Have you had high cholesterol – How successful have you been in lowering your numbers .

[BigStar]

7 hours ago, save the frogs said:

fruit is also a high-carb food, but fruit doesn't contain gluten nor seed oils. 

and therefore lumping all carbs together and reducing a food to a macro-nutrient may not be accurate. 

Different sources of calories have different effects on the metabolism, quite true. Gary Taubes made this point exhaustively in Good Calories, Bad Calories: Fats, Carbs, and the Controversial Science of Diet and Health. But we tend to hate Gary Taubes here, though we haven't actually read what he says.???? Some of our warriors are now lifting their hands from their keyboards to make the sign of the cross.

 

So with fruits.

 

David Unwin's Infographics

 

You can find a chart here: https://thegestationaldiabetic.com/glycemic-index-fruit/

 

Me, I have berries daily. Makro sells frozen 1 kg bags of them pretty cheaply.

 

 

[BigStar]

3 hours ago, Toolong said:

People ought to (IMHO) take note of what Sheryl's saying here. 

 

Would suggest people check out the very convincing evidence out there to back it up, to an overwhelming degree. In my case mostly via youtube vids on the subject of low carb diets, including keto & carnivore. 

 

 

Yes. Best starting point: cut out the processed foods. Some of our members claim that this was enough to get back to a normal weight.

 

Unprocessed foods (though we've debated the definition) still may not be so great for the ol' metabolism, however, if they're starches.

 

 

The best practice is just to avoid the filler, with probable insulin spikes, and instead spend your money on nutrient-rich foods:

 

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2022.806566/full

 

[BigStar]

On 12/17/2022 at 7:12 AM, scubascuba3 said:

Probably snacking because not eating enough

Probably snacking because of insulin drops after spikes. Dysregulation driving fat deposit.

[Sheryl]

10 hours ago, mstevens said:

One thing I don't get from this thread is that most people seem to be just quoting their straight cholesterol numbers. I thought that was the old way of doing it and today it is generally considered a better measure to look at the ratio of cholesterol to HDL. You divide your total cholesterol number by your HDL cholesterol number and it should ideally be below 5. Below 3.5 is really where you want to be.

Total cholesterol is indeed nto what matters, one has to look at the total lipid profile and rations.

 

Some  Thai doctors - especially general doctors and upcountry - still do not understand that.

 

[ozimoron]

I'm very confused about all this. The Australia Heart Foundation recommends not eating red meat at all. It seems that all roads point to the Mediterranean diet of mainly fish, pulses veges and fruit. I gave up all red meat several years ago based on research similar to that quoted below.

 

https://thewest.com.au/lifestyle/health-wellbeing/red-meat-raises-heart-disease-risk-study-c-3467076

 

https://www.victorchang.edu.au/blog/heart-disease-red-meat

 

“Instead, we suggest people should get most of their heart-healthy protein from plant sources such as beans, lentils (legumes) and tofu, as well as fish and seafood, with a smaller amount from eggs and lean poultry. Heart-healthy eating is more about the combination of foods, eaten regularly over time.

 

https://www.heartfoundation.org.au/media-releases/new-advice-from-the-heart-foundation-on-meat

 

Cheese and cows milk are high nutrient rich foods but also high in fats and I assume are a cholesterol risk. Chicken looks useless according to the above chart.

 

From the last link:

 

We have removed our restriction for healthy Australians on eating full-fat milk, cheese and yogurt. While the evidence was mixed, this type of dairy was found to have a neutral effect, in that it doesn’t increase or decrease your risks for heart disease or stroke.

 

Red meat and cancer

 

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2015/11/03/report-says-eating-processed-meat-is-carcinogenic-understanding-the-findings/

 

Regularly eating red meat increases significantly risk of death from heart disease and cancer, according to a study of more than 120,000 people carried out over 28 years.

The findings show that each extra daily serving of processed red meat – equivalent to one hot dog or two rashers of bacon – raised mortality rate by a fifth.

