 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Cardiology / October 2005Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive oil?
I got the following lab results yesterday: TOT 222 HDL 71 LDL 136 TRI 71 TOT/HDL 3.1 I get a lot of exercise, have low bodyfat, eat a pretty good diet, drink one glass of red wine every day, and have a flat stomach, so I think I'm already doing the usual suggested lifestyle things. My doc isn't ready to put me on a statin yet, I think mainly because of the high HDL, and I'm not ready to start taking them yet, but I wondered if there are other things I might do to lower LDL, particularly with respect to diet, or supplements. One thing I've wondered about is olive oil. I know that there are benefits of replacing other fats/oils with olive oil, but have there been any studies about eating "extra" olive oil on top of the regular diet. I mean, what if you just drank a tablespoon of olive oil, by itself, a couple times a day? Do we know what the effect would be on LDL and HDL? Well, I guess I need to go from 1% milk to skim (a quart a day), and maybe cut out that ounce of Dove dark chocolate that I eat with the red wine (ouch!), but otherwise I don't know that there's all that much saturated fat or cholesterol to cut out. > I got the following lab results yesterday: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > wondered if there are other things I might do to lower LDL, > particularly with respect to diet, or supplements. Your numbers look excellent, especially since not only is your HDL high, but your TGL is low, and it's considered a more predictive risk factor for CVD. Your TG/HDL ratio is 1. You're probably gonna hafta find something other than CVD to die of. > One thing I've wondered about is olive oil. I know that there are > benefits of replacing other fats/oils with olive oil, but have there [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the red wine (ouch!), but otherwise I don't know that there's all > that much saturated fat or cholesterol to cut out. Your numbers are enviable. The individual raw numbers are not as important as the pattern, and the LDL particle size. Your low TGL and high HDL suggest that your LDL particles are the harmless, large fluffy type. You may want to ask to have them directly measured. To even speak of a statin in this context shows how bizarre our thinking has become as a result of statin overselling. I lowered my LDL 70 points with the use of panthethine, after having lowered it once before by switching to a low starch/sugar diet. But I don't think you have anything to worry about, from all I've read in the literature. This opinion (like any other on usenet) is worth what it cost you, BTW, unless you research the information on your own and make your own informed choices. Susan Susan > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > Susan I couldn't agree more. My total is higher, Peabody, but my tris are lower, and HDL the same as yours. I haven't had the breakdown done, but I suspect I too might have the type of LDL particles Susan mentions. I don't take a statin, but do modify diet toward high, complex carb. That is not to say that I don't get a good quotient of protein too, from the all the plant foods and fish, some lean organic meat and dairy, and the occasional egg. The only 'supplement' I use consistently relevant to cholesterol is fishoil. And ditto on Susan's last comment. > Susan fresh~horses says... > The only 'supplement' I use consistently relevant to > cholesterol is fishoil. I take Carlson's salmon oil, but only take one a day. Should I take more? How much? > fresh~horses says... > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I take Carlson's salmon oil, but only take one a day. > Should I take more? How much? Hmmm. I'm now at 4-6, 1,000 mg wild Salmon oil capsules per day. I may go up to 10 depending on Beluga Burps*. That scintillating feature is almost non-existent if you take the capsules mid-meal. It's those espresso only mornings that'll get ya. Do some research and talk to your physician. Google: SBHarris* + fishoil. I take 5 capsules of COSTCO fish oil a day. Is it documented taking wild Salmon oil capsules is more helpful than regular costco fish oil? Mike >> fresh~horses says... >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Google: SBHarris* + fishoil. > I take 5 capsules of COSTCO fish oil a day. > Is it documented taking wild Salmon oil capsules is more helpful than > regular costco fish oil? > > Mike Regular fishoil is a mixture. You should certainly pay less for it than wild salmon oil. But whether or not it's better I can't say. The regulars at the groups I've thrown this to should be able to answer. > >> fresh~horses says... > >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > > > Google: SBHarris* + fishoil. >> I take 5 capsules of COSTCO fish oil a day. >> Is it documented taking wild Salmon oil capsules is more helpful than [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >wild salmon oil. But whether or not it's better I can't say. The >regulars at the groups I've thrown this to should be able to answer. The issues are: 1) is it good quality and not rancid (poking one open and sniffing can tell you that quickly); 2) what is the omega-3 fatty acid content? That's the important fraction. 