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

141–150 of 160 posts

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#141

Post by DrScump »

satx wrote: post #23

statins-for-cholesterol is a hugely profitable business pushed hard for decades by BigPharma, going back to a single faulty "study" in the 1950s, after Eisenhower's heart attack. My opinion is that statins-for-cholesterol, obsession with cholesterol is as big of a medical scam, a BigPharma misdirection-for-profit, as BigFood's "low-fat" and "whole grain", and gluten scams. Cholesterol is essential, so much so 90% is…

"statins-for-cholesterol is a hugely profitable business pushed hard for decades by BigPharma"

The vast majority of statin scripts are generics, and quite cheap. "Big Pharma" now lacks a profit motive there.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#142

Post by DrScump »

noondip wrote: post #115
dspillett wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 cholest…

> Recent research suggests that cholesterol directly in food isn't a major problem because most of it passes through the digestive system untouched. Could you please link to some of this research so we may all review and benefit from it?

Perhaps you could first identify your presumed mechanism of action that converts dietary cholesterol into LDL.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#143

Post by dspillett »

noondip wrote: post #115
dspillett wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 cholest…

> Recent research suggests that cholesterol directly in food isn't a major problem because most of it passes through the digestive system untouched. Could you please link to some of this research so we may all review and benefit from it?

Most of my "knowledge" on this matter comes from physical copies of NewScientist and similar (my bathroom reading), rather than papers directly or something I've got readily bookmarked online. I'll see if I can find that particular issue when I get home, if I can I'll extract the references and pass them on.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#144

Post by QSIITurbo »

DrScump wrote: post #142
noondip wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Recent research suggests that cholesterol directly in food isn't a major problem because most of it passes through the digestive system untouched. Could you please link to some of this research so we may all review and benefit from it?

Perhaps you could first identify your presumed mechanism of action that converts dietary cholesterol into LDL.

Dietary cholesterol is linked to blood LDL, because eating phytosterols - which inhibit cholesterol absorption in the gut - will lower your blood LDL. The mechanism can be found online.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#145

Post by tome »

tertius wrote: post #74
boothead wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, that's what I've done. I've completely eliminated sugar and I've increased my veg intake. As of the end of last week urine strips indicate that I'm in ketosis. I'll have another set of bloods done this week before I go to see a specialist probably after xmas. I intend to take a very self experimental approach with this. At the same time, if it does turn out that I'm one of those people who doesn't metabolize…

How can I get in contact with you? I'm in the same boat.

https://twitter.com/boothead

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#146

Post by boothead »

QSIITurbo wrote: post #139
boothead wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm aware of this and it's pretty scary! That's why I'm certainly not ruling out the drugs. What I want to do it figure out if I do have any damage with a CIMT test. If that shows I'm taking damage then it's a done deal, but If I can change my LDL through diet I think I owe myself a couple of months at least to try.

I'm not that familiar with the CIMT test, but by quick glance it only tells whether your carotid artery is affected. A negative result won't tell you whether the rest of your arteries - such as the coronary arteries - are affected. But I'm a bit curious: Who referred you to a test like this in your condition?

Nobody did, I just phoned my GP and asked him if he could, but he said that's a question I'd have to put to the specialist. My reasoning was that I want to assess whether I already have arterial damage or not, as that will have a significant bearing on how I asses my risk of not taking statins.

Regarding your earlier question, my LDL was 7.8 mmol/l and total serum cholesterol was 10.3 mmol/L (I make that and 301 and 398 in US money)

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#147

Post by mendelsd »

boothead wrote: post #137
teslabox wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Broda Barnes book [1] says, iirc, that high cholesterol levels are basically diagnostic of hypothyroidism. Usually people's superficial thyroid lab #'s look fine (TSH), but their body is not properly activating T4 -> T3. [1] https://books.google.com/books?id=TJXf2ZqoxUIC

Yes, when I demured on the statin it occurred to my doc to check thyroid function (seems the wrong way round to me). My levels were fine.

Define "fine"... reference levels of TSH for example are controversial [0]. The HUNT study in Norway (which followed 25,000 healthy Norwegians for 8 years) found death rates 69% higher amongst women with TSH 2.5-3.5 mIU/L than amongst those with TSH 0.5-1.4 mIU/L [1] (via [2]).

[0] http://tpauk.com/main/the-tsh-reference-range-wars/

[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18443261?dopt=AbstractPlu...

[2] http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2010/07/thyroid-more-evidence-t...

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#148

Post by QSIITurbo »

boothead wrote: post #146
QSIITurbo wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not that familiar with the CIMT test, but by quick glance it only tells whether your carotid artery is affected. A negative result won't tell you whether the rest of your arteries - such as the coronary arteries - are affected. But I'm a bit curious: Who referred you to a test like this in your condition?

Nobody did, I just phoned my GP and asked him if he could, but he said that's a question I'd have to put to the specialist. My reasoning was that I want to assess whether I already have arterial damage or not, as that will have a significant bearing on how I asses my risk of not taking statins. Regarding your earlier question, my LDL was 7.8 mmol/l and total serum cholesterol was 10.3 mmol/L (I make that and 301 and…

About assessing the risk of not taking statins: As I said, the exam you're about to take is only able to give you positive answer (yes, your carotid is sclerotic), not negative (won't say: no, your coronaries or the rest of your arteries are not sclerotic), so it's sort of useless.

What I'm still wondering is how a familial hypercholesterolemy would have been missed during earlier blood tests? It's a pretty standard test here, and 7.8 and 10.3 are extremely high for a fit person.

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#149

Post by boothead »

QSIITurbo wrote: post #148
boothead wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody did, I just phoned my GP and asked him if he could, but he said that's a question I'd have to put to the specialist. My reasoning was that I want to assess whether I already have arterial damage or not, as that will have a significant bearing on how I asses my risk of not taking statins. Regarding your earlier question, my LDL was 7.8 mmol/l and total serum cholesterol was 10.3 mmol/L (I make that and 301 and…

About assessing the risk of not taking statins: As I said, the exam you're about to take is only able to give you positive answer (yes, your carotid is sclerotic), not negative (won't say: no, your coronaries or the rest of your arteries are not sclerotic), so it's sort of useless. What I'm still wondering is how a familial hypercholesterolemy would have been missed during earlier blood tests? It's a pretty standard…

Interesting point on the CIMT test, I hadn't considered that. I'm not sure I've ever had a cholesterol test before, so that might be why it wasn't picked up. :-)

My GP seems to be saying the because I'm fit and healthy, there's no other possible diagnosis than FH given the high numbers. I was kind of hoping for a bit more investigation and perhaps some corroboration. I'm not sure what form that should take though - genetic screen perhaps?

Re: Inflammation: Medicine's burning question

#150

Post by jawilson2 »

copperx wrote: post #96
jawilson2 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've collected a lot of research on low-carb diets. In my previous job as a neurology professor, I had access to all of the most medical journals, and was able to save a lot. I have been on a ketogenic diet for 2 years now, and my LDL cholesterol went from 180 to 130, my HDL from 28 to 80, and my triglycerides from 140 to 75. Plus, I lost 70 pounds, no migraines for 2 years, and my anxiety and depression have all but…

That's great! I've saved the document. Seeing now that you were a neurology prof, I have a question. About 10 years ago I followed a diet similar to the [Slow Carb Diet]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow-Carb_Diet ) in order to lose fat slowly over a long period of time. One of the unexpected side effects was that I felt extremely clear-headed. I was doing software development at the time and I remember being able…

I believe it completely. This was one of the first effects I felt, before I had gotten deep into the literature. I remember after being on keto for a week, I was walking through a parking lot, and all of a sudden it was like my head popped through the clouds. I had a sudden burst of energy, my anxiety dropped, and I felt like skipping to the car. The keto flu disappeared, and I felt HAPPY for the first time in years. All in the course of 5 minutes. Over the next few weeks, I realized this had extended to my work as well: I felt focused, clear-headed, and able to work more quickly than I had in years. I used to get 1-2 migraines per month. I haven't had one in two years. I started the diet for weight loss (70 lbs now), unaware of the other benefits. It turns out this is starting to be supported by literature, though it is still a new area of study.

I started this because of my work in the pediatric epilepsy department I worked in. Nearly all of the kids that came through were put on a very low carb diet; it significantly reduced or eliminated the seizures in about 60%+ of the cases. Naturally, I wondered what was going on. It turns out that there are a number of neurological benefits. It has been shown to treat bipolar disorder [1], schizophrenia[2,3], ADHD[4], and so on. A lot of these are small studies. I am fine with that. If you have a patient who has been schizophrenic for 50 years, and no medication has worked, then a dietary change reverses most symptoms in a week, I feel comfortable saying something significant is happening, even with N=1. (A few years back at a Society for Neuroscience meeting, some NIH director made the point that if I say I have engineered a flying pig with wings, and bring it out on stage as proof, it doesn't make sense to say repeat it 10 or 100 times; the proof is sitting in front of you!). I have only cheated twice in two years, and both times I was groggy for days, and felt the depression creeping back. I realized this was how I ALWAYS felt previously.

[1]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11918434 [2]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26547882 [3]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19245705 [4]http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/129/2/330

Post reply on HN