is a good place to start.

Whole natural foods with occasional goodies generally works best for most people.

There is also a fantastic classic book on this topic that is only now coming into focus called 'Biochemical Individuality'.
 
Bloodtoes said:
I'm a little lost on this topic.

I have heard this stated a few times that for diet all you really need to worry about is your caloric intake. Too many calories means all sorts of problems including high amounts of sticky, gooey sugar in the blood which may be the real reason for problems leading to strokes, etc... this was the general message I took from it . One doctor was delighted to hear that his patient was eating bacon and eggs for breakfast, steak for dinner, and losing weight doing it. The emphasis was on weight loss, and there was no mention about cholesterol (which was my first thought reading the statement). What bugs me about reading this is it sounds eerily like a promotion of atkins/south beach since it's all about reducing carbs and focusing on low-calorie foods that help you to feel full sooner (leafy greens, protein-rich foods like meat, etc.). I am biased in that I hate fad diets and am inclined to reject anything sounding like atkins.

I did a bit of searching on the net, but pubmed is over my head and google results netted an equal amount of pseudoscience on both sides ("bad cholesterol is a myth, buy our natural supplement" vs "our natural supplement helps lower bad cholesterol" -- lol). I'd like to do a bit of research on this.. any suggestions on important papers would be fantastic. Specifically the subject of whether there is a "bad" cholesterol, and if it is in any way related to so-called "clogging" arteries and risk of heart problems. I know about HDL and LDL but it seems that neither is "bad."

What is the current consensus of the skeptical community?
Click to expand...

Are you asking about calorie ratios or dietary cholesterol?

I think there's consensus among dieticians: reduce calories to maintain low body fat percentage. Calorie ratio not very important. More veggies. Less saturated fat. No trans fat. Don't smoke. Drink in moderation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom