Cholesterol Blood Test

Hi, can anyone advise on blood test results for cholesterol and what they mean?

On 28 April I had the following.

Serum Cholesterol 3.7 mmol/L

Serum HDL cholesterol level 1.38 mmol/L

Serum triglycerides 1.1 mmol/L

Serum LDL cholesterol level 1.82 mmol/L

Serum cholesterol/HDL ratio 2.7

SE non HDL cholesterol level 2.3mmol/L

This was a non-fasting test and although I don't think my cholesterol is very high I am advised that as I have AF it should be as low as possible.

I would be grateful for any comments.

regards

Ray

21 Replies

oldestnewest
  • Hi,

    Thanks for getting back to me I have added the range figures in brackets.

    On 28 April I had the following.

    Serum Cholesterol 3.7 mmol/L (0 - 5.0)

    Serum HDL cholesterol level 1.38 mmol/L (1.00 - 9999)

    Serum triglycerides 1.1 mmol/L (0 - 1.69)

    Serum LDL cholesterol level 1.82 mmol/L

    (

    Serum cholesterol/HDL ratio 2.7

    SE non HDL cholesterol level 2.3mmol/L

    This was a non-fasting test and although I don't think my cholesterol is very high I am advised that as I have AF it should be as low as possible.

    I would be grateful for any comments.

    regards

    Ray

  • For the general population, all values within the reference ranges would be interpreted as meaning everything is fine. The lipid hypothesis is usually translated as meaning that you want HDL over 1.0, trigs under 1.7, total under 5.5 and ratio around 2 I think.

    BUT! I don't know about AF and there is a minority who disagree with the lipid hypothesis and consider these targets irrelevant.

  • Thanks for your reply and to everyone else who has provided advice. There is a lot to take in as I haven't used this website very much.

  • Hello Ray. Before you go any further with your investigation I recommend that you read the latest information published in the British Medical Journal in the last few days. Go to: bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/... I think you will be very surprised. Tibbly

  • Actually, the British Journal of Sports Medicine, not the main BMJ.

    In short: Dr Malhotra publishes another paper against saturated fat control. Is this news?

    I don't really understand how it's sports medicine, but the full text seems to be behind a paywall.

  • It is the sports magazine as part of the BMJ publications. It makes little difference to the content and the information whether you are a sports person or any other. What they are saying is all that advice to reduce saturated fat was wrong. We never took any notice of it, it was O.K. 100 years ago why should it be any different now?

  • This is not the BMJ.... but a sports science magazine..... quite different in so far that articles are produced from a scientific.... NOT a medical perpsective. Data is all important for medicine.... and the data informs from trials and results.... the current medical outlook / treatments.

    Not to say either is right or wrong.... but it is a dilemma.... ALWAYS seek advice from a medical practioner!!

  • Overall your results are excellent. Your LDL level is optimal. Are you on a statin medication like Crestor or Lipitor?

    Optimally, your HDL-C should be 1.6 mmol/l or greater. This is the so called 'good' cholesterol which initiates removal of the 'bad' LDL cholesterol.

    You can raise your HDL through exercise and consumption of blueberries, apples, nuts, beans, lentils, chick peas, and olive oil among other things.

    Triglycerides are acceptable, but optimally should be 0.79 or less. You can reduce these through a reduction in your consumption of sugars and simple carbohydrates such as bread, rice, pizza and pasta, as well as soft drinks, alcohol and fruit juices.

    Good luck.

  • Thanks for your advice and for all the replies I have received from everyone. I was on 40mg Simvastatin for 3 years until June 2015 when I changed to 10mg of Atorvastatin because of calf muscle pain and cramps. These started again in January this year and I then had upper leg muscle weakness so I changed to Pravastatin. As the problems got worse my GP advised to stop statins completely and I have been off them since end of January. In response to Londinium I am on 150mg levothyroxine for under active thyroid which can also cause muscle problems I understand.

    I think my muscle problems are caused by statins as I have had numerous other tests which have been negative.

    I guess at least my cholesterol isn't too bad but unfortunately I can't walk because of the leg muscle problems. It is hard to get any real answers from the medical profession.

    thanks

    Ray

  • Well if this is your blood-work without statins, I would say you are doing quite well from a lipid perspective. There are various ways to boost your thyroid function naturally. I suggest you try a web search on the topic.

  • Was it worth all the ghastly side effects?

  • Please explain !

  • Well, I certainly wish I had not taken Statins but supposedly most people take them without side effects?!

    At the moment I feel that they have made me very unhealthy as I can't take any real exercise. So the opposite effect to what my GP intended.

    I can only hope that things improve.

    Enzyme Q10 supplement has been suggested but have been tested for creatine kinase levels and these were found to be normal and someone told me these were connected but I'm not sure?

