Hi all,

I'm 25/F, 5'4", 120 lbs. I have a family history of heart disease, my dad died suddenly of a massive MI at 46.

I just had my cholesterol checked and the results were:
Total: 203
HDL: 64
LDL: 123
LDL/HDL ratio: 3-2

My doctor says this is "good." But I have some concerns. I realize that HDL over 60 is beneficial, but LDL should be kept under 100 if there are risk factors for heart disease. Also, I think the total number of 203 is higher than it should be. Also of note, I had my cholesterol taken a few years ago (when I was about 20) and the results were identical.

So what do you guys think? Is this really good? I'm skeptical. Thanks for your help.

Your results are good, and if you were the average Joe or Jane, I'd say don't worry about it. But with that family history, you aren't the average Joe or Jane. If it were me, I'd try to improve the picture a bit with diet, exercise and possibly supplements. I don't think it is bad enough to warrant statins, though.

To put my comments in perspective, this is coming from someone who has a strong family history of strokes and heart attacks (father, 3 grandparents, about 8 aunts and uncles). However, most of those were in their 70s, 80s or even 90s, which is a far different story than your family history. After all, we all have to die of something, though now that I'm 63, "in the 70s" doesn't sound so old any more.

What are you currently doing regarding diet, exercise and supplements?

Hi Uff-Da,

Thanks so much for your reply. As far as diet goes, I'm probably more healthy than most. I'm lactose intolerant so that cuts out all dairy, and I eat lean meats. My diet consists mostly of fruits (dried & fresh), veggies, nuts, whole-grain products, lean meats, and soy products. I don't drink soda and rarely eat anything fried.

As for exercise, I have a gym membership, but haven't gone much lately. I go for walks but rarely do anything more strenuous. Exercise hasn't always been a top priority because I am thin.

When it comes to supplements, I take a daily multi-vitamin. Other than that I am on birth control pills, claratin 10 mg/day, and Effexor 150 mg/day.

It doesn't sound like you can improve your diet much. If you aren't eating fatty fish like salmon or tuna twice weekly, you might do that. Or you could start taking a fish oil supplement. Then try to get more cardio exercise. For many people that helps to bring the HDL up higher, so the ratio looks better. I think those things are probably all I would do until my next lipid test, but if you were really concerned you might also consider taking some flush-free niacin. I wouldn't take any more than 250 mg at this point. That might just be enough to improve your numbers a little with a minimum of risk of dangerous side effects.

The birth control pills are probably what is making the difference between your current good lipid panel and what would otherwise be a superb one.

Thanks, Uff-da. you've helped me feel a lot better.

Because of the family history, you may be a candidate to pursue some of the more specialized blood test......homocysteine, lipoprotein (a) and C-reactive protein. They are usually not done routinely especially if the standard lipids are within a reasonable range.

Hi all,

I'm 25/F, 5'4", 120 lbs. I have a family history of heart disease, my dad died suddenly of a massive MI at 46.

I just had my cholesterol checked and the results were:
Total: 203
HDL: 64
LDL: 123
LDL/HDL ratio: 3-2

My doctor says this is "good." But I have some concerns. I realize that HDL over 60 is beneficial, but LDL should be kept under 100 if there are risk factors for heart disease. Also, I think the total number of 203 is higher than it should be. Also of note, I had my cholesterol taken a few years ago (when I was about 20) and the results were identical.

So what do you guys think? Is this really good? I'm skeptical. Thanks for your help.

Habitue,

Your numbers seem very good (I'd trade them for mine in a NY second). I would not be worrried if I were you. Your LDL/HDL ratio is quite good - and that is more important than the other measures.

I would consider cutting out trans fats (anything with the word 'hydrogenated' in it's ingredients), take some Omega-3 Fish Oil supplements, and use Olive Oil in place of Corn oil.

