Cholesterol Support
7,415 members2,099 posts

Serum Cholesterol

LDL HDL Triclyceron Serum Ch.

29/07/20131.7 2.2 1.1 4.4 When taking statins

29/10/20143.1 1.7 0.9 5.2 Without Statins

I had decided to stop taking statins towards the end of February 2014 because of the increasing severe side effects. I had been taking statins for 7.5 years.

Somebody explain to me, as to why GP's mainly look at the Serum Cholerterol - which included 'good HDL', to make an assessment whether one should be offered statins.


13 Replies

How can I edit this? The layout I used has re-set itself.

29/07/13 LDL1.7, HDL2.2, Tric1.1, Serum Cholesterol4.4

29/10/14 LDL3.1, HDL1.7, Tric.9 , Serum Cholesterol5.2


May be GP's needs training on cholesterol testing and cholesterol numbers!

Did you get a print out of your blood cholesterol testing results.? Go back to your GP and request for full explanation.


Yes, GP's true knowledge regarding cholesterol levels seems to be limited to exactly following NICE guidelines.

The above are the cholesterol numbers I wrote down when looking at my health record screen.

GP's seem to be reluctant to give print outs.

It should not have been surprising that my LDL would have increased after stopping statins for eight months.

MY HDL - with and without statins - is above average, which is supposed to be good.

My Triclyteron level had actually decrease after stopping statins, which should be a good sign.

There has to be some clarification at GP level as to how to interpret the separate numbers, I think.



In our GP practice, the blood test print out can have up to 30 list of information!

Total cholesterol to HDL ratio and Serum cholesterol two of the 30.

An example total cholesterol to HDL ration= 3.46

Serum HDL= 1.85

Serum cholesterol = 6.4

Total cholesterol calculated = 6.401. ( 1.85 x 3.46)

Is total cholesterol and serum cholesterol same?

Next question which is calculated?

In this list LDL is not given, can be calculated.

All I can say is in this example no medication was offered!

Please not that this is only an example of many examples that I have for discussions!!!!


After having done some research, my HDL of 1.7 is above average, hence, should it increase even further, my Serum cholesterol would be consider worse than it is now (5.2 last test). So, if my HDL became less, my serum cholesterol would reduce and put me into a healthier category. To me, this does not make sense.

My Tric is .9, which is well below average. The tric reading contributes only about 45% of its level to the serum cholesterol calculation though.

My LDL at 3.1 seems to be acceptable.

So, why was my GP worried?

I think they look mainly at the serum cholesterol level, disregarding anything else.


What is important is the overall consideration of an individual's health assessment. The three numbers and many other factors. Food intake control, exercise and enjoy life.

Please go back to your GP or to another GP in the practice and ask for full explanation.

Good luck.


triglycerides 1.1 29/07/13

0.9 29/10/14

I hope I got the spelling correct this time (:


Your cholesterol levels seem absolutely fine to me, your GP seems to have got it all wrong. Cholesterol level guidelines have gone right down in the past few years anyway and interestingly, France has a much higher level whereupon people will be considered for statins - 6.7 total. So I wouldnt worry about your levels and dont take potentially damaging statins if you dont need to.

Good luck


How where your cholesterol levels after you stopped statins


Ok Got it


You need statin as a secondary medication! this is because of your heart procedures. I am afraid, in your case the question of statin controlling cholesterol do not apply.

Please do discuss this with your GP and your consultant.


I had been diagnosed as being in the 'high risk' group in 2006. At that time, my Serum Cholesterol was about 6.9.( I do not have the break down). I did still smoke at the time, but only had mildly raised blood pressure and was NOT type 2 diabetic.

I think the main reason that triggered my assessment as 'high risk' was that I said that my dad had died of a heart attack at the age of 57. I think it was assumed that this was an indicator of potential hereditary heart decease.

My dad was a front line soldier in Stalingrad as a very young man, then some years later he had an almost fatal accident in a slate mine that caused him to have his milt removed. Of course he was stressed out. His own mother died some years after him in her eighties. His father died as a prisoner of war in an Siberian camp, cause of death not known.

I think that the Qrisk assessment process is too rigid.

I developed type 2 diabetes in 2008; it is not conclusive that this was due to statins, but it may be.

My GP increased my dose of statins around November 2013, because 4.4 TC was still considered too high. The following side effects were absolutely horrendous, and I stopped taking statins in March 2014.

My blood pressure had been high before I stopped statins; whether the statins actually contributed to it is inconclusive, but they may have.

On a lower dose of statins I did not actually notice side effects, because I was unaware that they could cause any. I did start to feel rather lethargic and tired and had muscle aches and cramp. At the time, I contributed this to my increasing age.

I had been very physically active for most of my life, but after 2006 I lost interest.

I think that I should never have been given statins. I do not blame the GP's that prescribed them. They are messengers only.

I think that much more training should be given to them.

Statins are a potent drug, yes I can accept that for many people they are a vital life line, but I doubt their use as a preventative drug very much.


Thanks Bala i am due back at the Dr on the 6th dec fro more tests will discuss this with her then.


You may also like...