starting strength gym
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Cholesterol concerns

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    4,621

    Default

    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    • starting strength seminar october 2024
    Quote Originally Posted by jfsully View Post
    In the setting of normal triglycerides, direct and calculated LDL are likely to be quite close, or at least in the same ballpark so as to not change your conclusions about what to do.

    I’m curious about the oxidized LDL, though, haven’t seen that tested. I know that oxidized is presumed to be the more pathological subtype of LDL. Is there any evidence that measuring it in addition to or in lieu of “vanilla” LDL adds to the risk determination? I would think it likely that oxidized LDL is generally a fairly fixed percentage of total LDL, and you could spare the expense of the fancy test. Do you have any references on this?
    I'm suggesting he retest it because he has no trending to verify that this was even a valid test. He should not take it at face value with no prior data.

    You know that there are references.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    2,633

    Default

    I could try and dig up the old test results from 5-10 years ago. I was actually much less healthy then though. I would be surprised if the numbers weren't higher then than now. Little to no exercise of any kind, lotta fast food, and so on.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Santana View Post
    I'm suggesting he retest it because he has no trending to verify that this was even a valid test. He should not take it at face value with no prior data.

    You know that there are references.
    I can’t find anything about the relationship of oxidized to total LDL, was wondering if you had something on that specifically. It would have bearing on whether spending the extra $$ to test oxidized has value over just LDL.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    4,621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CommanderFun View Post
    I could try and dig up the old test results from 5-10 years ago. I was actually much less healthy then though. I would be surprised if the numbers weren't higher then than now. Little to no exercise of any kind, lotta fast food, and so on.
    If you can find them that would be great. I still think you should retest before conceding to these numbers though.

    Quote Originally Posted by jfsully View Post
    I can’t find anything about the relationship of oxidized to total LDL, was wondering if you had something on that specifically. It would have bearing on whether spending the extra $$ to test oxidized has value over just LDL.
    If he doesn't want to spend the money then he doesn't have to spend the money. There are plenty of MIs that occur independent of LDL values so relying on that metric to determine health risk is already silly. If he's worried about it I provided him with an additional metric to look at. There are plenty of research articles on PubMed reporting independent associations between oxidized LDL and cardiovascular disease risk, hemoglobin a1c, and diabetes. You are welcome to search for them. I have no interest in arguing over professional research. The man wanted some practical advice and he received. If he doesn't want to pay for it he doesn't have to but he most certainly should get retested.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    2,633

    Default

    I've found some information about different types of LDL particles, patterns A and B. B pattern seems to be the one with the big risk for arterial buildup from what I've read. I've also read that pattern A seems to be more prevalent when blood triglycerides are lower, while pattern B seems to be more prevalent when the triglycerides are high. Thoughts on this?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Believe it or not, I didn’t want to argue about it, I was just trying to learn something.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    4,621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CommanderFun View Post
    I've found some information about different types of LDL particles, patterns A and B. B pattern seems to be the one with the big risk for arterial buildup from what I've read. I've also read that pattern A seems to be more prevalent when blood triglycerides are lower, while pattern B seems to be more prevalent when the triglycerides are high. Thoughts on this?
    This is correct. Small dense LDL also tends to be more atherogenic. Unfortunately, particle size is not easy to measure.


    Quote Originally Posted by jfsully View Post
    Believe it or not, I didn’t want to argue about it, I was just trying to learn something.
    Did you learn something?

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Santana View Post
    This is correct. Small dense LDL also tends to be more atherogenic. Unfortunately, particle size is not easy to measure.




    Did you learn something?
    Always do.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    4,621

    Default

    Glad to hear it. Always happy to help.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    21

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    At the risk of getting hammered here - If you care about your cholesterol levels and want to improve them, cardio will yield quick results.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •