Although thin do you have high Cholesterol level?

[Pilatus]

I ask the above as my sister has been diagnosed with high (7.5) Chloresterol level.
My sister and I are fortunate enough to be slim, eat very balance diet of fruit veg,some meat etc.
Seems strange that slim people can have high chloresterol and have to be on statins.
Any info appreciated.

 

[Oliveau]

High cholesterol on its own isn’t necessarily a problem as some people have a natural high cholesterol level. More important is the LDL/HDL ratio.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

The evidence on the risks of high cholesterol is much less certain than it was. How are they justifying her being on statins? If simply due to her 7.5 mmol level she should ask some searching questions.

There is actually a moderate but clear correlation between lowering cholesterol and overall mortality rate (called "all cause mortality").

@DaveGrohl may have more to add.

 

[Ffermer Bach]

I would be inclined to read this book for a start, and think about intermittent fasting and or cutting out sugar and reducing complex carbs from your diet

Spoon-Fed: Why almost everything we’ve been told about food is wrong : Spector, Tim: Amazon.co.uk: Books

Spoon-Fed: Why almost everything we’ve been told about food is wrong : Spector, Tim: Amazon.co.uk: Books

www.amazon.co.uk

 

[ollie989898]

I ask the above as my sister has been diagnosed with high (7.5) Chloresterol level.
My sister and I are fortunate enough to be slim, eat very balance diet of fruit veg,some meat etc.
Seems strange that slim people can have high chloresterol and have to be on statins.
Any info appreciated.

Genetics. Being slim is almost incidental in some ways but it certainly helps in others.

 

[Ffermer Bach]

Genetics. Being slim is almost incidental in some ways but it certainly helps in others.

The most important thing is where fat is deposited, if it is in the belly area that has health implications

Warning
A waistline of more than 35 inches in women and 40 inches in men may significantly raise the risk of developing diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease, according to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

 

[ollie989898]

The most important thing is where fat is deposited, if it is in the belly area that has health implications

Warning
A waistline of more than 35 inches in women and 40 inches in men may significantly raise the risk of developing diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease, according to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

I've read about this before, I don't know why some people accumulate it in that area or don't but being thin (and actually eating fewer calories than recommended) is believed to have health benefits and even extend lifespan but all the research I have seen is pretty preliminary and the reasoning for this is all beyond my understanding.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

I've read about this before, I don't know why some people accumulate it in that area or don't but being thin (and actually eating fewer calories than recommended) is believed to have health benefits and even extend lifespan but all the research I have seen is pretty preliminary and the reasoning for this is all beyond my understanding.

It is common in Indian and Pakistani heritage people to have high internal abdominal fat even if quite slim. This appears to have significance in a number of life shortening illnesses.

 

[fred.950]

A doctor once told me if you have a bad diet you either end up fat outside or fat inside. I’m currently proving him wrong by being both!

 

[Ffermer Bach]

I've read about this before, I don't know why some people accumulate it in that area or don't but being thin (and actually eating fewer calories than recommended) is believed to have health benefits and even extend lifespan but all the research I have seen is pretty preliminary and the reasoning for this is all beyond my understanding.

I remember reading that and saying "no problems my jeans are a 34" waist", and my partner laughing at me, saying, it's not the size of the waist measurement of your trousers, it's the measurement round the fattest part in the middle, I think that was 44" !!! Oops! So started the 5:2 diet, but the problem is I have a weakness for sugar, chocolate and cakes (like the majority of the UK population).

 

[DaveGrohl]

The evidence on the risks of high cholesterol is much less certain than it was. How are they justifying her being on statins? If simply due to her 7.5 mmol level she should ask some searching questions.

There is actually a moderate but clear correlation between lowering cholesterol and overall mortality rate (called "all cause mortality").

@DaveGrohl may have more to add.

I inderstand what you mean by your last sentence HCF but others might take it the wrong way. You are actually saying that having a lower cholesterol level INCREASES risk aren't you?

Cholesterol is such an emotive subject because there is so much to do with human nutrition that the medical/research profession have got upside down in the last few decades. A simple "high cholesterol level" provides no info whatsoever. 99.9% of doctors will tell you LDL cholesterol is "bad". This is simply wrong. @MX7 did your sister get any other info in her blood result? Triglycerides and HDL? These are far more revealing of cardiovascular risk than a simple LDL "measurement" (they don't actually measure LDL, they calculate it).

LDL can actually be measured properly and divided into fractions (there are 7 fractions I believe) and these provide the best indicator of cardio risk. They essentially measure the degree of LDL damage, it's the damaged LDL that causes all of the problems, healthy LDL is supposed to be present and functioning. The damaged LDL stops being taken in and recycled by the liver because it can't recognise it any more, so these particles just float round your body looking for a home because they've been refused entry to the liver. They can enter the artery wall lining and then start the process of atherosclerosis. What causes the damage to LDL? Glucose (from too much sugars and starch) and industrial veg oils amongst other things. Diet is the easiest thing to control.

Obv the process is a lot more complicated than this but I've tried to summarise the basics. Google damaged LDL and DYOR. Statins aren't ALL bad, they do have some positive effects and I'm not trying to put anyone off them, but the moment my doctor tells me I should be on statins is the moment when I will be demanding a fractional LDL test. Unless I've just had a heart attack, in that case they do have their uses for that specific group.

