ExRx.net

Exercise Prescription on the Net
It is currently Fri Aug 22, 2014 4:40 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 2:59 pm 
Online
moderator
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Posts: 6397
Location: Halifax, NS
Sat fat causes the LDLs to get large and fluffy. By volume the amount goes up but the numbers go down. It's the small ones that are harmful.

Its carbs that cause large numbers of small LDL's and triglicerides. The small LDLs are highly oxidative and are harmful. Likewise the trigicerides are harmful. The large fluffy LDLs and HDLs are protective. The problem is that the LDL number you're looking act is a group of potenntially harmful and protective elements and no meaningful conclusion can be drawn.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:57 pm 
Online
moderator
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Posts: 6397
Location: Halifax, NS
New study:
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstrac ... 09.27725v1

Quote:
A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:28 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 1:55 am
Posts: 719
Update my lipid profile test. (mg/dl)
Clolesterol 264
Triglycerides 32
HDL 68
LDL 185

Blood Urea Nitrogen
BUN 24.9

The result is a lot better than the last time although it's still higher than the doctor's good health range. So the good new is I don't have to take any medication. However, the doctor had a comment on my BUN and Creatinine which are too high and I should lower my protein intake or my kidney could have a problem filter out the waste from my body. Maybe I'll try to drink more water.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:18 am 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member

Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 3:46 pm
Posts: 1455
Are you taking creatine?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:16 pm 
Offline
Associate Member
Associate Member

Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:55 am
Posts: 468
Location: Seattle
that BUN doesn't seem that high - just the result of a higher protein diet...

thats in mg/dL right?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:19 am 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member

Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:04 pm
Posts: 1106
stuward wrote:
New study:
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstrac ... 09.27725v1

Quote:
A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD.



The hospital that did that study is currently doing another study relating to cholesterol. http://www.chori.org/Clinical_Studies/CRC/DELL_09.html

So if you know anyone in Oakland... I would be interested in being in a study haha on my high fat diet.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:29 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 1:55 am
Posts: 719
frogbyte wrote:
Are you taking creatine?

No, but I aim for at least 170g of protein per day, plus and extra 25g after workout. I weigh 185lb.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 9:01 am 
Online
moderator
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Posts: 6397
Location: Halifax, NS
I've been thinking about this for a while but I've been heisitating since I'm not in the medical profession and don't want to give medical advice.

However, since I like giving my opinions I will.

Blood tests are like pictures. They describe a thing, but they are not the thing. Neither are symptoms. Many treat the tests as if they are the thing, and that's what gets treated. It's the lab results and symptoms that get treated, not the desease or the patient. Sometimes, that's like removing the battery from the smoke detector to get it to stop ringing. The effciacy of different tests is debatable and we've talked about that before.

Most tests measure associations between indicators and desease in normal populations. The problem comes when an individual doesn't fit in the "normal" population.

Someone who's "normal" eats a diet consisting of mostly carbs, too much sugar, too much gluten, too much Omega 6, too little protein and omega 3. As well, the "normal" person's workout consists of jogging on a treadmill for 30-60 minutes several times a week with the odd yoga or pilates class for strength building. This is the population we're being compared to. Personally, I'd give up having some odd test results in favor of having reduced heart desease and cancer risk, reduced inflamation, improved insulin response, better mobility and strength than "normal" people. I like going in to my doctor each year and hearing, nothing wrong with you, see you next year.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4


All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group