Conversely, replacing red meat with fish, poultry, or plant-based protein foods contributed to a longer life.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/mar/12/red-meat-death-heart-cancer

 

New research that claims red and processed meat is probably not harmful to our health has caused controversy among experts who maintain people should cut down.

 

“This report has layers of flaws and is the most egregious abuse of evidence that I have ever seen,” said Walter Willett, professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, who advocates a plant-based diet.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/food/2019/sep/30/research-red-meat-poses-no-health-risk

 

Even moderate intake of red meat raises cancer risk, study finds

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/apr/17/even-moderate-intake-of-red-meat-raises-cancer-risk-study-finds

 

 

[ozimoron]

This kind of diet seems to make the most sense to me although living in Thailand leads me to eat more chicken because of convenience. It's getting very hardto find restaurant cooked fish meals using ocean caught fish rather than farmed fish.

 

https://www.verywellfit.com/pescatarian-diet-4174528

[Will B Good]

Take one statin a day......most recent blood test August 2022......all good.

 

No side effects, but where there's no sense there's no feeling.

[mstevens]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

I'm very confused about all this. The Australia Heart Foundation recommends not eating red meat at all. I\

 

Regularly eating red meat increases significantly risk of death from heart disease and cancer, according to a study of more than 120,000 people carried out over 28 years.

The findings show that each extra daily serving of processed red meat – equivalent to one hot dog or two rashers of bacon – raised mortality rate by a fifth.

Conversely, replacing red meat with fish, poultry, or plant-based protein foods contributed to a longer life.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/mar/12/red-meat-death-heart-cancer

 

I have read up on pretty much all diets and I am convinced that no matter which diet you choose, there are potentially issues with it. Vegans and vegetarians to a lesser extent potentially may suffer from various vitamin and mineral deficiencies. There's also a risk of oxalate toxicity if you go heavy on some types of vegetables. Carnivores who eat processed meat face an increased risk of cancer. One could go on and on - all diets have their pros and cons. Personally, I eat everything - but I make sure to eat as much variety as I can and go for organic, where possible. I know some think it's not worth it but the difference between organic and non-organic might be glyphosate - and I'd rather not put extra pressure on my liver to deal with that poison.

 

As far as red meat goes, there is a HUGE difference between eating grass-fed red meat and processed meat. I eat processed meat occasionally and consider it a treat. Grass-fed beef I enjoy frequently and to be frank, I feel good when I eat it. Not just the enjoyment of a steak, I feel more energetic when I eat beef. I know some prefer to avoid red meat but I really do believe that grass-fed red meat is hugely beneficial to good health.

[jts-khorat]

3 hours ago, BigStar said:

Could it have been gracku, with sildenafil and tadalafil?????

 

Never underestimate the power of placebo.

This was way before the dawn of Viagra, so I can deduce that this would be unlikely.

 

The placebo effect... maybe (but I doubt it, he was mixing in lots of herbal stuff in his concoction to be consumed right there, and the effect was going on for days -- not that I really needed it in those golden days of my youth ????).

[KannikaP]

3 hours ago, BigStar said:

Me, I have berries daily. Makro sells frozen 1 kg bags of them pretty cheaply.

And they are ideal for mixing with sugar, water and yeast.

3 x Mulberries @ Bht 99 a kilo, 2kg sugar, Lalvin 1118 @ Bht 60 and 8 litres of H2O and hey presto. Vino in moderation is good for reducing cholesterol

[ozimoron]

12 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

And they are ideal for mixing with sugar, water and yeast.

3 x Mulberries @ Bht 99 a kilo, 2kg sugar, Lalvin 1118 @ Bht 60 and 8 litres of H2O and hey presto. Vino in moderation is good for reducing cholesterol

Wouldn't all that sugar render this a poor choice?

[jts-khorat]

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

I'm very confused about all this. The Australia Heart Foundation recommends not eating red meat at all.

The problem with Western diet is, that lots of stuff is mixed together, which better should not be. This leads to statements as these, which are confusing at best, leading you into a whole wrong direction at worst.