 

[Lincs Lass]

I was told 14 yrs ago I had a level of 7.6 ,,not a clue what that ment ,,the endocrinologist said its border line stroke , what do you eat she asked.
Seafood I said ,,oh that's good for you , I said ye ,,seafood and eat it .
I don't look at how fattening anything is , I don't diet and I'm not interested in calories.
As I told her ,,she sits in a warm office all day and no exercise ,,I'm outside all day in all weather's and non stop activity ,,my blood cells need a fur coat to keep them warm.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Statins aren't ALL bad, they do have some positive effects and I'm not trying to put anyone off them, but the moment my doctor tells me I should be on statins is the moment when I will be demanding a fractional LDL test. Unless I've just had a heart attack, in that case they do have their uses for that specific group.

And yet one of the common side effects of statins (although I can't find details of it beyond that Rouvastatin is the worst) is muscle pains and deterioration. Surely that's that last thing you'd want to give someone with heart muscle damage that urgently needs their heart muscle to recover?

The data on "significant events" for statins (in plain langauge: serious side effects) has been supressed by the drug companies it appears.

Despite having read extensively around the statin use issue I am more confused than ever what to really think and most health practitioners know less than I do about it unless they have carefully read recent papers on their use.

 

[DaveGrohl]

And yet one of the common side effects of statins (although I can't find details of it beyond that Rouvastatin is the worst) is muscle pains and deterioration. Surely that's that last thing you'd want to give someone with heart muscle damage that urgently needs their heart muscle to recover?

The data on "significant events" for statins (in plain langauge: serious side effects) has been supressed by the drug companies it appears.

Despite having read extensively around the statin use issue I am more confused than ever what to really think and most health practitioners know less than I do about it unless they have carefully read recent papers on their use.

Indeed, my last facetious comment was based around the researched assumption that satins might extend my life by circa 5 days as opposed to 2 or 3 days if I hadn't had a heart attack. Is it really worth it in view of the accompanying side effects? That's without mentioning the notion that statins' reduction of LDL has nothing to do with any small extension to life, any positive effect seem to be as a consequence of reduction of inflammation. In which case why not just take a drug to reduce inflammation?

 

[Kidds]

A waistline of more than 35 inches in women and 40 inches in men may significantly raise the risk of developing diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease,

More than 40"! I'm not there yet and very overweight.

 

[Courier]

As someone who was diagnosed with Type 2 25 years ago my Doc suggested I take statins. Having said that my cholesterol levels are always between 4.4 and 4.7 without them so I don't take them......

 

[milkloss]

Statins don't just lower cholesterol so you look better on paper. An eye consultant once told me to take them because it would keep the retina in better health...... perhaps I should have listened to him.

 

[Courier]

Statins don't just lower cholesterol so you look better on paper. An eye consultant once told me to take them because it would keep the retina in better health...... perhaps I should have listened to him.

Seems to be another case of "You pays your money and you takes your choice ....."

But maybe the more recent studies actually know more

"
April 15, 2004 -- Cholesterol-busting statins, the largest-selling prescription drugs in the U.S., may protect older people from blindness, a new study shows. Aspirin also appears to provide significant protection.



It's a bit of good news for a puzzling problem, as age-related macular degeneration -- the leading cause of blindness in the elderly -- is not well understood, writes researcher Hilary L. Wilson, MD, professor of ophthalmology at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in San Francisco. Her study appears in this month's American Journal of Ophthalmology."



"Some reports have found an increased risk of cataracts from statin use, while others showed no association or even a protective effect. One possible mechanism may be statins' bidirectional effects on oxidation processes, including a possible mitochondrial effect that may increase the risk of cataracts.15 May 2020 "

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Seems to be another case of "You pays your money and you takes your choice ....."

But maybe the more recent studies actually know more

"
April 15, 2004 -- Cholesterol-busting statins, the largest-selling prescription drugs in the U.S., may protect older people from blindness, a new study shows. Aspirin also appears to provide significant protection.



It's a bit of good news for a puzzling problem, as age-related macular degeneration -- the leading cause of blindness in the elderly -- is not well understood, writes researcher Hilary L. Wilson, MD, professor of ophthalmology at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in San Francisco. Her study appears in this month's American Journal of Ophthalmology."



"Some reports have found an increased risk of cataracts from statin use, while others showed no association or even a protective effect. One possible mechanism may be statins' bidirectional effects on oxidation processes, including a possible mitochondrial effect that may increase the risk of cataracts.15 May 2020 "

Almost every statin study has been funded by the drug companies selling them. A number of those studies were ended early, some of them just quietly forgotten and others supposedly justified by large reported benefits which, on careful analysis, were actually small benefits cherry-picked from the interim data and presented in a way that inflated them.

There is very little transparency and robustness in the mass of positive studies presented as supporting wide statin use.

 

[Pilatus]

Many thanks for all your posts.
I will bear them all in mind if my blood tests come back high.
Meanwhile I will briefly mention what some of you have said to my sister as well.
Thanks again.