High LDL Cholesterol- HELP!

About specific vitamines, minerals or fiber, for example
nick
Moderator
Posts: 534
https://cutt.ly/meble-kuchenne-wroclaw
Joined: Tue 09 Aug 2005 00:01

questions about "Scandalous Cholesterol" article

Post by nick »

If you consume lots of cholesterol, the body just produces and also (re-)absorbs less ; One purpose of cholesterol for example, is to be transformed into bile acids, to decompose consumed fats. After digestion these bile acids are re-transformed into cholesterol, dependent on the need for cholesterol.

So, when I eat about 10 yolks a day, the absorption rate can be decreased because the cholesterol is clean. The natural oxy-cholesterols function to decrease the absorption, whilst the unatural exogenous oxy-cholesterols only increase the cholesterol level. Is the cholesterol absorbed from the bowels by chlyromicrons, taken to the liver, where the need is determined? Or does the liver/gallbladder communicate to the bowel uptake sytem (chlyromicrons) of how much to absorb? The latter makes more sense in terms of effeciency.

Oxy-cholesterols in prepared food, however, are mostly “strange” oxy-cholesterols, and are not 'recognized' by the body. Therefore, most oxy-cholesterols from prepared food do not inhibit cholesterols synthesis, increasing cholesterol level.

So where does this relationship of LDL and HDL take place. LDL and HDL are the regulators of the blood cholesterol level, right? If your body needed more cholesterol then it would increase the LDL level. So naturally, the idea that cholesterol is bad is stupid. Also, how will your body get the needed cholesterol if you decrease the LDL level? This doesn't sound so healthy.

The combined level of natural (oxy-) cholesterol and unnatural oxy-cholesterols can be further increased by unnatural oxy-cholesterols blocking transformation of cholesterol into bile acids. (7) And most unnatural oxy-cholesterols cannot be transformed into bile acids at all.

Because unnatural oxy-cholesterols cause accumulation of (oxy-) cholesterols, there logically is much damaged cholesterol (8) and -fats (9) in arteriosclerotic plaque.


So the feedback system is 'screwed' up and the intake of bad cholesterol is increased and unregulated. Does this bad cholesterol end up as LDL where it is transported around the body? Or can oxy-cholesterols be used in HDL?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholesterol

In the liver, chylomicron particles give up triglycerides and some cholesterol, and are converted into low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles, which carry triglycerides and cholesterol on to other body cells. In healthy individuals the LDL particles are large and relatively few in number. In contrast, large numbers of small LDL particles are strongly associated with promoting atheromatous disease within the arteries. (Lack of information on LDL particle number and size is one of the major problems of conventional lipid tests.)

Smaller LDL particle size is the result of a 'messed up' cholesterol metabolism. The body has no defense(simply exporting the bad cholesterol) against the bad cholesterol, so it is packaged in LDL, resulting in higher cholesterol levels?

High-density lipoprotein (HDL) particles transport cholesterol back to the liver for excretion, but vary considerably in their effectiveness for doing this. Having large numbers of large HDL particles correlates with better health outcomes. In contrast, having small amounts of large HDL particles is strongly associated with atheromatous disease progression within the arteries. (Note that the concentration of total HDL does not indicate the actual number of functional large HDL particles, another of the major problems of conventional lipid tests.)

Hmmm. I take it that oxy-cholesterols possibly screw with the HDL level as well?

Biosynthesis of cholesterol is directly regulated by the cholesterol levels present, though the homeostatic mechanisms involved are only partly understood. A higher intake in food leads to a net decrease in endogenous production and vice versa.

Since our bodies can make all the cholesterol we need, is their an advantage by eating yolks and sashimi? Is it better? I would side with the fact that you need all the other nutrients from them as well.

The average amount of blood cholesterol varies with age, typically rising gradually until one is about 60 years old. A study by Ockene et al. showed that there are seasonal variations in cholesterol levels in humans, more, on average, in winter.

Interesting. Probably cause it influences the serotonine system, because there is less sunlight, which increases the decompostion of serotinine. And by eating more cholesterol, this helps make up for the difference?

Thanks. I really would like make a nice informational graphic on this topic as well.
Last edited by nick on Mon 23 Jan 2006 05:59, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Re: questions about "Scandalous Cholesterol" artic

Post by RRM »

nick wrote:
So, when I eat about 10 yolks a day, the absorption rate can be decreased because the cholesterol is clean.
The natural oxy-cholesterols function to decrease the absorption, whilst the unatural exogenous oxy-cholesterols only increase the cholesterol level.
All natural (oxy)cholesterol is part of that negative feedback system; the more is ingested, the less is produced and the less bile acids are reabsorbed. Unnatural oxycholesterols are not part of this system.
Is the cholesterol absorbed from the bowels by chlyromicrons, taken to the liver, where the need is determined?
I think this is determined by the blood-cholesterol level.
The blood, the liver, the gallbladder, the bowels; they are all part of the system and take part in 'the conversation'.

So where does this relationship of LDL and HDL take place. LDL and HDL are the regulators of the blood cholesterol level, right?
No, they are just the transport proteins; the carriers of cholesterol. They are not good versus bad; Of all the cholesterol that is transported, its just that one carries more unnatural cholesterol than the other.

So the feedback system is 'screwed' up and the intake of bad cholesterol is increased and unregulated. Does this bad cholesterol end up as LDL where it is transported around the body? Or can oxy-cholesterols be used in HDL?
Bad cholesterol is not specific for LDL, but can also be transported by HDL.
The uptake of bad cholesterol is never regulated because they are 'outside the system'.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholesterol
large numbers of small LDL particles are strongly associated with promoting atheromatous disease within the arteries.
The body has no defense(simply exporting the bad cholesterol) against the bad cholesterol, so it is packaged in LDL, resulting in higher cholesterol levels?
Yes indeed, the LDL/HDL keep on carrying around the bad cholesterol because it cannot be utilized.
the concentration of total HDL does not indicate the actual number of functional large HDL particles


Indeed; HDL carrying around bad cholesterol is not functional.
Since our bodies can make all the cholesterol we need, is their an advantage by eating yolks and sashimi?
No, you may ingest too little cholesterol resulting in too low serum cholesterol levels, causing depressions and sleeplessness. So, no, our body does not always produce sufficient cholesterol.

Interesting. Probably cause it influences the serotonine system, because there is less sunlight, which increases the decompostion of serotinine. And by eating more cholesterol, this helps make up for the difference?
Thats one hypothesis. Also, the serotonine system highly influences the cholesterol system, so that sunlight (and thus season) does too.
Justin
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed 05 Oct 2005 00:01

cholesterol

Post by Justin »

RRM, for people with high blood cholesterol levels taking statins everyday to reduce LDL cholesterol, is sufficient cholesterol (as much as you like) from raw egg yolks still recomended? thanks
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Re: cholesterol

Post by RRM »

Justin wrote:RRM, for people with high blood cholesterol levels taking statins everyday to reduce LDL cholesterol, is sufficient cholesterol (as much as you like) from raw egg yolks still recomended? thanks
Yes, absolutely.
LDL and HDL are the proteins that carry cholesterol.
They both carry both good and bad cholesterol, but LDL tends to carry more of the bad than HDL.
Does that make those carriers bad / good?
Of course not; its the bad cholesterol that is bad.

Also, if the combined level of bad + good cholesterol is too high, you should not try to lower this level, but you should lower the level of bad cholesterol, because good cholesterol is an essential nutrient.
That is why 'cholesterol'-lowering drugs readily cause depressions (because they also lower the level of good cholesterol, which plays an essential role in many processes, including your mood).

So, lowering the combined cholesterol level is a bad idea.
Consuming less bad cholesterol is a good idea.
CurlyGirl
Moderator
Posts: 341
Joined: Thu 29 Dec 2005 01:01
Location: South Africa (soon to be USA)
Contact:

Post by CurlyGirl »

It is the ratio of total cholesterol to good cholesterol (HDL) that is the key factor, or so I have read. In that case, you could have a higher-than-average total cholesterol, but have a superbly healthy ratio between total cholesterol and HDL. Has anyone recently had their cholesterol checked? Anyone able to offer some comparisons between their cholesterol levels pre- and post-Wai-diet?
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

CurlyGirl wrote:It is the ratio of total cholesterol to good cholesterol (HDL) that is the key factor, or so I have read.
The problem is that they base "good" or "bad" on the carriers of the cholesterol, which is incorrect, as it depends on the molecular structure of the cholesterol itself, and not on the proteins that carry the cholesterol.

So, no, its not what they think is "total / good", "bad / good" or "bad / total" (which are all basically the same numbers, put in different perspectives).

These ratios are very misleading, becaused not based on what is pretended they are based on.
CurlyGirl
Moderator
Posts: 341
Joined: Thu 29 Dec 2005 01:01
Location: South Africa (soon to be USA)
Contact:

Post by CurlyGirl »

Ah, I see... so the low-/high-density lipoproteins are the little trucks that carry the cholesterol molecules around. So, science hasn't found a way to test the structure of the actual cholesterol molecules themselves, and use THIS to assess someone's health, but instead resorts to a primitive measure of LDL or HDL?? Grrrrr.... another reason to avoid doctors/tests/labs/pharmacies.

So how do I know, myself, whether my arteries, circulatory system, heart, etc are in good shape? (Apart from the obvious - i.e. do I look and feel healthy and radiant?) How can I test my own cholesterol molecules?
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

CurlyGirl wrote:Ah, I see... so the low-/high-density lipoproteins are the little trucks that carry the cholesterol molecules around.
Exactly.
So, science hasn't found a way to test the structure of the actual cholesterol molecules themselves
They do, actually, and they know which ones are the bad ones (that is what the WaiSays article is based on), but they prefer to focus on LDL/HDL instead. Otherwise everybody might understand whats cooking (pun intended)
instead resorts to a primitive measure of LDL or HDL?? Grrrrr....
Yep
So how do I know, myself, whether my arteries, circulatory system, heart, etc are in good shape?
Well, even though that their detection system is far from accurate, there is SOME truth in it, because "bad" carriers indeed carry around a bit more bad cholesterol than "good" carriers, and that an extremely high total cholesterol MAY point to a high level of bad cholesterol (since bad cholesterol impairs cholesterol level regulation).
If their tests cannot detect anything "unusual", you are probably safe.

We need to wait for tests developed that actually show the percentage of bad cholesterol (altered/damaged cholesterol molecules)
CurlyGirl
Moderator
Posts: 341
Joined: Thu 29 Dec 2005 01:01
Location: South Africa (soon to be USA)
Contact:

Post by CurlyGirl »

Thank you for your explanations RRM!
Justin
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed 05 Oct 2005 00:01

Post by Justin »

RRM i'd like your opinion on something.
I've found some really good sites that also understand the truth about cholesterol

http://www.westonaprice.org/moderndisea ... olest.html
http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/F ... terol.html
(if you haven't come across these before, they're both worth a very good read).

However these sites do not seem to advocate that heated cholesterol is harmful. All this great work these sites have done, but are they missing the final piece of the jigsaw??? Is cooked cholesterol the real problem with the cholesterol scandal? Is it as simple as raw cholesterol = good/essential/healthy, cooked cholesterol = bad/dangerous/unhealthy? thanks for your time
User avatar
Oscar
Administrator
Posts: 4350
Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2005 00:01

Post by Oscar »

Yes, they are missing a piece of the puzzle. They look solely at cholesterol itself, not the oxy-cholesterols which originate by heating. The latter site was also mentioned recently in this thread: http://www.acneboard.com/forum/viewtopi ... sc&start=0
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

Do they think there is any association between 'cholesterol' and vascular diseases? ..or diet in general?
huntress
Posts: 235
Joined: Tue 13 Dec 2005 01:01

Post by huntress »

There is a book by Dr Matthias Rath which explains on the association with 'cholesterol' with vascular diseases extensively.

The book can be downloaded at http://www.life-enthusiast.com/index.ph ... es&Q2=Rath
User avatar
RRM
Administrator
Posts: 8164
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005 00:01
Contact:

Post by RRM »

I dont have time to read that.
Maybe Justin can get into it.
User avatar
Oscar
Administrator
Posts: 4350
Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2005 00:01

Post by Oscar »

From the chapter on cholesterol:
Dr. Rath wrote:Cholesterol Is Only a Secondary Risk Factor
Worldwide, hundreds of millions of people have elevated
blood levels of cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL (low-density
lipoproteins), lipoprotein (a) and other risk factors. However,
cholesterol and all other blood risk factors are considered only
“secondary” risk factors because they can only cause damage if
the the blood vessel wall is already weakened by vitamin deficiencies.
Thus, elevated blood levels of cholesterol and other
blood risk factors are not the cause of cardiovascular disease —
they are the consequence of the ongoing vascular disease.
Dr. Rath wrote:Scientific research and clinical studies have already documented
the particular value of vitamin C, vitamin B3 (nicotinate),
vitamin B5 (pantothenate), vitamin E and carnitine, as
well as other components of Dr. Rath’s Cellular Health recommendations,
for lowering elevated cholesterol levels and other
secondary risk factors in the blood.
Dr. Rath wrote:Dr. Rath’s Cellular Health recommendations comprise a
selection of vitamins and other essential nutrients that help to
normalize elevated levels of secondary risk factors. These
essential nutrients lower the production rate of cholesterol and
other repair molecules in the liver and, at the same time, contribute
to the repair of the artery walls.
Post Reply