What Mr. Clinton did NOT do

12. February 2010 William Davis (36)
You've likely already heard that former President Bill Clinton underwent a heart catheterization today during which one of the bypass grafts to his coronary arteries was found to be occluded. The original coronary artery was therefore stented.

Dr. Alan Schwartz, Mr. Clinton's cardiologist, announced to the gathered press that Mr. Clinton had followed a good diet, had adopted a regular exercise program, but that his condition is a "chronic disease" like hypertension that is not cured by these efforts.



Needing a stent just 6 years after four bypass grafts are inserted is awfully soon. I would propose that it has less to do with having a "chronic disease" and more to do with all the things that Mr. Clinton likely is NOT doing. (In addition to all the other things that Mr. Clinton did not do.) In other words, in the Track Your Plaque world, procedures are a rarity, heart attacks virtually unheard of. I would wager that Mr. Clinton has been doing none of the following:

--Taking fish oil. Or, if his doctor was "advanced" enough to have advised him to take fish oil, not taking enough.
--Vitamin D--Followers of the Heart Scan Blog already know that vitamin D is the most incredible health find of the last 50 years, including its effects on reducing heart disease risk. Unless Mr. Clinton runs naked in a tropical sun, he is vitamin D deficient. A typical dose for a man his size is 8000 units per day (gelcap only!).
--Eating a true heart healthy diet. I'll bet Mr. Clinton's doctor, trying to do the "right" thing, follows the prudent course of advising a "balanced diet" that is low in fat--you know, the diet that causes heart disease. Judging by Mr. Clinton's body shape (central body fat), it is a virtual certainty that he conceals a severe small LDL pattern, the sort that is worsened by grains, improved with their elimination.
--Making sure that hidden causes are addressed--In addition to the "hidden" small LDL, lipoprotein(a) is another biggie. Lp(a) tends to be the province of people with greater than average intelligence. I believe Mr. Clinton qualifies in this regard. I would not be at all surprised if Mr. Clinton conceals a substantial lipoprotein(a) pattern, worsened in the presence of small LDL.
--Controlling after-meal blood sugars--Postprandial (after-eating) blood sugars are a major trigger for atherosclerotic plaque growth. There are easy-to-follow methods to blunt the after-meal rise of blood sugar. (This will be the subject of an in-depth upcoming Track Your Plaque Special Report.)
--Thyroid normalization--It might be as simple as taking iodine; it might involve a little more effort, such as supplemental T3. Regardless, thyroid normalization is an easy means to substantially reduce coronary risk and slow or stop coronary plaque growth.


It's not that tough to take a few steps to avoid bypass surgery in the first place. Or, if you've already had a procedure, a few additional steps (of the sort your doctor will likely not tell you about) and you can make your first bypass your only bypass.

Magnesium and arrhythmia

11. February 2010 William Davis (35)
Because magnesium is removed during municipal water treatment and is absent from most bottled water, deficiency of this crucial mineral is a growing problem.

Magnesium deficiency can manifest itself in a wide variety of ways, from muscle cramps (usually calves, toes, and fingers), erratic blood sugars, higher blood pressure, to heart rhythm problems. The abnormal heart rhythms that can arise due to magnesium deficiency include premature atrial contractions, premature ventricular contractions, multifocal atrial tachycardia, atrial fibrillation, and even ventricular tachycardia, fibrillation, and Torsade de Pointes (all potentially fatal). Magnesium is important!

Magnesium supplementation is therefore necessary for just about everybody to maintain normal tissue levels. (The exception is people with kidney disorders, who should not take magnesium without supervision, since they retain magnesium.)

Here is a Heart Scan Blog reader's dramatic rhythm-correcting response to magnesium supplementation:



Dr. Davis,

A few months ago, I contacted you inquiring if you had written any articles on arrhythmia. You were generous enough to answer and guide me to an LEF article you'd written in which you stressed fish oil and magnesium. I had been suffering with bad PVCs [premature ventricular contractions] for over 20 years, and they had gotten so bad recently that I was told my next options were ablation or pacemaker!

I was already on fish oil and had not seen any difference, and so I researched the magnesium you suggested more thoroughly and found a huge body of studies supportng its effect on arrhythmia. I also read many posts on heart forums with people having success with it. After getting advice from various bloggers, I tried magnesium taurate in the morning and Natural Calm (an ionized form of mag citrate) in the afternoon and evening. Within three days the PVCs were quite diminished and by 2 weeks totally gone! As long as I keep taking it, they never return---not even one irregular blip---even when I drink strong coffee! The magnesium also cleared up my restless leg syndrome, my eye twitching, and insomnia. (Apparently, I was the poster-girl for magnesium deficiency.)

I am so angry that after all these years of suffering, trying various medications, and seeing at least 4 different cardiologists that NOT ONE ever even mentioned trying magnesium. The generosity of the few minutes you took to answer my email and steer me in a helpful direction brought me total relief.

Thank you SO MUCH!

Warmly,
Catherine C.

Video teleconference with Dr. Davis

10. February 2010 William Davis (4)

Dr. Davis is available for personal
one-on-one video teleconferencing

to discuss your heart health issues.


You can obtain Dr. Davis' expertise on issues important to your health, including:

Lipoprotein assessment

Heart scans and coronary calcium scores

Diet and nutrition

Weight loss

Vitamin D supplementation for optimal health

Proper use of omega-3 fatty acids/fish oil


Each personalized session is 30 minutes long and by appointment only. To arrange for a Video Teleconference, go to our Contact Page and specify Video Teleconference in your e-mail. We will contact you as soon as possible on how to arrange the teleconference.


The cost for each 30-minute session is $375, payable in advance. 30-minute follow-up sessions are $275.

(Track Your Plaque Members: Our Member cost is $300 for a 30-minute session; 30-minute follow-up sessions are $200.)

After the completion of your Video Teleconference session, a summary of the important issues discussed will be sent to you.

The Video Teleconference is not meant to replace the opinion of your doctor, nor diagnose or treat any condition. It is simply meant to provide additional discussion about your health issues that should be discussed further with your healthcare provider. Prescriptions cannot be provided.

Note: For an optimal experience, you will need a computer equipped with a microphone and video camera. (Video camera is optional; you will be able to see Dr. Davis, but he will not be able to see you if you lack a camera.)

We use Skype for video teleconferencing. If you do not have Skype or are unfamiliar with this service, our staff will walk you through the few steps required.

Thinner by Thursday

10. February 2010 William Davis (0)
You want to lose a few pounds . . . Okay, maybe 50 or 75.

Should you exercise? Lengthen you workout? Push the plate away, deny yourself seconds, use a smaller plate?

Of all the weight loss strategies I've tried in patients, there's only one that stands out as a means of obtaining immediate--meaning within 3 days--weight reduction.

Wheat elimination.

Omega-3 Index: 10% or greater?

9. February 2010 William Davis (19)
We've previously considered the question:

What is an ideal level of omega-3 fatty acids in the blood?

Recall that omega-3 levels in red blood cells (RBCs), a measure called the "omega-3 index," have been associated with risk for sudden cardiac death:





In a recent analysis, 265 people experiencing sudden death during a heart attack (ventricular fibrillation, successfully resuscitated) showed an omega-3 index of 4.88%, while 185 people not experiencing sudden death during a heart attack showed an omega-3 index of 6.08%.

We have more ambitious goals than just avoiding sudden death, of course! How about the omega-3 index associated with reduced risk for heart attack? A recent analysis of females from the Harvard School of Public Health suggested that RBC omega-3 levels as high as 8.99% were still associated with non-fatal heart attack (myocardial infarction), compared to 9.36% in those without heart attacks, suggesting that even higher levels are necessary to prevent non-fatal events.

Most recently, another study comparing 50 people after heart attack with 50 controls showed that people with heart attack had an omega-3 index of 9.57% vs 11.81% in controls--even higher. (This study was in a Korean population with higher fish consumption. There was also a powerful contribution to risk from trans fat RBC levels.) The investigators concluded: "The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of fatty acid profiles was larger than that for traditional risk factors, suggesting that fatty acid profiles make a higher contribution to the discrimination of MI cases from controls compared with modified Framingham risk factors."

The data suggest that, while an omega-3 index of 7.3% is associated with reduced risk for sudden cardiac death, a higher level of 10% or greater is associated with less risk for heart attack. Surprisingly, fish consumption and fish oil intake account for only 47% of the variation in omega-3 index.

I believe the emerging data are becoming increasingly clear: If you desire maximal control over heart health, know your omega-3 index and keep it 10% or higher.

Let's soak 'em with fish oil

8. February 2010 William Davis (12)
If you don't think that charging drug prices for fish oil is wrong, take a look at a letter from an angry Heart Scan Blog reader:


Hello Dr. Davis,

My 44 year old brother had an MI [myocardial infarction, or heart attack] in June. He got pushed around due to "bad government insurance," a state-run program for the "uninsured": government pays 1/3, job pays 1/3, and individual pays 1/3.

What they didn't tell him is that there is no major medical coverage and little to no prescription coverage. We fought for 4 months to get him open heart surgery that the insurance was not going to pay for.

Now, with no assistance, terrible insurance, and no disability he has little to no income. He is a heavy equipment mechanic and is trying to be the "good American"-- take care of his bills, not file bankruptcy, etc.

Anyway, the doctors never seem to pay attention to what they prescribe. Lipitor was not working for him, due to side effects. Now they want to give him Zetia and Lovaza....Zetia at $114, and Lovoza is $169.85! Wow! For dead fish???? I think this is a little fishy! I looked up Lovaza, gee how nice, they will give you a $20 coupon....

Forget it, he can't afford this stuff. So I am enrolling in the Zetia program for him. And trying to get him OTC [over-the-counter] fish oil. The most prevalent fish oil around here (that I take myself is) Omega 3 Fish Oil that has EPA 410mg, DHA 274.

Thanks for your blog. It made me feel better that I wasn't the only one outraged by this stuff. I 've been a nurse for 20 years and it just never seems to get better. Thank you for your wisdom.

Sincerely JP, Tennessee


Had this reader not been aware that her brother could take fish oil as a nutritional supplement, he likely would have been denied the benefit of omega-3 fatty acids in slashing the risk for recurrent cardiovascular events. You and I can buy wonderfully safe and effective fish oil as a nutritional supplement, but there won't be a sexy drug representative to sell it, nor an expensive dinner and payment for a trip to Orlando to hear about it.

Heart scan gone wrong

6. February 2010 William Davis (9)
Those of you reading the Heart Scan Blog, I hope, have come to appreciate the power in measuring atherosclerotic plaque, the stuff of coronary artery disease, and not relying on indirect potential "risk factors," especially the fictitious LDL cholesterol.

However, like all things, even a great thing like heart scans can be misused. Here's a story of how a heart scan should NOT be used, submitted by a reader.


Dr. Davis,

First of all, let me start out by commending you on all of the work you are doing with your website, blogs, etc. You are truly a breath of fresh air at a time when conventional medicine is no longer making any sense. In the last 3 years or so, I have spent a lot of time using the internet to try and find answers . . . and just about every time, when I find things that make "sense," it coincides which the recommendations you provide. Thank You!!

I am 56 years old, and roughly 5 years ago I bought your book, Track Your Plaque, primarily because I had asked my then Internal Medicine physician about why we weren't more "proactive" about determining the state of our cardiovascular health...since the means to do so existed (scans). He was trying to get me to go on a statin because my cholesterol #'s were a little high and at the time I smoked. Other than that, I was in perfectly good health with no side effects or issues. The following year at my annual physical, we again discussed this and he gave me a few options and I ended up having a calcium score done, which showed some blockage, but again, I never had any pains, sweats, or any other symptoms whatsoever, and I am a very active former athlete. This is when I bought your book to try and set a course of plan that wouldn't just include pharmaceuticals.

At the same time, my father was in his last months of life dealing with prostate cancer and the multiple radiation and chemo treatments, so I was making many trips from my home to be with him . . . a 4 hour drive, and very disruptive to family, as I still have 3 kids at home. At what I thought was going to be my last visit with him, I stopped at the cemetery he had planned on being buried to confirm details and such and then started home.

As I was driving, a symptom hit me which I was unfamiliar with (pretty sure it was an anxiety attack now) and I stopped at a friend's house in Chicago, as I didn't want this to be a heart attack while I was driving. This is when I began thinking about the heart scan and the blockage, and ended up driving back later that night and went right to the ER....not because I had any chest pains, but thought it best to be checked out because I did not want to go before my dad did. I ended up staying the night. In the morning the cardiologist PA [physician's assistant] came in with a copy of my calcium scoring and said it was best to have a heart cath...which I was in total agreement with since it would definitively tell me the current condition of my coronary vessels. As I was getting ready to be wheeled into the cath lab, they approached me with a form that would allow them to treat (stent). This is where I became very uncomfortable, in that I had never even met the cardiologist . . . and I didn't like this. No one ever had asked if I was experiencing pains or anything else . . . but I buckled and signed the form.

Before you knew it, I was awake watching my heart being cathed and the cardiologist angry because they did not have all the right sizes of stents, so he had to use a couple extra and I ended up w/5 total . . . and my life changed forever! In looking back, I can't necessarily argue the need for intervention, but in hindsight, it would have been nice to have tried an alternative method of reversing my plaque, especially since I had never experienced any symptoms and didn't appear to be in any imminent danger.

Upon release from the hospital I was put on a cocktail of drugs that typically follow and I then began to search and research. No one talked to me about lifestyle changes other that smoking....but nothing on diet or other means of cholesterol control, etc....in fact, when I had to pick out my meals in the hospital, they wouldn't let me have cheese....but the rice crispy treat was fine....how stupid! They originally told me the Plavix had to last 6 months....and then 12....and then 2 years....I stayed on it for 1-1/2 years and it was the only thing other than a baby aspirin. I went to another cardiologist out of town and he wanted me back on 5 or 6 medications and said that now I had the stents....I would have to be on these for life.....and he was the expert that talked at several main conferences.....my last trip to him.

Now, fast forward to about 6 months ago: I was participating in a father-son soccer scrimmage and was playing goalie. It was wet out and I couldn't catch very well. So being the competitive person I am, I resorted to using my chest on several of the saves and also took a direct blow to my eye ( I wear glasses) and the eye started swelling up pretty good. We then finished and went inside to have pizza and everyone was concerned about my eye. About 30 minutes later I excused myself as i felt some pretty significant sweats and subsequently a pretty severe pain directly in the middle of my chest....I was having a heart attack! Called 911 and went to hospital (2-1/2 years since original stents) and my local cardiologist removed the blockage that was at the anterior portion of my 1st stent causing the blockage. The huge disappointment to me is that I had taken many steps to improve my overall health. But now that I have foreign bodies in my vessels, the chance of further clotting is something that i will most likely always have to live with.

BU, Michigan



This is an example of how heart scans should NOT be used. They should NEVER be used to justify a procedure, no matter how high the score or where the plaque is located. The "need" for procedures is determined by symptoms (BU's symptoms were hardly representative of heart disease), blood findings, EKG, stress testing, and perhaps CT coronary angiography. "Need" for procedures can never be justified simply on the basis of the presence of plaque by a heart scan calcium score.

Unnecessary procedures like the one BU underwent are not entirely benign, as his experience at the soccer game demonstrated.

Heart scans are truly helpful things. But, like many good things, they are subject to misuse in the hands of the uncaring or greedy.

Blood sugar: Fasting vs. postprandial

5. February 2010 William Davis (23)
Peter's fasting blood glucose: 89 mg/dl--perfect.

After one whole wheat bagel, apple, black coffee: 157 mg/dl--diabetic-range.

How common is this: Normal fasting blood sugar with diabetic range postprandial (after-eating) blood sugar?

It is shockingly common.

The endocrinologists have known this for some years, since a number of studies using oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT) have demonstrated that fasting glucose is not a good method of screening people for diabetes or pre-diabetes, nor does it predict the magnitude of postprandial glucose. (In an OGTT, you usually drink 75 grams of glucose as a cola drink, followed by blood sugar checks. The conventional cut off for "impaired glucose tolerance" is 140-200 mg/dl; diabetes is 200 mg/dl or greater.) People with glucose levels during OGTT as high as 200 mg/dl may have normal fasting values below 100 mg/dl.

High postprandial glucose values are a coronary risk factor. While conventional guidelines say that a postprandial glucose (i.e., during OGTT) of 140 mg/dl or greater is a concern, coronary risk starts well below this. Risk is increased approximately 50% at 126 mg/dl. Risk may begin with postprandial glucoses as low as 100 mg/dl.

For this reason, postprandial (not OGTT) glucose checks are becoming an integral part of the Track Your Plaque program. We encourage postprandial blood glucose checks, followed by efforts to reduce postprandial glucose if they are high. More on this in future.

Diabetes from fruit

2. February 2010 William Davis (38)
Mitch sat in my office, looking much the same as he had on prior visits.

At 5 ft 7 inches, he weighed a comfortable 159 lb, though he did have a small visible "paunch" above his beltline.

I had been seeing Mitch for his heart scan score of 1157 caused by low HDL of 38 mg/dl, severe small LDL (87% of total LDL), and lipoprotein (a).

Part of Mitch's therapeutic program was elimination of wheat, cornstarch, and sugars, the three most flagrant triggers of small LDL particles, and weighing his diet in favor of oils and fats to reduce Lp(a). However, Mitch somehow failed to follow our restriction on fruit, which we limit to no more than two 4 oz servings per day, preferably berries. He thought we said "Eat all the fruit you want." And so he did.

Mitch had a banana, orange, and blueberries for breakfast. For lunch, along with some tuna or soup, he'd typically have half a melon, a pear, and red grapes. For snacks, he'd have an apple or nectarine. After dinner, it wasn't unusual for Mitch to have another piece of fruit for dessert.

Up until Mitch's last visit, he'd had blood glucose levels of 100-112 mg/dl, above normal and reflecting mild insulin resistance and pre-diabetes. Today, on his unlimited fruit diet, his blood sugar: 166 mg/dl--well into diabetes territory.

I helped Mitch understand the principles of our diet better and advised him to reduce his fruit intake to no more than the 2 small servings per day, as well as sticking to our "no wheat, no cornstarch, no sugar" principles.

While fruit is certainly better than, say, a half-cup of gummy bears (84.06 g carbohydrates, 50.12 g sugars), fruit is unavoidably high in carbohydrates and sugars.

Take a look at the carbohydrate content of some common fruits:

Apple, 1 medium (2-3/4" dia)
19.06 g carbohydrate (14.34 g sugar)

Banana, 1 medium (7" to 7-7/8" long)
26.95 g carbohydrate (14.43 g sugar)

Grapes, 1 cup
27.33 g carbohydrate (23.37 g sugar)

Pear, 1 medium
25.66 g carbohydrate (16.27 g sugar)

Source: USDA Food and Nutrient Database

Fruit has many healthy components, of course, such as fiber, flavonoids, and vitamin C. But it also comes with plenty of sugar. This is especially true of modern fruit, the sort that has been cultivated, hybridized, fertilized, gassed, etc. for size and sugar content.

When you hear such conventional advice like "eat plenty of fruits and vegetables," you should hear instead: "eat plenty of vegetables. Eat a small quantity of fruit."

The sniff test

31. January 2010 William Davis (0)
It is well established that omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil are free of mercury, PCBs, furans, and other pesticide residues. Several independent analyses have all agreed: little to none are contained in fish oil. In the Consumer Lab series of assessments, for example, no fish oil supplement failed because of any heavy metal or pesticide residue.

However, oxidative byproducts are a problem. Just as fish that sits on the store shelf or your refrigerator too long starts to smell "fishy," so will fish oil. When fish or fish oil becomes rancid, smelling like rotten fish at its worst, it means that
Why small LDL particles are the #1 cause of heart disease in the US

Why small LDL particles are the #1 cause of heart disease in the US

15. September 2011 William Davis (77)
Ask your doctor: What is the #1 cause of heart disease in the US?

Let's put aside smoking, since it is an eminently modifiable risk and none of those crazies read this blog anyway. What will your doctor say? Most like he or she will respond:

High cholesterol or high LDL cholesterol

Too much saturated fat

Obesity

Pfizer, Merck, AstraZeneca and their kind would be overjoyed to know that they can add your doctor to their eager following.

I'd tell you something different. I would tell you that small LDL particles are, by far and away, the #1 cause for heart disease. I base this claim on several observations:

--Having run over 10,000 lipoprotein panels (mostly NMR) over the past 15 years, it is a rare person who does not have a moderate, if not severe, excess of small LDL particles. 50%, 70%, even 90% or more small LDL particles are not rare. Over the course of a year, the only people who show no small LDL particles are slender, athletic, pre-menopausal females.

--In studies in which lipoproteins have been quantified in people with coronary disease, small LDL particles dominate, just as they do in my office. Here's a 2006 review.

--Small LDL is largely the province of people who consume carbohydrates, such as the American population instructed to "cut fat and eat more healthy whole grains." Conventional diet advice has therefore triggered an expllosion in small LDL particles.

--When fasting triglycerides exceed 60 mg/dl, small LDL particles increase as a proportion of total LDL particles. This includes the majority of the US population. (This ignores postprandial, or after-eating, triglycerides, which also contribute to small LDL formation.)

If you were to read the data, however, you might conclude that small LDL affects a minority of people. This is because in most studies small LDL categorize it as either "pattern B," meaning exceeding some arbitrary threshold of percentage of small LDL particles, versus "pattern A," meaning falling below that same arbitrary threshold.

Problem: There is no consensus on what percentage of small LDL particles should mark the cutoff between pattern A vs. pattern B. In many studies, for instance, people with 50% small LDL particles are called "pattern A."

If, instead, we were to set the bar lower to identify this highly atherogenic (atherosclerotic plaque-causing) particle at, say, 20-30% of total, then the number or percentage of people with "pattern B" small LDL particles would go much higher.

I see this play out in my office and in the online program, Track Your Plaque, every day: At the start eating a low-fat, grain-filled diet with lots of visceral fat ("wheat belly") to start, they add back fat and cut out all wheat and limit carbohydrates. Small LDL particles plummet
Tags :

Comments (77) -

  • Bill

    9/15/2011 1:13:26 PM |

    But is there any real evidence that small LDL is a *cause* of heart disease? Correlation alone isn't sufficient, of course, and Chris Masterjohn has said that even the correlation largely disappears when traditional "risk factors" such as HDL, LDL, and triglycerides are added to the model.

    I ask in part because I am about to arm wrestle with my primary care doctor about my recent cholesterol panel:

    Total: 382
    HDL: 157
    LDL: 217 (calculated)
    Triglycerides: 39

    He's upset about the LDL, of course, especially since it's progressively risen over time (coinciding with dietary changes pretty compatible with TYP and including quite a bit of sat fat after years as a low-fat vegetarian). Naturally, he wants me to reduce my fat consumption and retest in four months, and I'm sure a statin drug recommendation will follow just as the sunset inevitably follows the sunrise.

    I am thinking of asking for a full lipoprotein panel, with the expectation that it will calm him down by showing 1) much lower real, measured LDL with my rock bottom triglycerides and 2) strong Pattern A LDL with my sky high HDL and low triglycerides.

    But I'm not certain if I can really make a convincing empirical case to him that Pattern A is benign with a high LDL. (I'm also hesitating after hearing Chris Masterjohn say that LDL particle size measurements are hugely dependent on the type of assay used and that as a result it's not clear what, biologically, any given result means until these methodological discrepancies are sorted out.)

  • Peter Silverman

    9/15/2011 2:41:59 PM |

    The article you cite says the number of LDL particles may be more important than the size.  Is that your experience?

  • Howard

    9/15/2011 3:02:31 PM |

    @Bill : Chris Masterjohn also mentioned in a recent podcast that the current measurement technology for LDL particle size is just not sufficiently accurate to be useful.

  • chuck

    9/15/2011 3:48:18 PM |

    what is your feeling on oxidized ldl?

  • chuck

    9/15/2011 3:52:16 PM |

    @howard
    yes, based on the hour to hour, day to day, week to week, and month to month natural fluctuations of lipids in the blood it is difficult to make any real judgements about cholesterol readings without doing multiple panels over a period of time.  the whole medical community seems to be screwed up in this respect.

  • Kathy

    9/15/2011 4:13:20 PM |

    I have no idea what Dr. Davis' response will be, but if you're interested in getting an NMR profile done on your own dime (and if there is a convenient location near you), check out directlabs.com for their September special.  An NMR profile will only set you back $79 (reg $127).  I've been waiting for this "sale" and am getting it done to show my own doctor.  Your health is ultimately in your hands - keep up the good fight!
    Best,
    Kathy

  • edward white

    9/15/2011 5:02:18 PM |

    Dr D,
    I totally agree small LDL is driven by excess carbohydrate intake and postprandial
    triglycerides. However there is a substantial subset of people whose small LDL
    is genetically driven. I believe you are aware of this phenomena.
    Please let these folks know what their options are to address this important issue!
    There can be a good deal of frustration when carbs and triglycerides are addressed but
    with little lowering of small LDL.
    Please help this substantial number of people out by outlining their options...
    Gib

  • Unix-Jedi

    9/15/2011 5:22:13 PM |

    Thanks for that information, Kathy.

  • cancerclasses

    9/15/2011 5:57:26 PM |

    It ain't good,  just ask Wikipedia.   From the Wiki page re 'Chronic endothelial injury hypothesis':
    "Once LDL accumulates in the subendothelial space, it tends to become modified or oxidized.[5] This oxidized LDL plays several key roles in furthering the course of the inflammatory process. It is chemotactic to monocytes; oxidized LDL causes endothelial cells to secrete molecules that cause monocytes to penetrate between the endothelial cells and accumulate in the intima.[6]

    Oxidized LDL promotes death of endothelial cells by augmenting apoptosis. Also, through the activation of collagenases, ox-LDL contributes to a process which may lead to the rupture of the fibrous plaque[7] Oxidized LDL decreases the availability of endothelial nitric oxide (NO), which, in turn, increases the adhesion of monocytes to the endothelium.[8] Moreover, NO is involved in paracrine signalling between the endothelium and the smooth muscle that maintains vascular tone; without it, the muscle will not relax, and the blood vessel remains constricted. Thus, oxidized LDL also contributes to the hypertension often seen with atherosclerosis."

  • Bob

    9/15/2011 6:12:21 PM |

    Test reply

  • cancerclasses

    9/15/2011 6:13:54 PM |

    Yes, French cardiologist Guy-Andre Pelouze MD. at the recent Ancestral Health Symposium said in his presentation "Paleodiet and atheroma: A Cardiovascular Surgeon’s Perspective" that:

    1. Native (the reduced form of) LDL cholesterol is NOT atherogenic, only the oxidized form leads to atheroma, atherogenesis & arterial plaque formation.

    2. Without oxidized cholesterol it's very difficult to have arterial plaque formation

    3. Anti-oxidants are ineffective in preventing atheroma.

    4. SDLDL easily enter the subendothelial space because SDLDL are less than 25 nm in diameter and the subendothelial space is 26 nm.

    5. Subendothelial space in humans is very different in humans than other mammals due to the large amount of smooth muscle in the arterial media below the the intima layer.

    And there's much more.  To see a video of Dr. Pelouze's presentation hosted on the Ancestral Health page at Vimeo just google 'vimeo, paleodiet and atheroma', then scroll to video number 33 in the right side box.

  • cancerclasses

    9/15/2011 6:42:38 PM |

    Do you REALLY believe that? We have the ability to measure the distance between the earth and the moon almost down to the millimeter, and certainly down to the centimeter. We have the ability to measure individual atoms with electron and other types of microscopy used in materials engineering and computer chip manufacturing.  Medical, biochemical & physiological textbooks are full of descriptions of the sizes of white and red blood cells, bacteria and viruses, etc. ad infinitum.  Do you REALLY think we lack the ability to measure SDLDL?  Don't be so ready to believe something just because somebody says something about it.  Use your own brain, put together everything you know and can learn on your own and connect ALL the dots before drawing a conclusion.  

    Furthermore, what's the point of a statement like that?  Should we just give up measuring and trying to understand how SDLDL causes atheroma just because ONE guy says we can't measure them to his degree of satisfaction?  Should we just give up worrying about what we eat, and what we are being sold as foods that are arbitrarily declared to be safe to eat by some anonymous bureaucrat at the FDA?  Should we just ignore the ever increasing incidence rates of cancer, heart disease and atherosclerosis that by all applications of observation and simple logic are known to be entirely due to the modern industrial foods diet in every society and the peoples that subsist on them?  

    I don't think so.  Homey don't play that anymore, at least this one doesn't.

  • cancerclasses

    9/15/2011 6:55:16 PM |

    @Bill,  Google and see this study: 'Detection of low density lipoprotein particle fusion by proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy'.    
    "Abstract: Recent evidence suggests that fusion of low density lipoprotein (LDL) particles is a key process in the initial accumulation of lipid in the arterial intima. In order to gain a better understanding of this early event in the development of atherosclerosis, it would thus be necessary to characterize the process of LDL fusion in detail. Such studies, however, pose severe methodological difficulties, such as differentiation of particle fusion from aggregation. In this paper we describe the use of novel methodology, based on 1H NMR spectroscopy, to study lipoprotein particle fusion."

  • Don

    9/15/2011 7:24:04 PM |

    Bill,
    You have no worry since your triglycerides are quite low and therefore your LDL particles are of healthy size.  Your correctly calculated LDL is only 161 using the Iranian formula (used if triglycerides low).  See LDL calculator here:
    http://homepages.slingshot.co.nz/~geoff36/LDL_mg.htm

    And never use statins, just cut carbs.
    Don

  • cancerclasses

    9/15/2011 7:34:54 PM |

    "About 80% of cholesterol is composed of fats and oils (Current Atherosclerosis Reports 2004). The
    majority of an arterial clog, 55%, comes from defective cooking oils, containing mainly damaged omega 6. Most of us unknowingly purchase these oils in the cooking oil section of the supermarket. These are the oils we fry with and the oils added to most packaged foods; both fresh and frozen.

    Here’s another shocker. It’s not the saturated fat —it’s the adulterated omega-6 from food processing that clogs arteries! Contrary to what we have heard for decades, it is not the saturated fat you eat that clogs your arteries! How do we know this? A 1994 Lancet article reported investigating the components of arterial plaques. In an aortic artery clog, they found that there are over ten different compounds in arterial plaque, but NO saturated fat. This means the bacon, eggs, cheese, steak, whipped cream, etc. isn’t the reason for a clogged artery. These natural saturated fats are actually good for you. You need them for body structure.

    With the consumption and transport of defective processed oils, LDL cholesterol acts like a “poison delivery system,” bringing deadly transfats and other ruined oils  into the cells. It is primarily the oxidized (adulterated) omega-6 that clogs the arteries, NOT saturated fat!"  

    For more just google 'Brian Peskin saturated fat' and read the day away to your heart's content.

  • Jack Kronk

    9/15/2011 8:37:50 PM |

    "just because somebody says something about it. Use your own brain, put together everything you know and can learn on your own and connect ALL the dots before drawing a conclusion. "

    lol. you must not know who CMast is.

  • cancerclasses

    9/15/2011 10:27:09 PM |

    Yeah, I do, and that's why I said that.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/16/2011 2:40:13 AM |

    Hi, Gib--

    The strategies that reduce small LDL are the same whether it's genetically-driven or acquired. However, when (presumptively) genetically-driven, it's just harder and requires a more meticulous effort.

    We are now seeing more and more people achieve zero or near-zero small LDL with strict carb reduction. The big exception is apo E4 people, who can still struggle because of the peculiar physiologic effects of this pattern.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/16/2011 2:42:32 AM |

    Big issue. Note that the real culprit in causing plaque may be glycated oxidized LDL.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/16/2011 2:43:51 AM |

    Hi, Peter--

    No, I think that is wrong. It might be correct if small LDL is regarded in a dichotomous way, i.e., pattern A vs. pattern B. But, when viewed quantitatively, I believe the real culprit is quantity of small LDL.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/16/2011 2:46:58 AM |

    No question: The various lipoprotein testing companies need to talk and standardize their definitions. But this does not invalidate the concepts.

    Chris Masterjohn is a very bright guy. But on this I disagree. I believe it is wrong to assume that triglycerides and HDL behave in perfect tandem with small LDL. While they do indeed correlate, they do not correlate perfectly and demonstrate independent behavior depending on postprandial phenomena and genetic factors like apo E and apo C.

  • Joyce

    9/16/2011 5:17:54 PM |

    This has nothing to do with LDL, but I don't know where else to ask this, so I'll dive right in.

    I am reading and enjoying your book Wheat Belly, but don't understand why you lump chia seed in with other non-gluten grains to avoid or minimize. .  In my mind it is closer to flax.  Chia is truly an oil-seed and not a grain according to Dr. Coates, the "father" of chia seed research.  I have used it generously, and feel it aids in weight loss.  Chia seed is high in protein and fiber and low in carbs.  Why are you telling us to avoid or limit it?  I feel it is healthier than flax even.

    Please, can you clarify your stance on chia?  I was very disappointed to read that in your book.  Other than that, I really enjoyed Wheat Belly, having avoided gluten for a few years now.

  • Joyce

    9/16/2011 5:33:17 PM |

    P.S.  According to calorieking.com website, 1 oz. raw chia contains 0 carbs and 1 oz. dried chia contains only 1 gram of useable carb.

  • Adriana

    9/17/2011 10:16:37 AM |

    Not everybody who has good HDL, good TG and eats a low carb paleo diet will have low small particle LDL numbers which is why an NMR LipoProfile is important.  People with gut issues, yeast issues,  H. Pylori or an otherwise compromised liver can have unhealthy LDL despite doing everything right on the diet front.  Getting to the root of these issues is critical to resolving it.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/17/2011 1:23:49 PM |

    Thanks, Joyce. But I don't remember lumping chia with the bad stuff.

    In fact, as you point out, chia belongs with flaxseed as one of the few truly healthy, low-carb foods.

  • Joyce

    9/17/2011 1:45:31 PM |

    Dr. Davies, on p. 212 of your book, chia is lumped in with other non gluten grains.  Maybe in future editions, the publisher can remove that?

    Although I have been gluten free for years, my husband is finally going gluten free..ALL BECAUSE OF YOUR BOOK!  He has some health issues, so for that I humbly thank you.

    Also, his next Toastmasters speech will be on "Wheat Belly"...how about that!

    Thank you so much for a wonderful book.  Your recipes are awesome.  I look forward to a Wheat Belly cookbook!!!!

  • Linda

    9/17/2011 2:57:40 PM |

    There are so many well read and brilliant posters here that I am going to jump in and ask a question totally off topic. This is not Dr. Davis' area of expertise, so I hope others may help.
    I do believe I am dealing with a bone/heel spur. Too much treadmilling, trying to increase speed, etc. I have done research on the condition and I read that turmeric, taken 2-3 times a day, is helpful. I just recently began taking D3 as well, 5000 IU a day. Will the Vit D3 help as well?
    Any thoughts? No, I am choosing not to visit a doctor for a cortisone shot. I am using NSAIDS for the pain and that works very well.

  • nina

    9/17/2011 4:48:56 PM |

    I've just spotted this post.  Never tried chia and wonder what you thought.  Have your patients reported similar effects?

    Nina

  • steve

    9/17/2011 7:26:34 PM |

    We are now seeing more and more people achieve zero or near-zero small LDL with strict carb reduction. The big exception is apo E4 people, who can still struggle because of the peculiar physiologic effects of this pattern

    Could you go in to more depth as to what strict carb reduction menas?  Is it no more than 50grams of starchy carbs such as rice or potatoes, or 100Grams?  I am guessing it is individualized, but some range of restricitons with those who have been successful would be helpful.  
    I have always had a low level of Trigs- never higher tnah 75 even on a hi carb diet, and was surprised to find the NMR showing all small particles!  So Dr. Davis is right to say low Trgs not always indicative of having large LDL.  Switched to elimination of most carbs and totally changed the profile.  Only issue that is while i produced lots of particles with carb diet, i also produce lots of LDL particles with carb restriction.  Genetics i guess!  I am an ApoE 3/3, which was a surprise.  
    Thanks for the good work Dr. D.  Have gotten several to buy Wheat Belly.  It will have an impact!

  • Joyce

    9/17/2011 7:30:40 PM |

    Nina, I am not Dr. Davis (wish I had his knowlege!), and I hope he doesn't mind me jumping in here, but I leaned about chia a few years ago when I read a book by Dr. Wayne Coates on the subject.  Chia has definitely helped me lose weight.  It is very filling.  When mixed with fluids, the chia seeds expand, and they really help to fill you up.  I've found all sorts of wonderful chia recipes on the web - from Chia "Tapioca" to beverages, etc.  I mix  it into many foods.  I think it enhances their taste.  I feel the chia seeds help with weight loss because of their appetite suppressant potential.  I hope this helped, and my apology to the good doctor for hogging the thread.

  • PeteKl

    9/17/2011 10:24:07 PM |

    Your post doesn't provide a lot of info, but if I were to guess I would say your problem is more likely related to walking/running incorrectly than nutritional (assuming you are in reasonable physical condition).  The human foot wasn't designed to be encased in the heavily cushioned shoes we typically wear today.   As a result many of us don't know how to walk or run correctly.

    Some of the better shoe stores will video tape you on a treadmill.  Just seeing the tape may be enough for you to realize what you are doing wrong.  If that doesn't help, there are professionals who should be able to figure out what might be happening.  

    Also consider reading "Born to Run" if you haven't already (it's a good read even for non-runners).  It probably won't give you a direct solution, but it may give you some ideas on where to look.  Good luck.

  • Louise

    9/18/2011 2:10:34 AM |

    Dr. Davis,
       I am 56 and have a strong history of heart disease in my family. I have been eating low carb for a couple of years... ( around 60 gms carb per day average..no pasta, no potato, almost no grain)  My most recent lipid panel showed LDL of 140. HDL 81, Triglycerides 43, CRP 0.2. .  I requested a test to show size of LDL. My doctor declined to order this, saying all LDL is bad.  Instead I was sent for a heart scan  ( paid out of pocket) and my calcium score was 0.  
      So now I'm trying to lower my LDL by lowering saturated fat.  Hard to do when you eat low carb. I wonder if I might be one of those Apo E 4 types that you mention, so thought I should try,.
      Here are my questions:
         Can I test my LDL size myself, through a home test? Or should I try to find out if I have Apo E 4?
          Do I really need to lower LDL if my calcium score is 0?
    Louise

  • Bob Goldstein

    9/18/2011 4:02:36 AM |

    For the last year I have eaten zero fruit, zero grains, zero sugar. Have mostly eaten beef, occasionally eggs cooked in butter. Have done two VAP tests the last year. When I started a year ago, trigs were 115, now 142. HDL was 50, now 46. My LDL did show a change of going from pattern A/B to pattern A.
    Any ideas why a diet for a year devoid of fruit, sugar, grains, would show an increase in trigs, and a slight decrease in HDL. If I have Apo E4 would my ldl go from A/B to A.
    I have lost 25 lbs. in the past year. Could this be a reason my numbers seem to be off?
    Thanks,
    Bob

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/18/2011 3:44:29 PM |

    Hi, Bob--

    Yes, blood drawn in the midst of weight loss can be very misleading.

    Transient effects include increased triglycerides, reduced HDL, even much higher blood sugar. Thankfully, it all gets much better once weight plateaus for a couple of months.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/18/2011 3:47:39 PM |

    Hi, Louise--

    Sad that you have to educate your doctor.

    I find it unacceptable that a nice person engaged in health is refused a simple, helpful test. Tell your doctor goodbye and find one willing to act as your partner and advocate in health, not an obstruction.

    Yes, you can test it yourself through services like PrivateMDLabs.com. My view is to 1) identify how much, if any small LDL there is, then 2) reduce small LDL with diet. If you have only large LDL, you will absolutely need an LDL particle number by NMR or an apoprotein B to know what the REAL value is.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/18/2011 3:49:52 PM |

    Thanks, Steve.

    There are a number of posts on this blog that detail how to gauge individual carbohydrate sensitivity. The best way is to check 1-hour after-eating blood sugars. Second best: count carb with the cutoff being determined individually. Just go back over the past 6 months and you will find several discussions.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/18/2011 3:51:17 PM |

    Hi, Joyce--

    Thank you!

    If chia is listed as among undesirable non-gluten grains, that was my error. Remember what Mark Twain said: "Don't read about health, else you might die of a typo."

  • nina

    9/18/2011 5:13:58 PM |

    Thanks for your response Joyce.  

    The part that fascinated me was the idea that chia triggers a drop in blood sugars without a pre-spike.  I can't find anything on the net about that and wondered if other people had similar experiences.

    Nina

  • Bob Goldstein

    9/18/2011 7:08:22 PM |

    Thanks for the reply Dr. Davis. I have a blood test scheduled six months from now, and hopefully I will see better numbers. My LDL shows pattern A so at least I did see one positive change.
    Love your blog. Have learned a lot and it was the reason I gave up grains and sugar. 1 full year, no cheats.

  • Annlee

    9/18/2011 10:41:56 PM |

    Consider also going barefoot as much as possible - around the house, etc. You don't necessarily have to run barefoot (unless you work into it *gradually* and choose to continue it). I've recovered from heel spurs with stretching my achilles, with emphasis on stretching the soleus, and letting my feet bear my weight without any props underneath. For stretches, Anderson & Anderson have a very good book - Stretching - available on amazon.com. You didn't develop the spurs overnight, and they won't clear that quickly, either. Be patient and work with your body.

    You may also wish to consider vitamin K2, very good for ensuring calcium deposition occurs in the correct locations.

  • Kira

    9/19/2011 6:52:43 AM |

    Hi Doctor Davis, I talked to your about a year ago and you were kind enough then to comment on my blood results saying there was nothing to worry about - according to the Iranian formula.  I would greatly appreciate if you looked at my new results, they scared my whole family, I certainly am not going to show to the family physician, and I don't even want to think about changing from paleo style of eating to some kind of low fat cholesterol lowering diet, and taking any drugs/supplements. But may be I have to? I am 36 y.o., 5'4 and weigh 104lb.
    Glucose 85
    VAP TEST:
    Lipids
    LDL Cholesterol 149!
    HDL 130
    VLDL 14
    CHOLESTEROL, Total 293!
    Triglycerides 48
    Non HDL Col (LDL+VLDL) 163!
    apoB100-calc 96
    IDL Cholest 4
    Remnant Lipo. (IDL+VLDL3) 12
    Sub-Class Information:
    HDL-2  35
    HDL-3  95
    VLDL-3  8
    LDL1 Pattern A 3.1
    LDL2 Pattern A 26.0
    LDL3 Pattern B  71.0
    LDL 4 Pattern B  31.4

    The ordinary, non-VAP Lipid panel shows:
    Cholest TOTAL 279 !
    Triglycerides 48
    HDL Cholest 144
    VLDL Cholest Cal 10
    LDL Cholest Calc 125 !

    Also, I can't understand how my vit. D can be so low - 29.0, when I have been sun tanning all summer here in Orange County, California, at peak hours. Is there anything that you know of that may inhibit the vit. D conversion from the sun?
    Again, I greatly appreciate any insight that you can give me on this situation...

  • Louise

    9/19/2011 4:52:38 PM |

    Dr Davis,
      Thank you for your reply.  For now, I found a lab I can go to and get myself tested. Two hours away.. (Oddly, I must leave NY state to get this done due to billing law.). I'm going to do this! Do you agree that my best choice is the NMR?

  • otterotter

    9/19/2011 5:43:51 PM |

    Hi Gib,

    Option 1 will be cutting the saturated fat and cholesterol from the diet in addition to cutting the carbs. I tried eliminating eggs and cheese and my total cholesterol down from 400 to 260. By adding back "one egg a day", it went back to 320 (that's the impact of the dietary cholesterol on me, confirmed twice). I am currrently trying to replacing all saturated fat with mono unsaturated fat (olive+canola), just want to see how big the impact is. I am also going to test coconut oil separately, it is a cholesterol-free plant based medium-chain saturated fat, there is a chance I might respond to it differently.

    Option 2 will be taking Statin drugs. I know it has side effects, but that's better than small dense LDL. Based on Dr Davis's previous response, for apoE, sometimes we have to go to Statin for the rescue. (My doc was pushing statin really hard on me, and I have been resisting that for the last year)

    otter

  • Joyce

    9/19/2011 5:50:45 PM |

    Dr. Davis, you are so funny.  We'll take your book....typos and all!  Now...how about a cookbook to compliment Wheat Belly/  PLEASE????

  • nina

    9/19/2011 7:41:34 PM |

    Sorry I missed the link:

    http://suzanneloomscreativity.blogspot.com/2011/09/lowering-blood-sugar.html

    Nina

  • PeteKl

    9/19/2011 9:24:31 PM |

    Hi Kira,

    Just out of curiosity, could you summarize your "paleo style of eating".  I have a good friend of mine who has similar numbers (low trigs, high HDL, high LDL).  I would describe her diet as "low-carb (no sugar, no grains), low-veggie (under 15%), high meat, high sat-fat (particularly cheese, eggs and coconut)".  Is your diet somewhat similar?  I would be interested to know how the two of you compare.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 12:36:46 PM |

    NMR is my preferred method, since it yields the LDL particle number, what I believe should be the gold standard.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 12:38:12 PM |

    Thanks for asking, Joyce! I've had very preliminary conversations with my editor, but nothing firm yet.

    In the meantime, in addition to the discussion on this blog, see the Wheat Belly Blog, where I will publish recipes one by one.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 12:41:39 PM |

    Hi, Kira--

    You have a surprising dominance of small LDL particles, despite your slender build and lifestyle (LDL 3+4 divided by "real" LDL). This is likely genetically-determined. The means of correcting this is beyond the scope of this blog, unfortunately. You might consider joining the discussion in the Track Your Plaque website.

    The vitamin D issue is common, an impaired or lost ability to activate vit D in the skin. It means doing it orally.

  • Adam

    9/20/2011 6:40:19 PM |

    Dr. Davis. I'm a type 1 diabetic who is on a low carb diet (mostly primal-esque) with only meat and veg. No fruit, no grains, no legumes. I lost 14 kgs in the first three months, then stabalized at around 89 kgs. Granted my fat is going down a wee bit as muscle mass increases (doing the slow burn exercises, plus HIIT training and martial arts). That is the background.

    The reason I'm posting here is confusion about cholesterol. I just got my latest results back from the lab, and they are the same. While my HbA1C is 5.3 (not bad), my cholesterol numbers don't look hot. Tryglicerides are fine (as I've stopped losing weight quickly), but HDL is low at 39, and LDL (doctor forgot to put in particle size check, but it cna't be that good as I'm a diabetic) was 150 on the spot. This was measured, not calculated.

    I take ~7k miligrams (or whatever the measurement is) of fish oil a day. Well, 7k of EHA/DHA, more in total quanity including inert substances. With my exercise, low carb diet, and fish oil supplements, how is it that my HDL are still so low? Any advice?

    Thanks!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 11:08:46 PM |

    Hi, Adam--

    How timely! See the next post after the one you responded to in which I discuss the transient effects of weight loss, including drops in HDL that rebound over time.

    Also, have you address vitamin D normalization? I aim for 60-70 ng/ml, which usually requires around 6000 units per day (gelcaps or drops only); the HDL-raising effect develops over a year or longer.

  • Adam

    9/21/2011 1:01:18 PM |

    Dr Davis,

    A pleasure to make your (virtual) acquaintance! My vitamin D, according to my last test (results came in yesterday, as I mentioned) levels are 59. A wee bit low, but not too bad, I think.

    I've been consistently 88/89kg for three months (I've been low carb/primal for 6 months total), so haven't lost any weight in the past three months, but still my HDL levels are very low. Do you have any suggestions?

    Cheers,

    Adam

  • Adam

    9/21/2011 1:03:52 PM |

    P.S. I'm pretty sure I've stabalized, as my triglycerides were at 29 or 39 (can't remember off hand, but pretty low). But still I had the low HDL and high LDL?

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/21/2011 9:37:43 PM |

    Hi, Adam--

    Of course, you are wheat-free, low-carb in addition to your vitamin D? Omega-3 fatty acids?

    Note that doing the diet and taking the vitamin D yield rises over 1-2 years. Patience is required.

    Consider a little red wine and dark chocolate, as well.

  • Adam

    9/22/2011 5:10:38 AM |

    Thanks for the response! Yes, I am completely wheat free (and was before I read your book, which was excellent). I am very low carb due to the diabetes. My HDL did go from 29 to 39 this last test (after 6 months), so I suppose, as long as maintaining this diet will continue to increase my HDL, I am ok. My concern isn't immediate gratification but more continuous improvement.

    I'll come bug you again in 3 months if my HDL doesn't continue to increase Smile

    Many thanks!
    ---Adam

    P.S. I've never been accused of not drinking enough red wine Smile While I've been beer free for 6 or 7 months now, I do go through ~2 bottles of red a week.

  • Adam

    9/23/2011 1:35:08 PM |

    Hah! Me too, because if my HDL doesn't start going up I'm gonna freak as I don't know what else to about my numbers. Diet is about as stripped down as it can be, and I'm exercising as much as is reasonable.

    --Adam

  • Kira

    9/24/2011 6:23:22 AM |

    HI Peter. I would say  that my diet could pretty similar, with the exception that I am still eating some low-glycmic fruit everyday (some cantaloup, grapefruits, berries) and eat lots of veggies.

  • Kira

    9/24/2011 6:29:11 AM |

    Dr. Davis, thnx for your reply. I understand this is a blog and it is hard to go into details here, but would you say that it is worth for me to try change this situation by changing the die to using less saturated fat? and would NMR test clarify anything?

    PS How do I further discuss this issue "by joining the discussion in the Track Your Plaque website"?

    Thnx AGAINSmile

  • ShottleBop

    9/25/2011 3:47:09 PM |

    My numbers are like Bill's.  I was diagnosed as pre-diabetic in February, 2008 (today, I'd have been diagnosed as Type 2; my A1c was 6.5, and my FBGs were 127 and 123).  Started low-carbing shortly after that:  cut out grains, starchy veggies, almost all fruit, all milk (still use heavy cream and eat cheese).   My most recent blood lipids (accounting for some variation, but roughly consistent in pattern over the past three years):

    TC:  381
    LDL (direct):  279 (291 calculated)
    HDL:  80 (was 40 at diagnosis)
    Trigs:  52

    (At diagnosis, my numbers were:
    TC: 281
    LDL (direct) 215
    HDL: 40
    Trig: 142)

    I lost 65 pounds in the first 9 months after diagnosis, and, since then, have regained approximately 25 pounds (mostly muscle).  Weight has been stable for months.  My doctor is talking statins, again--which I plan to continue resisting.  I have ordered an NMR test, and will see what it has to say about my particle size.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/26/2011 12:39:56 PM |

    Hi, Shottle--

    Good plan. I wouldn't be surprised if NMR sheds an entirely different light on your values.

  • ShottleBop

    9/29/2011 4:23:57 PM |

    They drew the blood this morning.

  • Bob

    9/30/2011 11:14:10 PM |

    Dr. Davis, I had my NMR test and the doctor who looked at it suggests that I have familial hypercholesterolemia. My LDL-P 3158
    LDL-C 280 HDL-C 58, TGL 105, HDL-P 28.0 small LDL-P 1122,
    LDL 21.7, LP-IR-33. I have been on no carb, no sugar, no wheat, or fruit for the last 14 months. Have been eating fatty meat twice a day and also eggs. Before I started eating beef, I was eating low carb, very little sat. fat. I was eating a lot of skinless chicken breast, and canned salmon, veggies, nuts, fruit but almost no beef. My LDL according to the basic lipid test was a little high but not crazy high. My HDL was in mid 30's. and trigs were high. I changed to a high saturated fat diet to raise HDL and lower trigs. I have been taking 1 gram of fish oil 2X daily. Is it possible that the fish oil is having an effect on my LDL? Not sure what to do about my diet. Obviously I won't go back to sugar and wheat but what about all the meat I have been eating. Would it be better to go back to skinless chicken and egg beaters even if it means my HDL going down? Just not sure what to do. Doctor believes I am at high risk since my father died at age 62 of sudden death.
    Thanks,
    Bob

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/1/2011 1:48:14 PM |

    Hi, Bob--

    This is a tough situation that, unfortunately, cannot be remedied diet alone. I hate saying that.

    Like people with apo E4, familial heterozygous hypercholesterolemia people are fat sensitive. First order of nutritional business remains carb-restriction to minimize small LDL particles, but you can still show large increases in large LDL with fat intake. If apo E4 is present, too, then even something as great as fish oil can increase LDL measures. However, the dose of fish oil you are using is very small and not a likely factor.

  • Bob

    10/1/2011 2:57:34 PM |

    Thanks for the reply Dr. Davis. I know I won't go back to carbs and sugar, but what about beef. I have eaten almost nothing but beef the last 14 months. Would I be better off going back to skinless chicken breast? Egg Beaters, instead of eggs? Olive oil instead of butter? I know in the past when I limited saturated fat my HDL dropped to mid 30's.
    Bob

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/2/2011 2:46:17 PM |

    Hi, Bob--

    I think we could make a strong argument in favor of variety in diet and that includes meat sources. Yes, I think a broader range of meats (if you eat them; I don't want to sound like a bloodthirsty carnivore; I don't even like meat, personally) is better--fish, shellfish, fowl, pork, as well as eggs.

  • ShottleBop

    10/3/2011 10:02:47 PM |

    Results came back today:
    TC:  373 mg/dL (ref <200)
    LDL-C:  282 mg/dL (ref = 40)
    Trigs:  47 mg/dL (ref < 150)
    Large VLDL:  <0.7 (ref <=2.7)
    LDL-P:  1793 nmol/L (ref = 30.5)
    Large HDL-P:  14.2 umol/L (ref >=4.8)
    Small LDL-P:  146 nmol/L (ref  20.5)
    HDL size:  10.0 nm (ref >=9.2)
    VLDL concentration was too low to determine a size
    According to the interpretive information:
    My HDL-P (total) of 39.1 places me in the lowest category of risk (it is beyone "high")
    My small LDL-P places me well below the 25th percentile (while slightly higher than the "low" level of 117), and is indicative of lower risk for CVD
    My LDL size places me well above the 75th percentile, and well into Pattern A territory (75th percentile level is 20.6), and is indicative of lower risk for CVD

  • ShottleBop

    10/3/2011 10:04:16 PM |

    Correction:  My LDL-C was 282, vs. a reference of " 40"

  • ShottleBop

    10/3/2011 10:06:37 PM |

    I give up.  I am typing things in correctly, and the comment system is dropping words (maybe it's interpreting my use of "greater than" and "less than" symbols as markup code?).  My HDL-C was 82.  The reference level is greater than 40.  My LDL-C was 282; the reference level is less than 100.

  • ShottleBop

    10/3/2011 10:09:37 PM |

    I see it dropped more information than I thought at first.  No matter, the conclusion stays the same: except for my LDL particle number and concentration, all of my lipid values indicate that I am at lower (or much lower) than average risk of CVD.  Now if only my body takes that to heart . . ..

  • ShottleBop

    10/3/2011 10:16:32 PM |

    LDL particle size was 22.1
    HDL-P was 39.1 umol/L

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/4/2011 2:41:25 AM |

    Hi, Shottle--

    Your values highlight this tremendous void we have in knowing just what to do about nearly "pure" large LDL particles.

    In other words, you have lots of LDL particles, but they are nearly all the more benign large variety. What level of large LDL particles are "allowable" before they contribute to atherosclerotic plaque formation? Not known. My preference would be, given the extreme abundance of large LDL, to reduce with statin drug. I hate to say this, but this is the occasional exception in which I believe that statins might indeed be beneficial. This is not to be confused with the general and absurd overuse of the drugs, but an application for a very specific genetic variant.

  • Louise

    12/5/2011 10:58:49 PM |

    At last I have had an NMR.  Thank you for the suggestion of PrivateMDlabs.com.  I can recommend this
    to others who find their doctor unwilling to order tests.
    I am pondering my results, trying to figure out if they are okay, or if I need to cut back on fat now, or go lower with carb reduction. What are your thoughts, Dr Davis?
       LDL Particle Number  1091  ( IS this too high??)
        Small LDL - P    129
          LDL size     21
        Large VLDL - P   < 0.7
           Large HDL - P        12.1
            HDL size           9.7
          LP - IR score    11
    Triglycerides are 32  ( lower since I"ve gone completely
    grain free since my last lipid panel)

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/6/2011 5:26:54 PM |

    These values are excellent, Louise! The only less than perfect value is the large HDL, but this tends to drift higher very slowly.

  • GoodStew

    5/11/2013 1:56:57 AM |

    Seems particle size doesn't matter as much as particle number. According to Dr. Peter Attia, a particle is a particle.  More than 1000 is a risk factor whether they're small, medium or large and fluffy.

Add comment

Loading