If you want to boost your HDL (the GOOD cholesterol), try Niacin (I take Inositol Hexanicotinate - a slow release version with less 'flushing'). It used to be standard treatment for cholesterol problems before statins.

If after several months of lifestyle changes you and your doctor are not happy with your numbers, you can always go on a low-dose statin.


HubbleRules


:cool:

Bigdobe & Hubblerules,

Thanks so much for your help. My doctor is indeed aware of my family history, so I'd like to trust that he'd keep a keen eye on my cholesterol. However, I realize that doctors are human and can make oversights. I will bring up the specialized testing and keep my eye on trans fats, etc. I was also unaware that birth control can raise cholesterol, so that helps explain my results.

It was just such a shock when my seemingly healthy & fit father literally dropped dead on the living room floor 4 years ago. He was so full of life. Since then, a few of his brothers & sisters (he comes from a big family) have had heart attacks and other heart problems- none of them are over 55. I have enjoyed a blissfully healthy life- never had a major disease, a need for surgery, or even a broken bone. But I know the danger of heart disease is lurking.

Best wishes to you all,
habitue

Hi Uff-Da,

Thanks so much for your reply. As far as diet goes, I'm probably more healthy than most. I'm lactose intolerant so that cuts out all dairy, and I eat lean meats. My diet consists mostly of fruits (dried & fresh), veggies, nuts, whole-grain products, lean meats, and soy products. I don't drink soda and rarely eat anything fried.

As for exercise, I have a gym membership, but haven't gone much lately. I go for walks but rarely do anything more strenuous. Exercise hasn't always been a top priority because I am thin.

When it comes to supplements, I take a daily multi-vitamin. Other than that I am on birth control pills, claratin 10 mg/day, and Effexor 150 mg/day.

It all sounds good. In your whole grain intake please avoid any wheat products though. You might consider adding B and D vits, L-Argeline (read up about LDL lowering supplements) Good luck. I'm in the same boat.

It all sounds good. In your whole grain intake please avoid any wheat products though. If she is not allergic to wheat, why should she avoid wheat products?

Brenlee said: It all sounds good. In your whole grain intake please avoid any wheat products though. You might consider adding B and D vits, L-Argeline (read up about LDL lowering supplements) Good luck. I'm in the same boat.


Were you referring to L-Arginine in your post? There have been some recent reports that this supplement should not be taken by persons who have suffered a heart attack. Apparently, a NIH-sponsored study was cut short after six of the 78 persons taking it died in a six-month period while none died in the control group. There is a theory it should not be taken by people whole arteries are already stiffening. It didn't say anything about the risk in younger people who do not have heart disease although there was a cautionary note for these people as well.

"We noted a possible increased risk of death in older patients after [heart attack] while taking L-arginine compared with those taking a placebo (fake pill), leading to the early termination of the study," Schulman and colleagues write. "These findings have broad public health implications given the increasing availability and use of L-arginine in patients with and without established [heart] diseases."

Jane

Why would anyone want to give up all wheat products unless one has a confirmed allergy?

Thanks Jane for the heads up on arginine. It seems a million websites are selling the stuff (that we get in our protein foods in abundance every day) to cure everything from cancer to hangnails...and to live forever with big bulging muscles!

By and large, most everything I have heard about L-arginine has been positive. It increases nitric oxide blood levels, thereby relaxing arteries and permitting better blood flow. In Japan and Greece, cardiology teams are infusing the nutrient directly into the coronary blood vessels of angina patients and dramatically reopening their circulation. Israeli heart doctors are improving the performance of the hearts of patients with congestive heart failure by administering 20 grams of arginine by vein over one hour's time.

I have only heard about a few precautions involving arginine. Arginine itself can promote free radical oxidation, and therefore it is advised that people should also take a broad spectrum of antioxidants. Also, if you have arthritis or an active infection, the excess nitric oxide can aggravate these conditions by triggering inflammation.