  • Hello RayH2. The medical profession have been persuaded by the drug companies that statins are the wonder drug, You only have to read what the more informed members of the medical profession have to say. Have a look at: healthscams.org.uk/are-stat... and the following page about vested interests. I despair! A professor once said, "They are taught to pass and not to know and the result is that they do pass and they don't know". Some of the medical profession seem incapable of working things out for themselves; they qualify and at that point they stop learning. We didn't have all these tests 50 - 60 years ago when we were a lot more healthy and not always worried about our health. I'm old enough to remember. Just get back to basic food. Tibbly

  • Tibblington,

    I'm not going to keep providing links to cardiologists and heart surgeons for anyone who says that they're suffering from terrible side-effects from statins... and then they say that statins are beneficial to many/most people.

    If someone wants to promote statins whilst also saying that they've been damaged by statins, and whilst also witnessing that many people on these forums have been damaged by statins, then I'm not going to trawl the internet and provide links again, and again, and again for them.

    Some people have said that they've been badly damaged by statins AND yet they're now thinking of having the PCSK9 injection! They know that their doctors misinformed them about statins and side effects. And now they think that their doctors are not misinforming them again about PCSK9?!

  • Londinium. I sympathise with your point of view. I have repeated links etc many times and feel that i have done it enough. It's a pity that there's not a central information page that Zest can manage so new-comers can go there first and so avoid lengthy repeat correspondence. Tibbly

  • Hi Tibbly,

    I just feel that I'm banging my head against a brick wall. I feel that way because people say they're ill from the statins and they ask what we think? Then they say that statins are beneficial to many/most people. Then some of them say that they're interested in also trying the PCSK9 injection.

    I don't think they look at our links properly. They might click on our links, but they don't read them. And I don't think they believe the content in those links. I also don't think they believe the cardiologists and the heart surgeons who openly state in various links that statins are detrimental and should only ever be considered for a very small minority of people after all other natural methods have been tried, and maybe not even then. And finally, that statins should only be used with CoQ10 supplements.

    You'd think that when people have been damaged by statins that they'd run some online searches to find out the truth about statins - just as we did?

    The false statin doctrine, about them being beneficial, is promoted and ingrained by Big Pharma. The misinformation of by doctors, consultants and nurses is almost impossible to get past. I see it in almost every post on this forum, where our links are merely considered "interesting".

  • Ray,

    Most people experience unfavourable side-effects from statins, just as you did and still do. But feel free to keep saying that you believe that statins are beneficial to many/most people and don't cause side-effects.

  • Hi,

    I'm just trying to give a balanced view but for the avoidance of doubt my personal opinion is that statins are the cause of the very serious problems that I have.

    I think that there should be much more publicity over the side effects of statins and I think that it was wrong to give them to me.

    I have read a lot about statins being the cause of calf muscle problems but would be very interested in anyone having severe muscle weakness in the upper legs.

    The worrying thing about statins is that they are given out too freely and it may be that it will be some years down the line before we become aware of the serious problems caused.

  • Ray,

    Whilst reporting on the damaging side effects that you've suffered from statins, you then go on to talk positively about statins. You do this almost every time!

    There are many doctors who know the truth about statins. But whilst you keep backing statins whilst also saying that they damaged you, no progress will be made. Other people who look at this forum will think that you're just one person who experienced side effects. But you're not. I've lost count of the number of people that I've physically met who have suffered from the side effects of statins, and don't even know it because they're complaining about pain and memory loss and then when I ask if they're taking statins, they are! ..but they didn't realise it was the statins!

    When I put together half a dozen links for you from credible cardiologists and heart sugrons etc that have openly stated that statins are detrimental and you then reply to me with thanks and then again express your support for statins by saying that statins are beneficial to many/most people, I'm sorry but I'm incredulous and wonder why I bothered trawling the internet for you? I spent time finding those links for you. I've since deleted them because of what I've just explained. And I did the same on the PCSK9 post because they are reporting on that post that they too are damaged from statins AND YET they want the injection.

    Sorry, but none of it makes any sense to me. It's double speak and fork tongue.

    YOUR CHOLESTEROL CAME DOWN BECAUSE OF YOUR THYROID MEDS. YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE EVEN BEEN PRESCRIBED STATINS!!

    If you want your cholesterol to come down even further because of what some foolish doctor or nurse said, please feel free to take more statins.

    If I were you, I'd completely stop pursuing the question of statins and the question of lowering your cholesterol even further. Instead, I'd buy a decent CoQ10, preferably Ubiquinol rather than Ubiquinone, because Ubiquinol is meant to be better absorbed and more effective, and I'd take it at least twice daily.

    If your doctor/nurse/consultant failed to instruct you to take CoQ10 with the damaging statins, then they failed you again. CoQ10 MUST always be taken with the damaging statins, in order to reduce the damaging effect of the damaging statins.

  • Hi Londinium,

    Thanks for all of your very helpful information that you have sent. I am going to take some time to look through everything and get back to you.

    I very much feel that you are right about it being wrong to give me statins but to be fair I'm sure that many people do benefit from them.

    I hope your own health is good and that you haven't had the same problems with statins!

    thanks

    Ray

You may also like...