 

The biggest issue in modern society is, that most people are pre-diabetic, due to massive amounts of processed carbs being consumed. The body is basically in constant emergency mode, trying to keep a stable insulin level. Add then a diet abundant in salted meat, often also heavily processed, and you create a recipe (literally) for disaster.

 

On top of that, we are under constant stress, with often bad sleeping habits, which tends to increase bad cholesterol with all its own side effects.

 

Untangling this is really difficult, but you have to start somewhere, and -- in my opinion -- the best way is to cut your carb intake. I had great success following a pretty harsh keto diet for a year, together with intermittent fasting, to loose a large part of my excess weight and de-stress my body overall: and it worked!

 

Nowadays, I am back to a more normal diet, cake, pizza and pasta are back on the menu, albeit a lot less than before. And I am still doing intermittent fasting and take care of consuming everything in a balance and without the excesses of previous times (which has become a lot easier, as the impossible food and sugar cravings have also simply gone).

 

In the end, this is what my doctor told me: if you want to heal naturally and sustainably, there are no quick fixes, especially if it took years or even decades of improper food intake to create the situation in the first place (so a definite 'No' to statins). But in the end it is more than worth it.

[ozimoron]

13 minutes ago, jts-khorat said:

The problem with Western diet is, that lots of stuff is mixed together, which better should not be. This leads to statements as these, which are confusing at best, leading you into a whole wrong direction at worst.

 

The biggest issue in modern society is, that most people are pre-diabetic, due to massive amounts of processed carbs being consumed. The body is basically in constant emergency mode, trying to keep a stable insulin level. Add then a diet abundant in salted meat, often also heavily processed, and you create a recipe (literally) for disaster.

 

On top of that, we are under constant stress, with often bad sleeping habits, which tends to increase bad cholesterol with all its own side effects.

 

Untangling this is really difficult, but you have to start somewhere, and -- in my opinion -- the best way is to cut your carb intake. I had great success following a pretty harsh keto diet for a year, together with intermittent fasting, to loose a large part of my excess weight and de-stress my body overall: and it worked!

 

Nowadays, I am back to a more normal diet, cake, pizza and pasta are back on the menu, albeit a lot less than before. And I am still doing intermittent fasting and take care of consuming everything in a balance and without the excesses of previous times (which has become a lot easier, as the impossible food and sugar cravings have also simply gone).

 

In the end, this is what my doctor told me: if you want to heal naturally and sustainably, there are no quick fixes, especially if it took years or even decades of improper food intake to create the situation in the first place (so a definite 'No' to statins). But in the end it is more than worth it.

I went to a doctor in Australia who recommended keto to me. It just seems to be a bad idea in the light of the overwhelming evidence against eating red meat.

 

How were you able to differentiate the keto from the intermittent fast as being responsible for your positive results?

[BigStar]

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

This kind of diet seems to make the most sense to me although living in Thailand leads me to eat more chicken because of convenience. It's getting very hardto find restaurant cooked fish meals using ocean caught fish rather than farmed fish.

 

https://www.verywellfit.com/pescatarian-diet-4174528

Certainly an improvement over the SAD. Jack LaLanne, one of my heroes, followed a diet somewhat similar, but it notably had much less starch, notably bread, rice, and pasta. This doesn't discriminate between fruits, either, meaning high glycemic OK to spike your glucose. And it gives lip service to Omega-3 while permitting processed seed oils high in Omega-6, so working against a low Omega-6/3 ratio the diet should promote.

Importance of maintaining a low omega-6/omega-3 ratio for reducing platelet aggregation, coagulation and thrombosis

 

I try to have fish a few times a week, notably salmon, canned tuna & mackerel.

[KannikaP]

26 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Wouldn't all that sugar render this a poor choice?

In the fermentation process, sugar + yeast = alcohol  + CO2. So very little sugar is left.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, KannikaP said:

In the fermentation process, sugar + yeast = alcohol  + CO2. So very little sugar is left.

But then your body breaks the alcohol back down into glucose? No net gain.

[BigStar]

20 minutes ago, jts-khorat said:

The problem with Western diet is, that lots of stuff is mixed together, which better should not be.

Lot of bias against meat by the food industry, which finances most of the studies in their own favor, and the politicians, and now the climate change industry (ironically). You'll find most of the studies against meat questionable for one reason or another. Common problem is that the obese meat eaters also eat a lot of carbs and other excess calories with their meat. Can't concieve of eating meat without bread, for example.

[BigStar]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

But then your body breaks the alcohol back down into glucose? No net gain.

True, but the carb content is pretty low, maybe 10% of beer. Probably the least of the worries for most members here eating their pies and pastries. The polyphenols make wine well worth drinking in moderation, besides some studies that show a moderate intake of alcohol good for you. I have a glass of red daily.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, BigStar said:

Lot of bias against meat by the food industry, which finances most of the studies in their own favor, and the politicians, and now the climate change industry (ironically). You'll find most of the studies against meat questionable for one reason or another. Common problem is that the obese meat eaters also eat a lot of carbs and other excess calories with their meat. Can't concieve of eating meat without bread, for example.

I don't think that the educational and government institutions world wide recommending cutting down on red meat are part of the "food industry".

[ozimoron]

Just now, BigStar said:

True, but the carb content is pretty low, maybe 10% of beer. Probably the least of the worries for most members here eating their pies and pastries. The polyphenols make wine well worth drinking in moderation, besides some studies that show a moderate intake of alcohol good for you. I have a glass of red daily.

I have also read that there are no safe limits for alcohol. You seem to advocate a diet which has much opposition from expert quarters.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-45283401

[BigStar]

13 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

It just seems to be a bad idea in the light of the overwhelming evidence against eating red meat.

It's not as overwhelming as it appears from all the noise.

 

Here ya go; talk to different Australian doctors. ????

 

Low Carb Down Under

 

 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, BigStar said:

It's not as overwhelming as it appears from all the noise.

 

Here ya go; talk to different Australian doctors. ????

 

Low Carb Down Under

 

 

That's a private company therefore not credible in my opinion as well as it goes against countervailing advice.

[jts-khorat]

Just now, ozimoron said:

How were you able to differentiate the keto from the intermittent fast as being responsible for your positive results?

I started with the Intermittent fasting first. Over a month I saw no result, due to the horrible sugar cravings I had constantly, leading to binge eating episodes like I never had them before.

 

After researching, mainly to better my pre-diabetes (I think the videos on Youtube of Dr. Sten Ekberg and Dr. Berg have been mentioned on here already), I reduced carb intake radically. This was a lot less comfortable for me, as I love my pizza and chocolate as much as the next guy.

 

However, amazingly, food cravings during fasting went away completely within a little more than a week and they have not come back after re-introducing limited carbs into my diet after a year of keto. Also I started to drop weight almost immediately, while feeling more active at the same time, meaning that my life quality increased; so far, another year later, there has been no jojo-effect either (I managed to shed around 15 kg in my keto year and feel much, much better on this weight now).

Of course, every body might react differently, but this was my experience. Might "just" doing intermittent fasting be enough for you?

 

With regard to the red meat: I ate a lot of fish and chicken, but I like both. Living in Germany, I basically had no beef, as that would be a price point well beyond me, but my research showed that there would be indeed a difference between grass fed beef and grain fed one. As you seem to live in Australia, that should be much less of an issue for you.

 

In the end, it will not hurt much to experiment with different options for a period of time and see, what brings results for you.

[KannikaP]

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

But then your body breaks the alcohol back down into glucose? No net gain.

No it does not. Loads of other 'toxic' substances but not sugar/glucose.

[BigStar]

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I don't think that the educational and government institutions world wide recommending cutting down on red meat are part of the "food industry".

Always have been. The founder of Harvard Nutrition, Fredrick Stare obtained $1,026,000 from General Foods. Kellogg's funded $2 million to set up Harvard's Nutrition Foundation. A shill for the Sugar Industry, Stare promoted the notion that Coca-Cola was "a healthy between-meals snack."
 

Big threat to the profits of the food, medical, and fitness "wellness" industries. It continues:

 

A spokesman for Corporate Accountability says the  new study  finds the federal scientific advisors to the dietary process “are even more conflicted than previously through.”

 

Some of the key findings:

    - 95 percent of the last Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) has at least one tie to an industry actor.

    - Researchers were able to document more than 700 instances of Conflict of Interest (COI) for the committee in total.

    - One advisor alone accounted for 152 of these instances.

    - Multiple advisors were connected to more than 30 industry actors.

    - Among corporations, Kellogg, Abbott, Kraft, Mead Johnson, General Mills, and Dannon had the most frequent and durable connections to advisors.

    - Among trade or front groups, the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) had the most extensive engagement with advisors, with the California Walnut Commission, Almond Board of California, and Beef Checkoff also looming large.

     --A second study finds Dietary Guidelines panel rife with conflicts of interest

 

There are currently >800 papers on low-carb/ketogenic diet trials (high-quality evidence). A draft list of Qs by for the next Dietary Guidelines did not include a single Q on this literature. Now, the list is being finalized.

     --Nina Teicholz

 

You may convince yourself of this by reading Denise Minger's Death by Food Pyramid: How Shoddy Science, Sketchy Politics and Shady Special Interests Have Ruined Our Health.

 

Or, just believe what you wish. Food, pharma, medical, political, and fitness industries are with ya, man.

[scubascuba3]

9 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I have also read that there are no safe limits for alcohol. You seem to advocate a diet which has much opposition from expert quarters.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-45283401

Yep, excess meat, diet cokes 555, alcohol

[BigStar]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

That's a private company therefore not credible in my opinion as well as it goes against countervailing advice.

Makes them more credible in some ways. Not being paid off by the usual sources. But, go read all the testimonials to their success.

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

No it does not. Loads of other 'toxic' substances but not sugar/glucose.

That seems to be true.

 

– That “beer belly” is not really beer causing the bulge.  It’s the food that the body hasn’t needed to use for immediate energy, as it was too busy breaking down the alcohol.

 

In my case it's too much carbs rather than alcohol. I'm skinny with a pot belly.

 

https://www.painreliefwellness.com.au/2016/11/03/does-alcohol-turn-into-sugar-well-not-really-but-there-are-calories-metabolic-pathway-explained/

 

 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, BigStar said:

Makes them more credible in some ways. Not being paid off by the usual sources. But, go read all the testimonials to their success.

I don't think the government is paid off by the "usual sources". And especially not every country's government which seem to be in agreement, they are guided by medical advice. You're getting into conspiracy theories here.

[scubascuba3]

6 minutes ago, jts-khorat said:

I started with the Intermittent fasting first. Over a month I saw no result, due to the horrible sugar cravings I had constantly, leading to binge eating episodes like I never had them before.

 

After researching, mainly to better my pre-diabetes (I think the videos on Youtube of Dr. Sten Ekberg and Dr. Berg have been mentioned on here already), I reduced carb intake radically. This was a lot less comfortable for me, as I love my pizza and chocolate as much as the next guy.

 

However, amazingly, food cravings during fasting went away completely within a little more than a week and they have not come back after re-introducing limited carbs into my diet after a year of keto. Also I started to drop weight almost immediately, while feeling more active at the same time, meaning that my life quality increased; so far, another year later, there has been no jojo-effect either (I managed to shed around 15 kg in my keto year and feel much, much better on this weight now).

Of course, every body might react differently, but this was my experience. Might "just" doing intermittent fasting be enough for you?

 

With regard to the red meat: I ate a lot of fish and chicken, but I like both. Living in Germany, I basically had no beef, as that would be a price point well beyond me, but my research showed that there would be indeed a difference between grass fed beef and grain fed one. As you seem to live in Australia, that should be much less of an issue for you.

 

In the end, it will not hurt much to experiment with different options for a period of time and see, what brings results for you.

With carbs try and differentiate between carbs to avoid, pizza, crisps, chips, chocolate, ice cream, pastries etc and ones which are good i.e. potatoes, rice etc