I don't know the answer, Arizona. I, too, had read good things about it and have a few bottles around the house. The study seemed reputable and the researcher quoted was from Johns Hopkins. As I said, the study was conducted on people who had suffered a heart attack and not on people with no heart problems. I think the theory was the arteries in the heart attack patients had stiffened to the point that the supplement's relaxing action was more of a shock than a benefit. My problem is I don't know if my husband's or my arteries are beginning to harden so I don't want to risk it.

Just a quick note on my husband. He is getting so much better. He has been off Lipitor for eight months and is only experiencing slight pain at this point. He has worked out on the treadmill for the past week and for the first time he does not have pain in his hip or leg. Unfortunately, his cholesterol is at 274. Ah, well, back to the drawing board.

Jane

I'm sorry, I was typing quickly and meant L-arginine. There have been extensive and compelling studies in regression of arterial plaque as well as widening and relaxing of the arteries. L-arginine has been shown to shrink plaque in patients with varying degrees; from mild to heavy burdens. As for patients whom have already had a first heart attack, that might be a different scenario. (I don't know...) The criteria here is based on several case studies specific to arterial plaque and CAD.

Now where I was coming from re: wheat products....

Whole wheat bread is not the health food people think it is. The glycemic index (blood sugar raising effect) of whole wheat bread is no better than white bread and nearly identical to that of white table sugar. Whole wheat therefore raises triglycerides, increases small LDL, and lowers HDL through its high glycemic effect. Whole wheat also contributes to a pre-diabetic tendency. This applies to whole wheat bagels, wheat cereals, wheat crackers, pita bread, and the like.

If you must eat bread, look for brands made with oats, flaxseed, sunflower or pumpkin seeds, or nuts listed as high as possible among the ingredients. While virtually all of these products still list whole wheat as the first product, the other fibers help blunt the sugar effects. Also avoid brands made with high-fructose corn syrup.

Same with Wheat Bran cereals....

Cereals like Raisin Bran, Grapenuts, and Shredded Wheat are, for heart disease purposes, worthless at best. For the same reasons that whole wheat bread provokes an undesirable cascade of effects in your body, so do these “healthy” cereals for similar reasons. The insoluble wheat fibers in these products are good for bowel health, but little else. They raise blood sugar substantially, rather than blunt the response like oat fibers and other healthy viscous, or soluble, fibers.

The list of lower glycemic index cereals is very short. The muesli types of cereals, those containing more oats without added sugars, or soy protein tend to be better choices. Some soy protein cereals are entering the market that have exceptionally low processed carbohydrates and are high in protein. The Trader Joe’s market chain carries one such brand called More & Less.

I jumped in, possibly without going into proper detail in response to all the right steps habitue is indeed taking to address her heart health.

Habuite, the diet does sound good. Stay with foods rich in flavonoids. Avoid processed foods, and the "white foods"... bread, potatoes, rice, pasta, etc.-

When I saw "whole grain products" I wanted to mention whole wheat. We've been led down that primrose path that whole wheat is good for us... And seems to me information is ever changing.. (just when I switched to real butter ;) )

Hope this answers your question Lenin. All of this "good food/ bad food stuff" is a real mind-bender.

Good luck Habuite. I'm in the process of trying to lower my LDL to below 70 from 108. My other numbers look fine.. though due to some risk factors and arterial plaque, this is my doctor's rec.

Brenlee, why do you say whole wheat is "bad"? I am diabetic and my dietician said whole wheat was good for me. I see on "mypyramid" that it lists whole wheat as a grain food ok to eat. Please explain.

p.s only ppl that are allergic to wheat should avoid it.

Now where I was coming from re: wheat products....

Whole wheat bread is not the health food people think it is. The glycemic index (blood sugar raising effect) of whole wheat bread is no better than white bread and nearly identical to that of white table sugar. Whole wheat therefore raises triglycerides, increases small LDL, and lowers HDL through its high glycemic effect. Whole wheat also contributes to a pre-diabetic tendency. This applies to whole wheat bagels, wheat cereals, wheat crackers, pita bread, and the like.

