Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Medicine and other human performance related issues.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Whirly
10000 and still climbing
10000 and still climbing
Posts: 11396
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 3:25 pm
Closest Airfield: Ermelo
Location: Mpumalanga
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 13 times

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by Whirly » Mon Mar 07, 2016 9:46 am

Fransw wrote:I like the Tim Naokes diet the best! Fatty foods, butter, full cream everything....... I lost weight , stronger, faster than ever, lower cholesterol, blood press, etc etc . Works for me.
Works for me too, been doing it for eighteen months now and can agree. I modified it a bit though. :D

Whirly.
Every dog needs a home and every home needs a dog (or two or three).
rattex
Aircraft in Hangar
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2015 4:22 pm
Closest Airfield: favv
Location: Meyerton
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rattex » Fri Mar 11, 2016 7:44 pm

Hi Rainier
You may want to look at getting apolipoprotein A1 & B lab tests done, as well as an inflammation test. These provide an alternative view on cardiac health. To quote Wikipedia “ApoA1 is often used as a biomarker for prediction of cardiovascular diseases and the ratio apoB- 100/apoA1 has been reported as a stronger predictor for the risk of myocardial infarction than any other lipid measurement. “

They are available via Ampath if I am not mistaken. You may have to have a homoeopath request and interpret them for you, as GP often balk, as they do not fit the conventional disease model.

I think you are on the right track, and wish you luck.
Walid
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1212
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:15 pm
Closest Airfield: FALA
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by Walid » Sat Mar 12, 2016 12:49 pm

Rainier, how do you take your vitamin C ?
rainier
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:33 am
Location: Somerset West
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rainier » Tue Mar 15, 2016 1:19 pm

I use CRP as an inflammation marker.
I used to get levels bouncing around 4 to 6, occasionally higher - so that was my norm.
Last check I had a few weeks ago was 0.8. It's likely even lower now. That's way down.
In the absence of other causes of inflammation, CRP has a strong correlation with your level of arteriosclerosis.
You can have your lipoprotein(a) checked - that is the direct medium involved in the creation of arteriosclerosis (It is related to LDL combined with a protein). You should get a reading of less than 10. Please ask if the lab is calculating or measuring it. The calculation method (based on the levels of your other lipids) will not show if you reduce the level using the amino acids I mentioned.

As an aside, my cholesterol levels have practically collapsed in the last two weeks and are now all but normal in the lower 4's (total). This is remarkable given that I have not changed my diet, not taking any cholesterol lowering drugs (anymore) - just pop a few vitamins and benign supplements...

At the same time my stress ECG (which I do myself as I bought a machine) is showing tremendous improvements, I am having increasing difficulty seeing any ST depression during or after exercise - the software that comes with the system saw only a few minor events at around 0.7mm depression on V5 yesterday (anything up to 1mm is considered normal). I started with a whopping 4mm (not good for a flight medical).

I know I still face a problem - I have several stents. These are behaving themselves for now but there are issues with tissue growth which can lead to restenosis which I have had a problem with in the past. Unfortunately my treatments worked out so far cannot help with this.

Rainier
rattex wrote:Hi Rainier
You may want to look at getting apolipoprotein A1 & B lab tests done, as well as an inflammation test. These provide an alternative view on cardiac health. To quote Wikipedia “ApoA1 is often used as a biomarker for prediction of cardiovascular diseases and the ratio apoB- 100/apoA1 has been reported as a stronger predictor for the risk of myocardial infarction than any other lipid measurement. “

They are available via Ampath if I am not mistaken. You may have to have a homoeopath request and interpret them for you, as GP often balk, as they do not fit the conventional disease model.

I think you are on the right track, and wish you luck.
Who said the sky is the limit ? I think not.
rainier
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:33 am
Location: Somerset West
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rainier » Tue Mar 15, 2016 1:47 pm

Walid wrote:Rainier, how do you take your vitamin C ?
I only take the base molecule - pure ascorbic acid (Vitamin C is considered by many to be a combination of things and do not view ascorbic acid to be the whole Vitamin C).

