Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 160 posts

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#11

Post by LunaSea »

atomical wrote: post #9
boothead wrote: post #2

It's great to read things like this... I wish my GP would do the same. I recently had a really high cholesterol reading (both total cholesterol and LDL). Everything else (blood pressure, blood glucose etc) seems fine. I'm 38, fit and healthy and nothing that suspect in my family history. I found the attitude of my doctor in all this quite surprising. It amounted basically to "You definitely have familial hypercholest…

It comes down to diet. My LDL is 66 and my HDL is 75. I don't eat eggs, meat, or cheese. Basically, nothing that has cholesterol. My numbers will probably be even better this year. I have looked at /r/keto and /r/paleo. Their cholesterol numbers aren't good.

I've stopped eating all together and my stats are out of this world.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#12

Post by boothead »

atomical wrote: post #9
boothead wrote: post #2

It's great to read things like this... I wish my GP would do the same. I recently had a really high cholesterol reading (both total cholesterol and LDL). Everything else (blood pressure, blood glucose etc) seems fine. I'm 38, fit and healthy and nothing that suspect in my family history. I found the attitude of my doctor in all this quite surprising. It amounted basically to "You definitely have familial hypercholest…

It comes down to diet. My LDL is 66 and my HDL is 75. I don't eat eggs, meat, or cheese. Basically, nothing that has cholesterol. My numbers will probably be even better this year. I have looked at /r/keto and /r/paleo. Their cholesterol numbers aren't good.

The problem is now that I'm not even sure whether I should agree with what a "good" or "bad" number is for LDL or TC. The recommended number seems to fall every few years, and I'm unsure how much of that is based on good research or industry pressure or what.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#13

Post by carapat_virulat »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #4
Swizec wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> almost all of the high quality, science based writing I've read indicates that the mainstream healthcare system's view on cholesterol is wrong. My understanding is that a doctor's first job is to be risk averse. That's why they shy away from bleeding edge research and knowledge, and choose instead to rely on proven ways. Their job isn't so much to be right as it is to not be wrong . If that means keeping you subopt…

The problem is, there is no research stating that lowering dietary cholesterol leads to lowered blood levels and the reversal of fatty liver disease. There is research stating that fatty liver disease exists due to long term over-production of cholesterol in the liver, caused by low dietary cholesterol, and increasing dietary cholesterol can lead to the reversal of fatty liver disease; and such research isn't really…

But most anti-cholesterol diets lower animal fat intake, not dietary cholesterol intake. Is this supposed not to work?

I had high cholesterol for years, I didn't take it very seriously because I'm otherwise healthy and I was eating healthy, but when I decided to take care of it I got it from around 210mg/dL to something like 140mg/dL just by changing all my meat/cheese to low fat alternatives as my doctor said. I am a big eater though, so maybe it doesn't make as much a difference for people that don't eat so much.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#14

Post by kaeluka »

LunaSea wrote: post #11
atomical wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It comes down to diet. My LDL is 66 and my HDL is 75. I don't eat eggs, meat, or cheese. Basically, nothing that has cholesterol. My numbers will probably be even better this year. I have looked at /r/keto and /r/paleo. Their cholesterol numbers aren't good.

I've stopped eating all together and my stats are out of this world.

Why the snark?

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#15

Post by boothead »

DanBC wrote: post #5
boothead wrote: post #2

It's great to read things like this... I wish my GP would do the same. I recently had a really high cholesterol reading (both total cholesterol and LDL). Everything else (blood pressure, blood glucose etc) seems fine. I'm 38, fit and healthy and nothing that suspect in my family history. I found the attitude of my doctor in all this quite surprising. It amounted basically to "You definitely have familial hypercholest…

The NICE evidence, which your NHS GP should be following, is here: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg181/evidence The NICE guidance, which your NHS GP should be following, is here: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg181 Your GP should have used more information than just your non-HDL results; they should have given you a standardised risk assessment call QRISK2. http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/02February/Pages/NICE-publis…

Having skimmed over, one indication that my GP isn't up to date is that the lipid test is no longer required to be a fasted test, whereas mine was. Interestingly the specialist lipid clinic has also asked for a fasting test.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#16

Post by dspillett »

atomical wrote: post #9
boothead wrote: post #2

It's great to read things like this... I wish my GP would do the same. I recently had a really high cholesterol reading (both total cholesterol and LDL). Everything else (blood pressure, blood glucose etc) seems fine. I'm 38, fit and healthy and nothing that suspect in my family history. I found the attitude of my doctor in all this quite surprising. It amounted basically to "You definitely have familial hypercholest…

It comes down to diet. My LDL is 66 and my HDL is 75. I don't eat eggs, meat, or cheese. Basically, nothing that has cholesterol. My numbers will probably be even better this year. I have looked at /r/keto and /r/paleo. Their cholesterol numbers aren't good.

Recent research suggests that cholesterol directly in food isn't a major problem because most of it passes through the digestive system untouched.

The problem is actually cholesterol produced by the body using other substances. 80% or more of the cholesterol in your body is produced by your body, no more than 20% of it comes from your diet unless your diet is particularly unbalanced in that manner. The reason cholesterol in people's diet got the blame is that there is often a strong correlation between the foods containing substances that do cause increased cholesterol in the body and foods containing significant amounts of cholesterol, and a similar correlation between certain lifestyle options that are risk factors for heart problems generally and eating those foods.

So blindly reducing cholesterol in your diet is not useful and may lead you into a false sense of security - you could still be taking in the other stuff and living your life in a way that will encourage the body to produce too much cholesterol itself.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#17

Post by [deleted] »

boothead wrote: post #2

It's great to read things like this... I wish my GP would do the same. I recently had a really high cholesterol reading (both total cholesterol and LDL). Everything else (blood pressure, blood glucose etc) seems fine. I'm 38, fit and healthy and nothing that suspect in my family history. I found the attitude of my doctor in all this quite surprising. It amounted basically to "You definitely have familial hypercholest…

[deleted]

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#18

Post by copperx »

tkyjonathan wrote: post #8
boothead wrote: post #2

It's great to read things like this... I wish my GP would do the same. I recently had a really high cholesterol reading (both total cholesterol and LDL). Everything else (blood pressure, blood glucose etc) seems fine. I'm 38, fit and healthy and nothing that suspect in my family history. I found the attitude of my doctor in all this quite surprising. It amounted basically to "You definitely have familial hypercholest…

Take matters into your own hands and change your diet. Nothing beats a high anti-inflammatory whole-foods plant-based diet. Check the research.

Doesn't the TFA address this and basically says that there's no anti-inflammatory diet except a strict liquid one delivered through the nose?

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#19

Post by [deleted] »

boothead wrote: post #2

It's great to read things like this... I wish my GP would do the same. I recently had a really high cholesterol reading (both total cholesterol and LDL). Everything else (blood pressure, blood glucose etc) seems fine. I'm 38, fit and healthy and nothing that suspect in my family history. I found the attitude of my doctor in all this quite surprising. It amounted basically to "You definitely have familial hypercholest…

[deleted]

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#20

Post by copperx »

boothead wrote: post #2

It's great to read things like this... I wish my GP would do the same. I recently had a really high cholesterol reading (both total cholesterol and LDL). Everything else (blood pressure, blood glucose etc) seems fine. I'm 38, fit and healthy and nothing that suspect in my family history. I found the attitude of my doctor in all this quite surprising. It amounted basically to "You definitely have familial hypercholest…

I recently visited my GP and I had a high cholesterol reading. He suggested me to reduce sugars and white flours, get a reading in a month, and depending on that he'll decide whether to prescribe statins.

It surprised me that he didn't mention reducing saturated fats or meat consumption. It made me wonder whether refined carbohydrates play a role in high cholesterol. I think I'll have to take a look at the research.

Post reply on HN