If you must eat bread, look for brands made with oats, flaxseed, sunflower or pumpkin seeds, or nuts listed as high as possible among the ingredients. While virtually all of these products still list whole wheat as the first product, the other fibers help blunt the sugar effects. Also avoid brands made with high-fructose corn syrup.In looking at the revised 2002 Glycemic Index on the mendosa website, I really don't see that whole wheat is the villain you make it out to be nor other grains that much better. It appears to me that there is so much variation within each (or at least within most) grain types that it is hard to draw a conclusion. It appears that anything with larger amounts of whole kernels looks good compared to the same grain - or a different grain - finely milled. Then it also depends upon what it is eaten with. Even white bread has a low glycemic index and load when combined with the right things. And in addition, the glycemic load is really a better indication of the real affect on the body of eating specific foods.

Well I found this and was quite shocked about the whole wheat bread also. I have been told for years it was better then white, now I really wonder. It does say pita is low, 57, which is on the low scale. Looks like Stone ground whole wheat is low. Sheesh, will they ever make up their minds?
**************************************** ***********
High GI foods have a glycemic index of more than 70. Low GI foods have a glycemic index of less than 55. Medium GI foods are in between:

Glycemic Index of Breads
inc. Muffins & Cakes
Bagel 72
Blueberry Muffin 59
Croissant 67
Donut 76
Pita Bread 57
Pumpernickel Bread 51
Rye Bread 76
Sour Dough Bread 52
Sponge Cake 46
Stone Ground Whole wheat bread 53
Waffles 76
White Bread 70
Whole Wheat Bread 69

But then there are other listings like this:

(Note: the first number is glycemic index, GI of 55 is low, the second number is glycemic load and GL of 10 is low.)

Wheat Breads
Coarse wheat kernel bread, 80% intact kernels and 20% white wheat flour (Sweden) 52 10

Cracked wheat kernel (bulgur) bread
50% cracked wheat kernel (Canada) 58 12
75% cracked wheat kernels (Canada) 48 10
mean of two studies 53±3 11

White bread with soluble fiber
White bread + 15 g psyllium fiber (Plantago psyllium) (Mexico) 41 7
White bread + 15 g psyllium fiber (Plantago psyllium) (Mexico) 65 11
mean in two groups of subjects 53 9

White bread eaten with vinegar as vinaigrette (Sweden) 45 7

Wholemeal (whole wheat) wheat flour bread
Wholemeal flour (Canada) 52 6
Wholemeal flour (Canada) 64 8
Wholemeal flour (Canada) 65 8
Wholemeal flour (Canada) 67 8
Wholemeal flour (Canada) 67 8
Wholemeal flour (Canada) 69 8
Wholemeal flour (Canada) 71 8
Wholemeal flour (Canada) 72 8
Wholemeal flour (USA) 5 73 10
Wholemeal flour (South Africa) 75 9
Wholemeal flour (Tip Top Bakeries, Australia) 77 9
Wholemeal flour (Tip Top Bakeries, Australia) 78 9
Wholemeal flour (Kenya) 87 11
mean of thirteen studies 71 9
Wholemeal Turkish bread 49 8

There are over 100 listings of bread on that list on the medosa website, so I'd suggest you consult the original chart for details of the various types of breads if you want more details on the specialty breads, most of which also seem to have a wide variation.

I've just reached the conclusion that the range within each type is too wide to draw very definite conclusions. Besides, even white bread has a listing of glycemic load of 10 or under for most listings.

Well the Mendosa site explains things in alot better detail then the site I saw. Just giving the listing of the GI index doesn't tell the whole story.

Thanx for the info., it makes much better sense. With hubby being diabetic, we have always followed what the drs. have suggested for foods, so it was a bit distrubing to see the site with such foods we eat having a high GI Index.

Oh well, life and learn..... :wave: