Re: Cholesterol - Can We Go Too Low?

On 2006-10-06 17:49:11 -0400, Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> said:

> In another thread it was mentioned that a certain level of
> cholesterol is necessary for the brain among other things.
> As someone who seems to have genetically high LDL, it never
> really occurred to me that I could go too low.

Forget it. You CAN'T go too low.

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 00:27:27 GMT, sechumlib
<sechumlib@liberal.net> wrote:

>
>> In another thread it was mentioned that a certain level of
>> cholesterol is necessary for the brain among other things.
>> As someone who seems to have genetically high LDL, it never
>> really occurred to me that I could go too low.
>
>Forget it. You CAN'T go too low.

Oh? Do you mean it's not physically possible for anyone to
do so, or for me personally to do so, or that no matter how
low I go it won't cause me harm?

And on what do you base the assertion, whichever one you
made?

Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg
--
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.

sechumlib wrote:
> On 2006-10-06 17:49:11 -0400, Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com>
> said:
>
>> In another thread it was mentioned that a certain level of
>> cholesterol is necessary for the brain among other things.
>> As someone who seems to have genetically high LDL, it never
>> really occurred to me that I could go too low.
>
> Forget it. You CAN'T go too low.
>
Thanks, doc. I'll tell Phil that /his/ doc was wrong.

Until this past April, Phil was a co-worker of mine. He was part of the
team that hired me fresh-out of school, and I worked for him on my first
from-scratch design project.

He is of italian descent, and has a very high metabolism. He's always
munching on vegetables. Back in college, the dining hall had an
all-you-can-eat ice cream night. He ate so much that he now acts
violently allergic to dairy (not just lactose intolerant). So he can't
eat /anything/ with dairy anymore.

Last time I saw him (2 or 3 years ago), he was still muscular but
otherwise very thin.

He was told by his Doc to increase his meat and eggs intake because his
cholesterol was too low. No, I don't remember what it was.

mt

--
T2 dx May 2005 with A1c 10.1
1000 mg Metformin 2x day
1000 mg Fish Oil (Omega 3) 2x day
500 mg Niacin 1x day
last A1c: 5.7

On 2006-10-07 21:33:14 -0400, Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> said:

> On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 00:27:27 GMT, sechumlib
> <sechumlib@liberal.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>> In another thread it was mentioned that a certain level of
>>> cholesterol is necessary for the brain among other things.
>>> As someone who seems to have genetically high LDL, it never
>>> really occurred to me that I could go too low.
>>
>> Forget it. You CAN'T go too low.
>
> Oh? Do you mean it's not physically possible for anyone to
> do so, or for me personally to do so, or that no matter how
> low I go it won't cause me harm?
>
> And on what do you base the assertion, whichever one you
> made?

Well, let's see. Perhaps I was oversimplifying.

Two things (that I know of) can cause low cholesterol: natural
physiology or cholesterol-lowering drugs such as statins.

Natural physiology won't lead to a cholesterol level that's TOO low for
healthy survival unless there's something else wrong. Then that thing
has to be fixed. I would hope that the concerned person has been
advised of that by his/her doctor, and something is being done.

Cholesterol-lowering drugs are only used when one's cholesterol level
is too high, and only to the extent necessary to get it back into the
desirable range. So that won't make things too low.

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 13:21:59 GMT, sechumlib
<sechumlib@liberal.net> wrote:

>On 2006-10-07 21:33:14 -0400, Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> said:
>
>> On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 00:27:27 GMT, sechumlib
>> <sechumlib@liberal.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> In another thread it was mentioned that a certain level of
>>>> cholesterol is necessary for the brain among other things.
>>>> As someone who seems to have genetically high LDL, it never
>>>> really occurred to me that I could go too low.
>>>
>>> Forget it. You CAN'T go too low.
>>
>> Oh? Do you mean it's not physically possible for anyone to
>> do so, or for me personally to do so, or that no matter how
>> low I go it won't cause me harm?
>>
>> And on what do you base the assertion, whichever one you
>> made?
>
>Well, let's see. Perhaps I was oversimplifying.
>
>Two things (that I know of) can cause low cholesterol: natural
>physiology or cholesterol-lowering drugs such as statins.
>
>Natural physiology won't lead to a cholesterol level that's TOO low for
>healthy survival unless there's something else wrong. Then that thing
>has to be fixed. I would hope that the concerned person has been
>advised of that by his/her doctor, and something is being done.
>
>Cholesterol-lowering drugs are only used when one's cholesterol level
>is too high, and only to the extent necessary to get it back into the
>desirable range. So that won't make things too low.

Youi make an assumption in that last statement. "only to the
extent necessary to get it back into the desirable range"
begs two questions.

First that assumes a standard definition for "desirable
range" which involves at least three variables - HDL, LDL
and triglycerides, with VLDL starting to be included.

Second, it ignores the tendency reported on every forum I
read for medical staff to press for lower lipids without a
floor level and to prescribe statins almost as an automatic
response to even marginally high LDL even if other lipids
are low.
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg
--
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.

On 2006-10-08 11:08:29 -0400, Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> said:

> Youi make an assumption in that last statement. "only to the
> extent necessary to get it back into the desirable range"
> begs two questions.
> First that assumes a standard definition for "desirable
> range" which involves at least three variables - HDL, LDL
> and triglycerides, with VLDL starting to be included.
>
> Second, it ignores the tendency reported on every forum I
> read for medical staff to press for lower lipids without a
> floor level and to prescribe statins almost as an automatic
> response to even marginally high LDL even if other lipids
> are low.

Yes, I AM making assumptions - more than one, possibly. First, that one
is seeing a competent physician. Second, that that physician has a
reasonable idea of the balance between the variables you mention.
Third, that the physician is not interested (as he/she would not be if
the second question is answered in the affirmative) in merely
"press[ing] for lower lipids without a floor level".

If one accepts ALL possibilities, including those that would seem
absurd, anything may happen. That's sort of like George Gamow's
description of what might happen if the "law" of entropy ceased to
function: all the air in the room might collect in the opposite corner
and leave you to suffocate. I choose to try for the reasonable approach.

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 19:18:13 GMT, sechumlib
<sechumlib@liberal.net> wrote:

>On 2006-10-08 11:08:29 -0400, Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> said:
>
>> Youi make an assumption in that last statement. "only to the
>> extent necessary to get it back into the desirable range"
>> begs two questions.
>> First that assumes a standard definition for "desirable
>> range" which involves at least three variables - HDL, LDL
>> and triglycerides, with VLDL starting to be included.
>>
>> Second, it ignores the tendency reported on every forum I
>> read for medical staff to press for lower lipids without a
>> floor level and to prescribe statins almost as an automatic
>> response to even marginally high LDL even if other lipids
>> are low.
>
>Yes, I AM making assumptions - more than one, possibly. First, that one
>is seeing a competent physician. Second, that that physician has a
>reasonable idea of the balance between the variables you mention.
>Third, that the physician is not interested (as he/she would not be if
>the second question is answered in the affirmative) in merely
>"press[ing] for lower lipids without a floor level".
>
>If one accepts ALL possibilities, including those that would seem
>absurd, anything may happen. That's sort of like George Gamow's
>description of what might happen if the "law" of entropy ceased to
>function: all the air in the room might collect in the opposite corner
>and leave you to suffocate. I choose to try for the reasonable approach.

Unfortunately, the combination you imply is not absurd. I
wish it were.

Read through some past posts here, where people with good
trigs and HDL mention medical staff expressing concern at
LDL over 100.

Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg
--
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.