Cholesterol's Function?

Cholesterol info: http://www.thincs.org/

"jaym1212" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What are the main functions of cholesterol? Is is to repair cell walls?
If so, which parts of the body have a high rate of repair? Is it the
gut wall and brain?

Even though I am thin (5'10 120 lb), my cholesterol level is high and
rising.

2005 2003
----- ---- ---- ---- ----
Chol 291 278 252 447
HDL 93 71 81 92
LDL 187 197 161 350
TG 56 51 51 79
Ch/H 3.13 3.92 3.11 5.66
FBG 88 86 86 75
1AC 5.6 5.5 5.4 6.2
CRP <0.2

I exercise about 15 minutes, 4 times a week and below is my typical
meal which I eat 4 times a day.

Various vegetables (steamed and raw).
3 hard boiled eggs (whites only, sometimes salmon, sardines)
1 TBS of olive oil or coconut oil.
A few nuts such as almonds, pecans, etc.
Fruits occassionally (mostly apples and berries).

I have reactions to grain-fed meats of any kind, milk products, legumes
(esp soy), grains (esp wheat), citrus and oddly canteloupe.

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cholesterol info: http://www.thincs.org/

"jaym1212" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What are the main functions of cholesterol? Is is to repair cell walls?

An association was established between cholesterol and various forms of
lipids and heart disease. Whether cholesterol or any form of cholesterol,
oxidized included, is involved directly within a pathogenic model is
unimportant. What is more important is if drugs or modification of lipids
reduces the risk by what ever mechanism whether or not it is related to
cholesterol.
In short is if it works then who cares why it works.
Theories as to why things happen or don't are not as important as practical
solid evidence that they do work or don't work.
It is called empirical evidence.
The reason why I say that is because you get arguements by those people who
like to say cholesterol is good for you and that it has not been proven that
it is the culprit in causeing disease but is only a reaction to disease etc.
Then it is only a marker for disease and not involved in the pathogenesis is
still being worked out. The exact pathophysiology is still not worked out
completely. With each new established small part then comes interventional
remedies and they look at outcomes.

Here is part of their arguement.
?Members of this group represent different views about the causation of
atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease".

That is horse [censored]. First associations are made then the pathophysiology is
worked out.
Associations have been made with several lipids and have been determined to
be independent risk factors involving heart disease.

Cholesterol is, inter alia, the precursor of most of your body's hormones.
Cut it excessively and you will probably have severe endocrine dysfunction.
Your body's ability to deal effectively with excess fat would seem to be
genetically determined, according to latest ressearch. Let us hope they
are wrong.
A balanced diet and plenty of exercise will work wonders.
Watching a biased view of your intake will not.

jaym1212 said:

What are the main functions of cholesterol? Is is to repair cell walls?
If so, which parts of the body have a high rate of repair? Is it the
gut wall and brain?

Even though I am thin (5'10 120 lb), my cholesterol level is high and
rising.

2005 2003
----- ---- ---- ---- ----
Chol 291 278 252 447
HDL 93 71 81 92
LDL 187 197 161 350
TG 56 51 51 79
Ch/H 3.13 3.92 3.11 5.66
FBG 88 86 86 75
1AC 5.6 5.5 5.4 6.2
CRP <0.2

I exercise about 15 minutes, 4 times a week and below is my typical
meal which I eat 4 times a day.

Various vegetables (steamed and raw).
3 hard boiled eggs (whites only, sometimes salmon, sardines)
1 TBS of olive oil or coconut oil.
A few nuts such as almonds, pecans, etc.
Fruits occassionally (mostly apples and berries).

I have reactions to grain-fed meats of any kind, milk products, legumes
(esp soy), grains (esp wheat), citrus and oddly canteloupe.

Philomon is correct in his first statement. Biochemist Ray Peat
suggests that you should check your thyroid function. You can do a
google search for ray peat thyroid and several useful web pages will be
displayed. As far as taking drugs: they often mask the underlying,
root cause, which should be corrected. Also, you can destroy your
liver or other parts of your body by taking drugs. I've had several
major health problems since 2000. One doctor wanted me to go on Vioxx,
and I'm very glad I didn't listen to any of them, but instead, I did my
own research and was able to stay out of the biomedical establishment
meat grinder. Good luck to you.

However, the studies that seemed to associate cholesterol and CVD were done
in the context of modern high carbohydrate levels. This creates an
ambiguity. It is only modern bias that accepts the carb levels in the
Framingham study as normal.

Take away the high carbs and you have a new ballgame.

If I'm wrong, in terms of absolute risk, the added risk is relatively small.

"Robert" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cholesterol info: http://www.thincs.org/

"jaym1212" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What are the main functions of cholesterol? Is is to repair cell

walls?

Quoted message said:

An association was established between cholesterol and various forms of
lipids and heart disease. Whether cholesterol or any form of cholesterol,
oxidized included, is involved directly within a pathogenic model is
unimportant. What is more important is if drugs or modification of lipids
reduces the risk by what ever mechanism whether or not it is related to
cholesterol.
In short is if it works then who cares why it works.
Theories as to why things happen or don't are not as important as

practical

Quoted message said:

solid evidence that they do work or don't work.
It is called empirical evidence.
The reason why I say that is because you get arguements by those people

who

Quoted message said:

like to say cholesterol is good for you and that it has not been proven

that

Quoted message said:

it is the culprit in causeing disease but is only a reaction to disease

etc.

Quoted message said:

Then it is only a marker for disease and not involved in the pathogenesis

is

Quoted message said:

still being worked out. The exact pathophysiology is still not worked out
completely. With each new established small part then comes interventional
remedies and they look at outcomes.

Here is part of their arguement.
?Members of this group represent different views about the causation of
atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease".

That is horse [censored]. First associations are made then the pathophysiology

is

Quoted message said:

worked out.
Associations have been made with several lipids and have been determined

to

Quoted message said:

be independent risk factors involving heart disease.

Quoted message said:

An association was established between cholesterol and various forms of
lipids and heart disease.

I guess "various forms of lipids" is the important part here.

TC is not very predictive.

You you want to base your claims on facts, try first to feed data of
this person (LDL 187, HDL 91, TG 51) to some of risk calculators that
are based on models using actual data. To my knowledge, this profile is
far from atherogenic.

Mirek

If you are interested, I'll try to determine what's going on in your
body, in terms of what the evidence suggests. I need to know family
history, and of course your medical/physical/dietary history. It will
take you a while, but I'd be willing to spend some time on it. How
much you eat of each food is essential to know, but otherwise, provide
as much info. as possible, and I'll ask for me if I think it would be
helpful. Let's try to sort this out before you take drugs.

If you are interested, I'll try to determine what's going on in your
body, in terms of what the evidence suggests. I need to know family
history, and of course your medical/physical/dietary history. It will
take you a while, but I'd be willing to spend some time on it. How
much you eat of each food is essential to know, but otherwise, provide
as much info. as possible, and I'll ask for me if I think it would be
helpful. Let's try to sort this out before you take drugs.

"Mirek Fidler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

An association was established between cholesterol and various forms of
lipids and heart disease.

I guess "various forms of lipids" is the important part here.

TC is not very predictive.

You you want to base your claims on facts, try first to feed data of
this person (LDL 187, HDL 91, TG 51) to some of risk calculators that
are based on models using actual data. To my knowledge, this profile is
far from atherogenic.

Mirek

There is no mention of other risk factors to make an LDL goal. A 187 is far
from good. Mine is 70 on statins with goals of under 100 common. With family
history, diabetes or if he had a recent MI then it is not good.
They ususally don't put people on statins with one risk factor, family,
hypertension etc.
There is no mention of age as with increasing age it gets more fuzzy on
benefits overall as predictors of CAD.
Sub fractions of LDL and other lipids were not done so again it is premature
to make declarations.
There is differences on male vs female also so many factors involved before
one can make an assessment and say that "profile is far from atherogenic".

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You you want to base your claims on facts, try first to feed data of
this person (LDL 187, HDL 91, TG 51) to some of risk calculators that
are based on models using actual data. To my knowledge, this profile is
far from atherogenic.

Mirek

There is no mention of other risk factors to make an LDL goal. A 187 is far
from good.

HDL 91 and TG 51 is far from bad. Balance is what is really predictive.

If he is 50 years old, non-smoker, no DM, BP < 120, his profile
indicates same risk (2%) as e.g. one with HDL 50, LDL 120, TG 120 (which
would be considered absolutely OK without further risk factors).

Quoted message said:

With family
history, diabetes or if he had a recent MI then it is not good.

That is true.

Quoted message said:

There is no mention of age as with increasing age it gets more fuzzy on
benefits overall as predictors of CAD.

Hm, I guess opposite is true also. I think best benefit is somewhere
between 40-60 years. Before 40, CAD event is too unlikely, after 60 it
is too fuzzy as you have said.

Quoted message said:

There is differences on male vs female also so many factors involved before
one can make an assessment and say that "profile is far from atherogenic".

This specific profile is low-risk (that is, less than 10% for 10 years
prediction) both for male and female for all ages.

Of course, little we know about other risk factors (but based on low TG
DM or MetS diagnosis is unlikely). Anyway given this profile alone,
risk is definitely low (<10% is considered low AFAIK).

Mirek

Quoted message said:

Let's try to sort this out before you take drugs.

Thanks. My doctor and friends are recommending statins which I would
like to avoid. Neither mom or dad has had a cardiac event, however both
are prediabetic (ie FBG 110). Mom had high BP but now 120/80. Dad had
sugar in urine but not anymore. Both lowered their carb (rice and
wheat) intake.

I am 40 yr old. No CVD. BP is 110/70. The last blood profile included
C-Reactive Protein test which was < 0.2 . About 2 years, I switched
from the typical American diet (minus junk foods / soft drinks) to less
carbs and more veges and fruits. For about the last 6 months, a typical
day had 4 meals. In general, each meal contained the following (which
would blended to approx 0.75 liter):

Protein: 3 or 4 boiled egg whites (yolk once or twice a week).
Fats: 1 to 1.5 tbs of extra virgin coconut
or olive oil (sometimes 1/2 an avocado).
Lite carbs: Lettuce, celery.
Med carbs: 2 cups of brocolli, califlower, cabbage, okra, zuchinni
or similar. (sometimes spinach, kale, collards).
1/4 of small tomato, 1/4 of chili.
Dense carbs: 1/16 sweet potato, 1/4 carrots, 1/8 onion,
1 clove garlic, small slice of turmeric and ginger.
Fruits: about a dozen frozen berries.
Supplements: Multi-vitamin capsule, 1/4 tbs flaxseeds.

I have been snacking 2 or 3 times a day. I usually have tea and a fruit
(usually apples, sometimes bananas). Sometimes a dozen almonds or
pecans. Sometimes a cup.

I believe my gut is compromised as the following foods cause me
inflammation: All dairy, all grain-fed meats, many grains and legumes
and citrus. I used to eat these almost every single day prior to two
years ago. I believe my liver is probably weak. If I consume just a 1/4
cup of wine, I get dark circle under eyes the next morning. Would a
damaged liver or gut lining raise my cholesterol?

jaym1212 said:

What are the main functions of cholesterol? Is is to repair cell

walls?

Quoted message said:

If so, which parts of the body have a high rate of repair? Is it the
gut wall and brain?

The basic thing cholesterol does is to stablize fat globules so they
can sit in suspension in an aquaeous solution. So the cholesterol in
chlyomicrons, VLDL, LDL is there so the body can move fat around via
the blood. Similarly it stablizes the fatty membranes around cells.

The body also uses it as a building block to make other things. Others
have commented on the role that cholesterol plays as the starting point
for the steroid hormones. I'll mention that cholesterol is converted
into bile acids which are used to transport fat from the GI tract over
to the blood. For a blow-by-blow description of this, check out the
slide show at Baylor College of Medicine:
http://www.lipidsonline.org/slides/slide01.cfm?tk=31

This slide show will show you how and why sterols, stanols, fibre, bile
acid resins etc lower LDL and raise HDL.

Adam Becker

If you think there is something wrong with your liver, ask your doctor
about running some tests. I'm a thin 40 year old male also, and I had
a horrible malabsorption problem. I cured that with stomach acid (HCl)
and pepsin pills (by Country Life). I think I had horrible yeast
overgrowth (I had bad mouth thrush too). So I'd look into that if I
were you. If you feel burning, you can just drink water until it goes
away. 8 ounces should be good to neutralize one pill.

I'd go easy on the dark, leafy vegetables, as they have potent
inhibitors in them. A little is okay. I'd dump the flax seeds
entirely. You don't seem to be eating much in the way of omega 6s, so
the omega 3s are useless to you, and will only create oxidative stress,
though if you don't grind them, they won't do anything. A can of
sardines in oil once is well is probably okay, but not much more than
that. Eat the egg yolks too. The egg whites contribute to serotogenic
conditions.

Now, let's be clear: do you have only gut symptoms? And you blood
numbers look like they are mixed up. The HDL is too high, so you might
have mixed them up with the TGs. And what year is what? Or, just post
what your numbers are from your last test - that should be good enough,
actually. My cholesterol was 209 last time, with 63 HDL and 123 LDL.
On a vegan diet for many years, it was 131, 40, and about 90. Big
difference, but who cares? Cholesterol lower than 200 is bad news, and
I'm glad I know that now, but yours is over 200, so why worry? If you
cholesterol is way over 220, you may be hypothyroid to some degree.
I'd also cut back on the exercise. What's the point? Exercise is
stressful, so as long as you are active throughout the day, don't put
any extra burden on your body. If you do, eat a few raisins before and
during, or right afterwards. That will take care of oxidative stress
that exercise creates. Also, exercise requires more protein, and your
diet may be low in it.

Rancid nuts can cause lots of problems, and if you eat too many, even
fresh nuts can put a large burden on your gut.
Potatoes are good, being a high quality protein source. Boil them and
put butter and herbs/spices you can tolerate on them. I like to put
tamari sauce on them too.

So...

you need to check some things out, avoid some things, add some things,
and see if the HCl/pepsin pills help. Usually, give it a month, and
your body should tell you if you going in the right direction.

jaym1212 wrote:
::: Let's try to sort this out before you take drugs.
::
:: Thanks. My doctor and friends are recommending statins which I would
:: like to avoid. [...]

How about trying krill oil? In one study it has been found to have an
impressive effect to blood lipids even in very doses.

Bunea R, El Farrah K, Deutsch L. Evaluation of the effects of Neptune
Krill Oil on the clinical course of hyperlipidemia. Altern Med Rev. 2004
Dec;9(4):420-8.

Department of Internal Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec,
Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of krill oil on blood lipids,
specifically total cholesterol, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein
(LDL), and high-density lipoprotein (HDL). METHODS: A multi-center,
three-month, prospective, randomized study followed by a three-month,
controlled follow-up of patients treated with 1 g and 1.5 g krill oil
daily. Patients with hyperlipidemia able to maintain a healthy diet and
with blood cholesterol levels between 194 and 348 mg per dL were
eligible for enrollment in the trial. A sample size of 120 patients (30
patients per group) was randomly assigned to one of four groups. Group A
received krill oil at a body mass index (BMI)-dependent daily dosage of
2-3 g daily. Patients in Group B were given 1-1.5 g krill oil daily, and
Group C was given fish oil containing 180 mg eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)
and 120 mg docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) per gram of oil at a dose of 3 g
daily. Group D was given a placebo containing microcrystalline
cellulose. The krill oil used in this study was Neptune Krill Oil,
provided by Neptune Technologies and Bioresources, Laval, Quebec,
Canada. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary parameters tested (baseline and 90-day
visit) were total blood cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL, HDL, and
glucose. RESULTS: Krill oil 1-3 g per day (BMI-dependent) was found to
be effective for the reduction of glucose, total cholesterol,
triglycerides, LDL, and HDL, compared to both fish oil and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study demonstrate within high
levels of confidence that krill oil is effective for the management of
hyperlipidemia by significantly reducing total cholesterol, LDL, and
triglycerides, and increasing HDL levels. At lower and equal doses,
krill oil was significantly more effective than fish oil for the
reduction of glucose, triglycerides, and LDL levels. PMID: 15656713

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/en­trez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&d­b=pubmed&...

I recommend reading the full study:

http://www.thorne.com/altmedre­v/.fulltext/9/4/420.pdf

Couple of sites about krills:

http://www.awi-bremerhaven.de/Eistour/krill-e.html

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/invertebrates/crustacean/Krillprintout.shtml

--
Juhana

Juhana Harju wrote:
:: jaym1212 wrote:
::::: Let's try to sort this out before you take drugs.
::::
:::: Thanks. My doctor and friends are recommending statins which I
:::: would like to avoid. [...]
::
:: How about trying krill oil? In one study it has been found to have an
:: impressive effect to blood lipids even in very doses.
::
:: Bunea R, El Farrah K, Deutsch L. Evaluation of the effects of Neptune
:: Krill Oil on the clinical course of hyperlipidemia. Altern Med Rev.
:: 2004 Dec;9(4):420-8.
:: [...]
:: RESULTS: Krill oil 1-3 g per day (BMI-dependent) was found
:: to be effective for the reduction of glucose, total cholesterol,
:: triglycerides, LDL, and HDL, compared to both fish oil and placebo.
:: CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study demonstrate within
:: high levels of confidence that krill oil is effective for the
:: management of hyperlipidemia by significantly reducing total
:: cholesterol, LDL, and triglycerides, and increasing HDL levels. At
:: lower and equal doses, krill oil was significantly more effective
:: than fish oil for the reduction of glucose, triglycerides, and LDL
:: levels. PMID: 15656713

These should be functioning URLs:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15656713

Here is the full study:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FDN/is_4_9/ai_n9485702

"Krill oil at a daily dose of 1 g, 1.5 g, 2 g, or 3 g achieved
significant reductions of LDL of 32, 36, 37, and 39 percent,
respectively (p=0.000)."

--
Juhana

Juhana Harju wrote:
:: Juhana Harju wrote:
:::: jaym1212 wrote:
::::::: Let's try to sort this out before you take drugs.
::::::
:::::: Thanks. My doctor and friends are recommending statins which I
:::::: would like to avoid. [...]
::::
:::: How about trying krill oil? In one study it has been found to have
:::: an impressive effect to blood lipids even in very doses.
::::
:::: Bunea R, El Farrah K, Deutsch L. Evaluation of the effects of
:::: Neptune Krill Oil on the clinical course of hyperlipidemia. Altern
:::: Med Rev. 2004 Dec;9(4):420-8.
:::: [...]
:::: RESULTS: Krill oil 1-3 g per day (BMI-dependent) was found
:::: to be effective for the reduction of glucose, total cholesterol,
:::: triglycerides, LDL, and HDL, compared to both fish oil and placebo.
:::: CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study demonstrate within
:::: high levels of confidence that krill oil is effective for the
:::: management of hyperlipidemia by significantly reducing total
:::: cholesterol, LDL, and triglycerides, and increasing HDL levels. At
:::: lower and equal doses, krill oil was significantly more effective
:::: than fish oil for the reduction of glucose, triglycerides, and LDL
:::: levels. PMID: 15656713
::
:: These should be functioning URLs:
::
::
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15656713
::
:: Here is the full study:
::
:: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FDN/is_4_9/ai_n9485702
::
:: "Krill oil at a daily dose of 1 g, 1.5 g, 2 g, or 3 g achieved
:: significant reductions of LDL of 32, 36, 37, and 39 percent,
:: respectively (p=0.000)."

And couple of commercial sites about krill oil (I am not involved in any
supplement business).

http://www.krillbiz.com/krill_oil_omega-3.htm

http://www.discount-vitamins-herbs.net/neptune-krill-oil.htm

--
Juhana

Quoted message said:

stomach acid (HCl) and pepsin pills (by Country Life) ..
go easy on the dark, leafy vegetables ..
dump the flax seeds ..
can of sardines in oil once [a week] ..
cut back on the exercise ..
few raisins before and during, or right afterwards exercise ..
Potatoes .. Boil .. butter and herbs/spices ..
Eat the egg yolks too.

I can give all the above a try but am leary about the egg yolks.
Supposedly regular eggs have 650mg n6 / 37mg n3 which is roughly 18:1.
The Eggland's Omega eggs available here are 700mg/100mg which is 7:1
and still seems to be far from 1:1. Also a regular yolk has 345mg
arachidonic acid.

Quoted message said:

And you blood numbers look like they are mixed up.

I am copying the numbers from 4 separate lab reports (from same clinic)
so I think they are OK. I have rearranged them from old (left column)
to latest (right column). The initial 447 cholesterol reading was after
a 2 day fast instead of the normal 12 hour fast.

12/03 6/04 11/04 3/05
----- ---- ---- ---- ----
Chol 447 252 278 291
HDL 92 81 71 93
LDL 350 161 197 187
TG 79 51 51 56
Ch/H 5.66 3.11 3.92 3.13
FBG 75 86 86 88
A1C 6.2 5.4 5.5 5.6
hsCRP na na na <0.2

Prior to 12/03, I was eating lots of fruits and that is probably why
A1C was 6.2. Prior to 6/04, I was eating almost all vegetables and
quite a bit of it raw which gave the lowest cholesterol level. Prior to
11/04, I was eating more protein (5 egg whites per meal), very low carb
veges and almost no fruits. I was surprised that the cholesterol and
A1C went up anyway. Prior to 3/05, I lowered protein (4 egg whites per
meal), increased veges and added back some fruits. It seem fruits raise
TG and A1C.

Quoted message said:

Also, exercise requires more protein, and your diet may be low in it.

4 meals x 4 eggs white x 3.3g/egg white = 53g or approx 0.5g per lb.
Is it too low?

Quoted message said:

Rancid nuts can cause lots of problems, and if you eat too many, even
fresh nuts can put a large burden on your gut.

This could have been part of the problem. I am noticing that about 6
months after reducing almonds, skin inflammation at joints has started
to subside.

Quoted message said:

Now, let's be clear: do you have only gut symptoms?

In general, I don't have other health problems but many foods (except
for veges and fruit) cause some type of symptoms. For example, milk,
wheat, soy and meats cause inflamation of skin around my knuckles. In
addition, milk products seems to increase constipation and meats seems
to cause hemorrhoids.

You are eating a rather strange diet, especially in that you eat only
the egg whites. Peoples of the past didn't do this sort of thing.
They ate the whole animal or egg. Ray Peat has talked about the
unhealthy aspects of eating only parts of animal products, especially
the serotongenic effects. If you are a bit hypothyroid, that could be
the reason for the high cholesterol, but you've got a incredibly high
HDL. Did your doctor say anything about that? I'd be curious to hear
what a doctor would say about it. I lost 30 pounds within a couple of
months and had other major problems. It really doesn't sound like
you've got major problems, so make those changes and tell us what's
going on in a month.

Forgot to mention: I take calcium citrate and magnesium, as well as
selenium, vitamin D and a B complex. You could have some deficiencies.
Use some nutritional yeast. I take about half a teaspoon or so with
each meal. Also, try Metagenics whey powder, which is the best
quality, organic, non-pasteurized, etc. I forgot what they call it,
exactly, but a local health food store sells it right off the shelf.
See if that bothers you. Carrageenan is a big problem in processed
dairy products.