The reason for this is that in this form it can act as a chelate for calcium (resulting in the common form calcium-ascorbate). This is needed as part of the therapy to assist in the removal of calcium from the arteriosclerotic plaque or excess calcium from your serum. (Vitamin K2 also helps greatly in the transport of the calcium from your arteries).

Since you are not looking at a mono therapy but rather at a combination of supplements where Vitamin C is also required as co-anti-oxidant the simplest way of getting the required quantity in combination of the other items you need is to use the pre-packaged product called "CholesterolEase" - this is the one now sold at Dischem and Clicks and a few other places. It is sold in a simple carton of 30 sachets. You mix a sachet with a glass of water. Does not even taste bad. I am using three of these per day but will likely soon change to two per day as it seems it's done the work it was supposed to do. After that you take a maintenance dose.
This is also by far the lowest cost solution.
Please take note that there is another product sold by VitaC also called "CholesterolEase" - that is completely different and not what I am talking about.

Lastly, if you have not yet had a a problem with arteriosclerosis but you have a family history of this - you can take one sachet a day as preventative. If you weigh over 90Kg - take two. However, it would be a good idea to ask a knowledgeable GP for a comprehensive blood test which would include such things as thyroid function tests and such like (Test for T3 and T3r hormones as well). Often high cholesterol has causes other than diet or direct genetics and these can often be easily corrected if they can be identified. Unfortunately, many doctors skip all this and go straight to the statins without giving this any thought.

Rainier
Who said the sky is the limit ? I think not.
Walid
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1212
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:15 pm
Closest Airfield: FALA
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by Walid » Fri Mar 25, 2016 3:47 pm

Went for an executive medical on Friday morning. Total Cholesterol and "bad" cholesterol levels are too high (good cholesterol level is high enough). I have never taken any statins - I have just started taking CholesterolEase this morning. I will test again in 6 months.
rainier
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:33 am
Location: Somerset West
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rainier » Tue Mar 29, 2016 9:28 am

Walid wrote:Went for an executive medical on Friday morning. Total Cholesterol and "bad" cholesterol levels are too high (good cholesterol level is high enough). I have never taken any statins - I have just started taking CholesterolEase this morning. I will test again in 6 months.
If you can, please have your thyroid hormones checked. T3 and T3r. This should be the first thing your doctor should check if you have elevated cholesterol levels. A fair percentage of patients have low T3 levels due to a "lazy" thyroid. Lack of Iodine in the diet is the primary cause. In SA our typical diets are very low in Iodine.
T3 is responsible for creating LDL receptors on your cell membranes. LDL is food for your cells (to put it simply). Lacking these LDL levels increase in your serum and LDL stays in the serum for longer increasing chance of oxidation.

Iodine is easily supplemented but don't do that until you know whats what.

Another hint can be if you change your diet to something approaching the banting diet (i.e. cut out a lot of the carbs and add protein) and your cholesterol goes up instead of down - that is pretty solid evidence that your thyroid is not working well.

Statins should only be a last resort if you cannot get things under control in any other way.

BTW, as a side note: If you use CholesterolEase for a while the simple pharmacy cholesterol tests and home test kits don't work anymore (i.e. those that use a color change on a test strip). They may show an increased result. You need a proper lab test.

Rainier
Who said the sky is the limit ? I think not.
Walid
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1212
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:15 pm
Closest Airfield: FALA
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by Walid » Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:56 am

rainier wrote:
Walid wrote:Rainier, how do you take your vitamin C ?
I only take the base molecule - pure ascorbic acid (Vitamin C is considered by many to be a combination of things and do not view ascorbic acid to be the whole Vitamin C).

The reason for this is that in this form it can act as a chelate for calcium (resulting in the common form calcium-ascorbate). This is needed as part of the therapy to assist in the removal of calcium from the arteriosclerotic plaque or excess calcium from your serum. (Vitamin K2 also helps greatly in the transport of the calcium from your arteries).

Since you are not looking at a mono therapy but rather at a combination of supplements where Vitamin C is also required as co-anti-oxidant the simplest way of getting the required quantity in combination of the other items you need is to use the pre-packaged product called "CholesterolEase" - this is the one now sold at Dischem and Clicks and a few other places. It is sold in a simple carton of 30 sachets. You mix a sachet with a glass of water. Does not even taste bad. I am using three of these per day but will likely soon change to two per day as it seems it's done the work it was supposed to do. After that you take a maintenance dose.
This is also by far the lowest cost solution.
Please take note that there is another product sold by VitaC also called "CholesterolEase" - that is completely different and not what I am talking about.

Lastly, if you have not yet had a a problem with arteriosclerosis but you have a family history of this - you can take one sachet a day as preventative. If you weigh over 90Kg - take two. However, it would be a good idea to ask a knowledgeable GP for a comprehensive blood test which would include such things as thyroid function tests and such like (Test for T3 and T3r hormones as well). Often high cholesterol has causes other than diet or direct genetics and these can often be easily corrected if they can be identified. Unfortunately, many doctors skip all this and go straight to the statins without giving this any thought.

Rainier
I am just a bit concerned as your body cannot store vitamin C won't you just urinate out most of the Cholestrol Ease ?
rainier
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:33 am
Location: Somerset West
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rainier » Wed Mar 30, 2016 11:44 am

Walid wrote:
I am just a bit concerned as your body cannot store vitamin C won't you just urinate out most of the Cholestrol Ease ?
Ascorbic acid is only a small but important part of what is in the product. It is used as anti-oxidant and chelate (for calcium).

The established medical opinion is that ascorbic is flushed out of your system quickly. In addition serum levels do not rise linear with dosage which leads directly to the opinion that there is no point in taking large dosage of ascorbic.
There are several studies around this you can view on the NIH website and these are often quoted. These studies are fairly old now but are taken pretty much as gospel.

However.

As we know now, things are not that simple. Nobody in the past actually measured the amount of ascorbic (or the conversion products) passed through the urine - it was simply assumed (never mind most studies only used very small doses).
We know that a lot of the excess ascorbic at higher doses ends up in your cells where it is actually stored and given a constant dose your tissue saturation level is reached in about three months (it also takes around that time to flush it out again). This mechanism explains the non-linear behavior of the serum saturation level (which takes about two weeks to saturate). It is quite linear up to a certain point - once you reach that ascorbic is readily absorbed by your tissues - that is when the curve flattens and seemingly does not rise anymore (at least not fast).
The net result of this is that you create your own "slow release" ascorbic deposit to some extent.

Getting back to the CholesterolEase, every time you take a sachet you give your serum a 3000mg "hit" of ascorbic. Your serum level spikes for around 30 minutes. This is the time where chelation happens. Most of this (unfortuately) results in sodium-ascorbate - but some ends up as calcium-ascorbate and a bit as magnesium-ascorbate. It's a gentle way to remove excess calcium without going through the more severe intravenous chelation process.

We are however also interested in the anti-oxidant properties of ascorbate - we need to minimize any oxidization of fats in your serum (which includes LDL) and ascorbate is very effective here (I don't think any medical professional still disagrees with this).

You will also find a hefty dose of folic acid in the product - this does much the same.

As you also get a lot of Vitamin E the ascorbic is vital - it prevents the E from becoming toxic (your body needs to convert this to its more useful products and this requires a co-anti-oxidant).

The anti-imflammatory properties of the various vitamins included are also not to be sneezed at - up to the point where I started this myself I was taking one or two over-the-counter anti-inflammatories every day to help with the still considerable damage caused by the statins at that time. The first thing I noticed is that the inflammation in my joints dissipated at breakneck pace - within a day I stopped the anti-inflammatories and have never had the need to touch them again.

Hiked up Table mountains skeleton gorge and down nursery ravine on Easter Monday - and pretty fast too. Zero chest pains or anything related despite really moving it up the mountain. "The miracle continues...".

Rainier
Who said the sky is the limit ? I think not.
Walid
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1212
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:15 pm
Closest Airfield: FALA
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by Walid » Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:53 pm

Rainier, is the only way that doctors can check whether your arteries are getting clogged, to do an angiogram ?
Kiewiet Vlok
Stressed Eric ain't got nothing on me
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 8:37 pm
Closest Airfield: Klerksdorp
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by Kiewiet Vlok » Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:26 pm

angeo not the only ,not without risk and indicasions must be right

there is a perfusion scan one can do , much safer, ask your gp to send you to a kardiologist that can arange it

Kiewiet
rainier
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:33 am
Location: Somerset West
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rainier » Wed Apr 06, 2016 10:11 am

Walid wrote:Rainier, is the only way that doctors can check whether your arteries are getting clogged, to do an angiogram ?
Well, seems to be my Cardiologist's favorite method. I'm not sure anymore - think I have had around 8 of these done so far.
It's the only method that tends to give a true result and I suppose if the doc suspects a blockage it's the way to go as it is not just a diagnostic tool but at the same time you can fix many of the issues by angioplasty or inserting of stents.

I suppose other methods have their role to play in less obvious or suspected initial cases - but if positive you'll end up with a angiogram anyway.

I have had one perfusion scan done so far to assess damage caused by a heart attack (relatively minor one leading to a big one hours later - luckily when the big one struck I was already in an ICU bed for just a few minutes and they got me going again immediately so that one caused no damage).
It's a rough scan that does not show a detailed image - rather you can see areas of the heart not doing that great so you can take an educated guess as to the causes.

I'm now some three months on the protocol. On Sunday I had my last stress ECG. I am very happy to report that for the first time I can show a stress ECG to target heart rate (165 for my age) that gives a result you would call "normal". My maximum ST depression on V5 is now about 0.75mm from baseline and reducing at max exertion (possibly dilation of the arteries due to Adrenalin). In December I was 4mm at just 140 heart rate (1mm is considered "normal"). My best one since my bypass some 13 years ago was 1.5mm (they gave me a flight medical with that).

I know most doctors look at this with a great deal of suspicion, even ridicule. But none can prove it does not work. By contrast there are thousands of observational studies on individuals and several related double blind studies that look at parts of the protocol with good results and of course quite a few in vitro studies showing very strong evidence.
I myself am adding yet another observational, individual study. For me personally, the argument is settled. I'd be a complete idiot not to take this seriously.

My doctors should have been the ones telling me to do this. Instead they preached the statin mantra that did only damage to me and did not fix anything. Yes, I am angry. Also at myself. I should have looked at what else was out there much earlier.
For me, Dr. Google worked just fine and I'll stake my reputation on this.

Rainier
Who said the sky is the limit ? I think not.
rattex
Aircraft in Hangar
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2015 4:22 pm
Closest Airfield: favv
Location: Meyerton
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rattex » Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:49 pm

The cynical take on statins is that they help only 1 in 100 people, and that is assuming that you are a middle aged male who has already had a heart attack. The latest American guidelines are that pratically everybody should be taking them (slightly exagerated).

If you had started your latest regimen earlier, do you think that it is possible that you might not have needed stents at all?
rainier
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1078
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:33 am
Location: Somerset West
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rainier » Wed Apr 06, 2016 3:30 pm

rattex wrote:The cynical take on statins is that they help only 1 in 100 people, and that is assuming that you are a middle aged male who has already had a heart attack. The latest American guidelines are that pratically everybody should be taking them (slightly exagerated).

