Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack.
Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me.
By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography?
Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack.
Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me.
By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography?
Yes. It is an imperfect test that is known to miss lipid-rich atherosclerotic plaques which may contain very little calcium deposits and yet be just as prone (if not more prone) to rupture thereby causing a heart attack.
The wife with TC of 300 mg/dl is not free of atherosclerosis on the basis of a "negative" EBCT.
Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack.
Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me.
Quoted message said:
By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography?
Mel
I had one back in 1995 when it was first being used. Now, clinics where you can have this done are poping up faster than Starbucks. They even do full-body scans.
It does have its limitations, being a static test (as opposed to, say, a stress-echo) and I question their usefulness.
Two more factors besides chol, CRP and Hba1c do a better job than TC in prediction CHD. As you know, the TC/ HDL ratio does a better job than TC also. The electron-beam tomography isn't recommended because it may prompt unneccessary procedures. Also, the jury may be still out about how valid it is. I just read in the Framington study a chol below 160 predicts a very low risk of CHD - you should be fine if you don't worry too much!
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack.
Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me.
By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography?
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Mel,
Two more factors besides chol, CRP and Hba1c do a better job than TC in prediction CHD. As you know, the TC/ HDL ratio does a better job than TC also. The electron-beam tomography isn't recommended because it may prompt unneccessary procedures. Also, the jury may be still out about how valid it is. I just read in the Framington study a chol below 160 predicts a very low risk of CHD - you should be fine if you don't worry too much!
Look who's talking. Your the guy with a great HDL of 68 and worrying what to take to replace your Lipitor. :-)
Brad, I already have CHD. I had a bypass in 1998 and that means I am considered to have CHD. What I need is a study to show a TC lower than 160 predicts my narrow grafts will last 50 years. 🙂
Mel
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack.
Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me.
By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography?
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Brad, why should I worry about the risk when I already have it? The bypass in 1998 makes me a statistical CHD person. The only thing I have to do now is keep my narrow grafts clean as long as possible.
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Mel,
Two more factors besides chol, CRP and Hba1c do a better job than TC in prediction CHD. As you know, the TC/ HDL ratio does a better job than TC also. The electron-beam tomography isn't recommended because it may prompt unneccessary procedures. Also, the jury may be still out about how valid it is. I just read in the Framington study a chol below 160 predicts a very low risk of CHD - you should be fine if you don't worry too much!
Look who's talking. Your the guy with a great HDL of 68 and worrying what to take to replace your Lipitor. :-)
Brad, I already have CHD. I had a bypass in 1998 and that means I am considered to have CHD. What I need is a study to show a TC lower than 160 predicts my narrow grafts will last 50 years. 🙂
Mel
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local > newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with > his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in > coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had > significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was > free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be > possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol > responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had > this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack. > > Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 > and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me. > > By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography? > > Mel
The question is your odds of a coronary event. Mel, if I were in your shoes I'd try to increase my (low) HDL. How? 1) eat up to 40% fat by eating more nuts, oily fish, and olive oil. 2) exercise more (if your doc allows) 3 consider Niaspan and a drink a day. Here's an encouraging site about actually reversing blockages: http://www.niaspan.com/templates/hcp.asp?class=2&page=2 Disclaimer: I mean well but am not a doctor or expert.
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Brad, why should I worry about the risk when I already have it? The bypass in 1998 makes me a statistical CHD person. The only thing I have to do now is keep my narrow grafts clean as long as possible.
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > Mel, > > Two more factors besides chol, CRP and Hba1c do a better job than TC > in prediction CHD. As you know, the TC/ HDL ratio does a better job > than TC also. The electron-beam tomography isn't recommended because > it may prompt unneccessary procedures. Also, the jury may be still > out about how valid it is. I just read in the Framington study a chol > below 160 predicts a very low risk of CHD - you should be fine if you > don't worry too much!
Look who's talking. Your the guy with a great HDL of 68 and worrying what to take to replace your Lipitor. :-)
Brad, I already have CHD. I had a bypass in 1998 and that means I am considered to have CHD. What I need is a study to show a TC lower than 160 predicts my narrow grafts will last 50 years. 🙂
Mel
> > [email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local > > newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with > > his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in > > coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had > > significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was > > free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be > > possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol > > responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had > > this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack. > > > > Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 > > and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me. > > > > By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography? > > > > Mel
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Brad, I am eating nuts, oily fish, and olive oil. I have also increased the amount of exercise. I don't have angina. The bypass was done because of 1 severely clogged artery and they did 3 other moderately clogged arteries.
I don't take any medication except for 10 mg of Zocor.
Niaspan does not reverse heart disease. I have heart disease because I had a bypass - but my heart functions normally - according to the test that measures heart function. I don't have any problem walking up hills or otherwise.
Niaspan is not without possible serious side effects. My cardiologist is quite pleased with my lipid profile and not concerned about my HDL being 38. However, I am exercising more and expect the next blood test to reveal a higher HDL.
Mel
Quoted message said:
The question is your odds of a coronary event. Mel, if I were in your shoes I'd try to increase my (low) HDL. How? 1) eat up to 40% fat by eating more nuts, oily fish, and olive oil. 2) exercise more (if your doc allows) 3 consider Niaspan and a drink a day. Here's an encouraging site about actually reversing blockages: http://www.niaspan.com/templates/hcp.asp?class=2&page=2 Disclaimer: I mean well but am not a doctor or expert.
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Brad, why should I worry about the risk when I already have it? The bypass in 1998 makes me a statistical CHD person. The only thing I have to do now is keep my narrow grafts clean as long as possible.
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > [email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > Mel, > > > > Two more factors besides chol, CRP and Hba1c do a better job than TC > > in prediction CHD. As you know, the TC/ HDL ratio does a better job > > than TC also. The electron-beam tomography isn't recommended because > > it may prompt unneccessary procedures. Also, the jury may be still > > out about how valid it is. I just read in the Framington study a chol > > below 160 predicts a very low risk of CHD - you should be fine if you > > don't worry too much! > > Look who's talking. Your the guy with a great HDL of 68 and worrying > what to take to replace your Lipitor. :-) > > Brad, I already have CHD. I had a bypass in 1998 and that means I am > considered to have CHD. What I need is a study to show a TC lower than > 160 predicts my narrow grafts will last 50 years. 🙂 > > Mel > > > > > [email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > > Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local > > > newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with > > > his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in > > > coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had > > > significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was > > > free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be > > > possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol > > > responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had > > > this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack. > > > > > > Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 > > > and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me. > > > > > > By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography? > > > > > > Mel
Great job, Mel. You're beating 99% of your age group. Just think how much lower our health insurance could be if everyone took care of themselves like you. I'm at least a year away from "flat belly" - I'm trying.
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Mel, sounds like you're doing the right things. Hopefully your HDL will rise. I'm just guessing that higher HDL would help prevent reclogging, I haven't see any studies. I'm working on trying to lose my belly fat as you have - that's a real challenge for a 55 year old. Good luck to you.
Brad, I'm 61 and my belly looks like a lean 17 year old's belly. I not only do lots of walking but also workout with dumbells - trying to get that Schwarzenegger look. 🙂
In order to lose that belly fat in our age group, I believe you have to tear yourself down and rebuild.
Mel
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Brad, I am eating nuts, oily fish, and olive oil. I have also increased the amount of exercise. I don't have angina. The bypass was done because of 1 severely clogged artery and they did 3 other moderately clogged arteries.
I don't take any medication except for 10 mg of Zocor.
Niaspan does not reverse heart disease. I have heart disease because I had a bypass - but my heart functions normally - according to the test that measures heart function. I don't have any problem walking up hills or otherwise.
Niaspan is not without possible serious side effects. My cardiologist is quite pleased with my lipid profile and not concerned about my HDL being 38. However, I am exercising more and expect the next blood test to reveal a higher HDL.
Mel
> The question is your odds of a coronary event. Mel, if I were in your > shoes I'd try to increase my (low) HDL. How? 1) eat up to 40% fat by > eating more nuts, oily fish, and olive oil. 2) exercise more (if your > doc allows) 3 consider Niaspan and a drink a day. Here's an > encouraging site about actually reversing blockages: > http://www.niaspan.com/templates/hcp.asp?class=2&page=2 > Disclaimer: I mean well but am not a doctor or expert. > > [email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > [email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > > > Brad, why should I worry about the risk when I already have it? The > > bypass in 1998 makes me a statistical CHD person. The only thing I > > have to do now is keep my narrow grafts clean as long as possible. > > > > Mel, not worried, just being cautious. 🙂 > > > > > > > Mel, > > > > > > Here's a risk calculator from the NIH: > > > http://hin.nhlbi.nih.gov/atpiii/calculator.asp?usertype=pub My risk > > > came to 2% for CHD in the next ten years. http://hin.nhlbi.nih.gov > > > has a lot of good info. > > > > > > [email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > > > [email hidden] (Brad Sheppard) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > > > > Mel, > > > > > > > > > > Two more factors besides chol, CRP and Hba1c do a better job than TC > > > > > in prediction CHD. As you know, the TC/ HDL ratio does a better job > > > > > than TC also. The electron-beam tomography isn't recommended because > > > > > it may prompt unneccessary procedures. Also, the jury may be still > > > > > out about how valid it is. I just read in the Framington study a chol > > > > > below 160 predicts a very low risk of CHD - you should be fine if you > > > > > don't worry too much! > > > > > > > > Look who's talking. Your the guy with a great HDL of 68 and worrying > > > > what to take to replace your Lipitor. :-) > > > > > > > > Brad, I already have CHD. I had a bypass in 1998 and that means I am > > > > considered to have CHD. What I need is a study to show a TC lower than > > > > 160 predicts my narrow grafts will last 50 years. 🙂 > > > > > > > > Mel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [email hidden] (M. Schwartz) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > > > > > Dr. Paul G. Donohue writes a syndicated column that I read in a local > > > > > > newspaper. One of the questions today came from a guy who along with > > > > > > his wife had an electron-beam tomography to detect plaque buildup in > > > > > > coronary arteries. He was amazed that with a TC level of 184 he had > > > > > > significant buildup of plaque while his wife with a TC over 300 was > > > > > > free of plaque buildup. He asked Dr. Donohue how that could be > > > > > > possible. Dr. Donohue replied "there are forces other than cholesterol > > > > > > responsible for clogging arteries." He went on to suggest that had > > > > > > this guy's TC been higher he could have had a heart attack. > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, here I was feeling secure with a TC of 133 and LDL of just 81 > > > > > > and now I wonder what "other forces" are killing me. > > > > > > > > > > > > By the way, anyone know about this electron-beam tomography? > > > > > > > > > > > > Mel