If you had started your latest regimen earlier, do you think that it is possible that you might not have needed stents at all?
Not just possible. Guaranteed.
This is not one of those feeble interventions that may improve or retard things a little, perhaps buying you a few more years if you are lucky. This goes to the root of the issue with guns blazing (statins merely tamper a bit with the peripheral). It works so fast it is little short of unbelievable (so from that point of view I'll humor the doctors). Most of the arteriosclerosis sufferers that stumble on this are precisely those that effectively are "final stage", i.e. not long now... So, from that viewpoint you have the worst possible study sample. Yet, the endlessly repeated outcome is the same: Radical, very noticeable improvement starting in as little as a few days. The doctors tell me Arteriosclerosis cannot be cured. To this I say "Bollocks !". You can get rid of it completely even if far advanced. You don't need a prescription drug, treatment is cheap. Even more unbelievable - I know. But that's just it. If you would have told me what I am telling you now three months ago I would have given you a funny look normally reserved for those escaped from the loony bin.

To answer you question - it's about prevention too. If I would have known about this say 14 years ago and I would have interpreted my symptoms at the time correctly - I would never have needed a bypass in the first place.

One of the experiences gained with the protocol is that dosage of some of the ingredients is critical and related to your weight so that needs to be done right. Take too little and you might as well not take anything at all. For the average 85Kg male you'd need around 5 grams of ascorbic acid per day as a preventative if you have family history and are getting to the dangerous 40's. If your cholesterol levels are elevated (most likely they will be), a bit of L-Lysine and L-Proline (You must have both !) will be a great help too. I'd add two teaspoons of Soy Lecithin granules a day as well (contains around 50% phospholipids) and definitely Vitamin K2 (MK7) at 50mcd per day or more.
That's minimum. Good idea as well to ask for some blood tests: Magnesium, Potassium, Selenium, Vitamin D3, Iodine, thyroid function and correct anything that is not right.
Yes, a bit of exercise and a good decent diet is needed as well. That means a good balanced diet containing some real nutrients and cut the sugars and starches a bit.

It's important to understand exactly what arteriosclerosis is and how and why it starts and how it develops and what it needs to develop - once that is understood this protocol starts to make sense and you will understand what all these chemicals do exactly and why they are needed. It really is chemistry. This is not a random collection of snake oil powders found at the bottom shelf of your local sangoma. It's not too surprising that the person that first clicked onto this (or at least the initial seed of what has developed since then) was in fact a chemist - and a very good one.

The trouble with prevention on something like Arteriosclerosis is: How do you know if it's working ? How do you know if what you are taking is actually doing something useful ? How do you know if not taking anything would not make a difference since you'll not get it anyway ? You don't. That's the problem. You only really know once you get nailed and then do something and it happens to do the trick. Only then will the light bulb go on...

Rainier
Who said the sky is the limit ? I think not.
rattex
Aircraft in Hangar
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2015 4:22 pm
Closest Airfield: favv
Location: Meyerton
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Cholesterol - Risk myth?

Unread post by rattex » Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:08 pm

A US study quoted in the guardian today shows that lowering cholesterol can raise the risk of death. The study is presented in the BMJ (British Medical Journal), so I think the main stream will slowly have to sit up and take notice.

<<<
Replacing animal fat in the human diet with vegetable oil may not lower the risk of heart disease, and might even boost it, according to a study that challenges a cornerstone of dietary advice.

Switching from saturated to unsaturated Omega-6 fats did result in lower blood cholesterol in a trial with nearly 10,000 participants, the US study said, but not the expected reduction in heart disease deaths.

Those with a greater reduction in cholesterol “had a higher rather than a lower risk of death”, according to the research published by the medical journal BMJ.
....
“If blood cholesterol values are not a reliable indicator of risk of cardiovascular disease, then a careful review of the evidence that underpins dietary recommendations is warranted,” he wrote in the BMJ.
>>>

Return to “Aviation medical and related issues”