3) how much do you take and why? just for general health? Manage a cholesterol or high triglyceride problem? 4) do you exercise, watch your diet/eat well and, if needed, stop smoking? George M. Carter > >> I take 5 capsules of COSTCO fish oil a day. > >> Is it documented taking wild Salmon oil capsules is more helpful than [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > 1) is it good quality and not rancid (poking one open and sniffing can > tell you that quickly); I store mine in the icebox and purchase small quantities often. Nuts and grains can go rancid too and I do the same precautions. Bill  SignatureGarden Shade Zone 5 S Jersey USA in a Japanese Jungle Manner.39.6376 -75.0208 This article is posted under fair use rules in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and is strictly for the educational and informative purposes. This material is distributed without profit. Sam Adams-- "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds" > >> I take 5 capsules of COSTCO fish oil a day. > >> Is it documented taking wild Salmon oil capsules is more helpful than [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > George M. Carter Salut George! Good to see your sig. "2) what is the omega-3 fatty acid content? That's the important fraction" This could be hard to figure out. It's not on the bottle or the website for the one I use, bought on sale. When they're gone I'll shop around a bit more. What's ideal, do you know? >> >> I take 5 capsules of COSTCO fish oil a day. >> >> Is it documented taking wild Salmon oil capsules is more helpful than [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >for the one I use, bought on sale. When they're gone I'll shop around a >bit more. What's ideal, do you know? Why would you buy something if you don't know what it is? I can't believe you would do that. Are you sure it is not on the website? What is the website. I would like to see that? Ora > "2) what is the omega-3 fatty acid content? That's the important > fraction" > > This could be hard to figure out. It's not on the bottle or the website > for the one I use, bought on sale. When they're gone I'll shop around a > bit more. What's ideal, do you know? Presumably there's no ideal, as the best clinical trials have been done with cold water fishoil (standardized to 30 to 35% EPA + DHA), mostly derived from menhaden, not the purified EPA/DHA. We presume the EFA or the DHA is the good stuff, but cold water fishoil is many dozens of fatty acid triglycerides, some of them very odd and rare ones. The other 70% may not be just junk. Recently we've seen some purified fishoil concentrates on the market with higher quantities of EPA/DHA (around 55%-60%). Whether these are any better for you is up for grabs. They aren't what the studies were done with it, so we can't be sure. Costco formerly had two brands-- a non-concentrated and a concentrated enteric. Contents are on the label. Costco fish oil had been analysed by Consumer Reports which gave it a superior rating for rancidity. Other than that, I can't advise. It is very inexpensive, and it's what I personally take. Red (sockeye) salmon has been recommended for eating because it can't be cultured, and cultured salmon has variable quantities of EPA and DHA (depending on what the fish were fed), as well as whatever contaminants happen to be in the feed. Cultured salmon can has as little has half the EPA nad DHA in it as wild cold water fish, which all seem to contain somewhere around 30% to 40% EPA+DHA in their tissues. Red salmon are red because of the high amounts of astaxanthin in their normal marine diet of krill, so they are red for precisely the same reason that flamingos are pink. This carotenoid might be good for you, too-- though you won't get any vitamin A from it. As for red salmon *oil,* I don't have any figures for precise EPA+DHA content, but it's no doubt about 35% as a natural source cold water fishoil. Nor do I know if the oil is red (which would mean it contains astaxantin). You can buy astaxanthin separately, and red salmon oil tends to be hard to find and expensive in the states. Whether it's worth the extra money, I cannot say. SBH > Red (sockeye) salmon has been recommended for eating because it can't > be cultured, and cultured salmon has variable quantities of EPA and DHA [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > tends to be hard to find and expensive in the states. Whether it's > worth the extra money, I cannot say. COMMENT: I should add that canned red (sockeye) salmon is cheap anywhere you go in the world, and is excellent. In all ways it's a better nutritional choice than tuna (much less mercury, more of other good stuff), and better ecologically, too (Alaska has a good record of sustainable fishing). I long ago switched to red salmon sandwiches instead of tuna. Just mix in nonfat mayo, salt and pepper, some chopped onions, and whatever else you like, to make a good sandwich spread. There's been some complaining in this newsgroup about pesticide and organohalogen contamination of wild caught fish, but that's a problem with cultured fish, too (even more so). Whether there's enough of these things (polutants which are NOT mercury) to be worried about, I cannot say. All chemicals are detectable everywhere, in SOME amounts. It's the dose only that makes the poison. SBH > > Red (sockeye) salmon has been recommended for eating because it can't > > be cultured, and cultured salmon has variable quantities of EPA and DHA [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > SBH Brands are different here. This is the one I'm using. Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to the price of the fishoil. Prairie Naturals Salmon-Force 1000 mg Wild Salmon Oil Each softgel contains: wild salmon oil = 1,000 mg capsule consists of gelatin, glycerine and purified water contains no wheat yeast starch, dairy, artificial colour or preservatives. Yes. The oil is red. $12.99 for 180 softgels > Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to > the price of the fishoil. Yes, if that's all you used it for. But there's other stuff at Costco. See my other message in this thread. You can buy _Harry Potter and His New Pubic Hair_ for $5.99. It's an amazing place. > Prairie Naturals > Salmon-Force [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > $12.99 for 180 softgels Fascinating. Well, you're getting a 2-fer-1 with the red astaxanthin you're seeing, so it's hard to compare. SBH > > Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to > > the price of the fishoil. > > Yes, if that's all you used it for. But there's other stuff at Costco. > See my other message in this thread. You can buy _Harry Potter and His > New Pubic Hair_ for $5.99. It's an amazing place. So's a library. You make choices when you work part time and won't compromise your principles for certain kinds of high-paying work. I know you understand that because in some ways you've done that too (foregoing lunches with the FDA). So I wouldn't use a Costco membership I don't think. But I'll give the place a tour. > > Prairie Naturals > > Salmon-Force [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > SBH That was a sale price so I may not do as well again. We'll see. > You make choices when you work part time and won't compromise your > principles for certain kinds of high-paying work. I know you understand [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > So I wouldn't use a Costco membership I don't think. But I'll give the > place a tour. COSTCO sells excellent quality goods w/ a no questions asked return policy. \ The pay good wages, including health insurance and other benefits. The CEO of Walmart hates COSTCO for these reasons dexcribed previously. Mike >> > Prairie Naturals >> > Salmon-Force [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > That was a sale price so I may not do as well again. We'll see. > > You make choices when you work part time and won't compromise your > > principles for certain kinds of high-paying work. I know you understand [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Mike I'll respond to both your posts here. Ok? Costco may not carry the fishoil brand I'm using, and if I were to change to the Costco brand, they won't be charging the U.S. price. Costco is about 15 miles away, but yes, I could make special arrangements if I really wanted to go there say once a month. They don't yet (coming) have an organics section, nor do they carry many of the Asian food stuffs I use to cook the things I like to cook. I also prefer to support local people as much as possible. This doesn't rule out Costco, since of course they employ local people; but they don't buy local goods or produce, rather importing from the United States and American owned agribusinesses in Mexico and environs. That's necessary sometimes. We don't grow good bananas and pineapple here. ; ) I try to shop at the farmers' market and a couple locally owned organics and ethnic shops as much as possible. Interestingly, the ethnic stores kill the superstores on produce prices. I can get Gala apples there for $.49 a pound, and they'll be around a dollar at the supermarkets. Garlic, hot peppers, dals and pulses etc in bulk, papadums, really great Greek yogurt. But I am going to Costco tomorrow just to see. > >> > Prairie Naturals > >> > Salmon-Force [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > > > That was a sale price so I may not do as well again. We'll see. I see you pont ANd agree with you. I visit COSTCO abount once a month. Typical purchases are running shoes, gym socks, detergent, really like their humus, roasted chicken, fish oil as needed, tools, shaving cream, disposable razors, gifts for kids. Earlier this year I bought a top rated plasma tv from them.. My brother saved $200.00 buying tires for his car there. Mike >> > You make choices when you work part time and won't compromise your >> > principles for certain kinds of high-paying work. I know you understand [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] >> > >> > That was a sale price so I may not do as well again. We'll see. > I see you pont ANd agree with you. I visit COSTCO abount once a month. > Typical purchases are running shoes, gym socks, detergent, really like their [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Mike Sounds great. Goodwill and (next to) dumpsters is better. ; ) > >> > You make choices when you work part time and won't compromise your > >> > principles for certain kinds of high-paying work. I know you understand [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > >> > > >> > That was a sale price so I may not do as well again. We'll see. > > Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to > > the price of the fishoil. > > Yes, if that's all you used it for. But there's other stuff at Costco. > See my other message in this thread. You can buy _Harry Potter and His > New Pubic Hair_ for $5.99. It's an amazing place. And Costo gasoline is about 10c a gallon cheaper than average. That's perhaps a $1.60 a tank. At 75 fillups a year (I commute 80 miles a day, my wife 60). That's $120. If my wife filled up there it would be over $200 saved a year in gas. -Bruce > > > Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to > > > the price of the fishoil. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > -Bruce I toured one last Sunday. Harry Potter was $22.79, the fishoil was more expensive for fewer of a lowdose blend and everything was in huge quantities, bagged or packaged; 3 dozen apples, a 23 pound sirloin tip roast, shampoo packaged in the 3s, tylenol in 5s. Costcos here don't have gas stations so I filled up at Husky on the way home. My fill was $34 at $1.04 a litre for a sub-compact. >>>>Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to >>>>the price of the fishoil. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > have gas stations so I filled up at Husky on the way home. My fill was > $34 at $1.04 a litre for a sub-compact. That's what happens when you do stuff like that in Canadia. It's those metric dollars. Last Thursday, I filled up at 89.4/ltr at a PetroCan station. You need to pick your friends more wisely. And I heard Harry got a hairweave. Pastorio > >>>>Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to > >>>>the price of the fishoil. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > metric dollars. Last Thursday, I filled up at 89.4/ltr at a PetroCan > station. You need to pick your friends more wisely. It was $.99 ltr here at that time. > And I heard Harry got a hairweave. You perv. > Pastorio I pick my friends very wisely; they are, to a man: well-read, good looking, side splitting funny, terrific writers. >>>>>>Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to >>>>>>the price of the fishoil. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > It was $.99 ltr here at that time. Bottled water is more expensive. Hilarious. Doesn't burn as well as you'd hope, either. >>And I heard Harry got a hairweave. > > You perv. Oh, come on. It was in all the libraries. > I pick my friends very wisely; they are, to a man: well-read, good > looking, side splitting funny, terrific writers. So, not Canadians, eh? Pastorio > >>>>>>Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to > >>>>>>the price of the fishoil. [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > Pastorio <<lol>> Stick around; I think I'll keep you. Until your wife hollers for another bingo marker. > I toured one last Sunday. Harry Potter was $22.79, the fishoil was more > expensive for fewer of a lowdose blend Eh? They must be ripping you off up there. Down here it's $7 US for a 300 count bottle of 1 gram caps, 30% EPA+DHA. That's less than 8 cents a gram for EPA+DHA. Dunno where you'll find it cheaper. The COSTO distilled oil (enteric) is about 53%, with the same amount in a bottle (90 grams), and the price $11. Thus, the per gram cost of EPA+DHA in the enteric is about 11/7 = 1.57 times more. But 12 cents a gram is still cheap. SBH >> I toured one last Sunday. Harry Potter was $22.79, the fishoil was more >> expensive for fewer of a lowdose blend [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > SBH and the Harry Potter book was a bit less than $15.... > >> I toured one last Sunday. Harry Potter was $22.79, the fishoil was more > >> expensive for fewer of a lowdose blend [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > and the Harry Potter book was a bit less than $15.... COMMENT: Perhaps everything in Candian COSTCOs is 50% more, due to Canadian import fees, surcharges, taxes, and socialist blahblah. Wouldn't surprise me. Costco is the essense of capitalism, and the Canadians can ruin it by taxing it to death, if anyone can. Again I keep wondering what the devil Canada spends all those taxes on?? It's not the US bloated military, certainly. And it's not the Canadian medical system, which Canadians only pay 50% as much Americans for. Yet the average Canadian earns about the same as the average US citizen in income, yet pays an astounding 45% percent of it for taxes, vs the US 35% (figuring total tax burden by dividing all State budget expenditures by GDP.) Where DOES that extra go? From discussion here, I am inclined to hypothesize that it is spent on feckless bands of Canadian "First Nations" persons. Or perhaps converted to paper currency and burned for heat? SBH Rolling right along, Stevie into this third brewski of the afternoon. I note you pulling your punches there boyo. Month or so ago you would have called us Indians. A woman's work is never done. But geez it does take some doin' with some people. > Rolling right along, Stevie into this third brewski of the afternoon. I > note you pulling your punches there boyo. Month or so ago you would > have called us Indians. The quotes were just for you, Zee. >> Rolling right along, Stevie into this third brewski of the afternoon. I >> note you pulling your punches there boyo. Month or so ago you would >> have called us Indians. > >The quotes were just for you, Zee. "Zee"? There is no letter in the Canadian alphabet for "Zee". Fabienne: Whose motorcycle is this? Butch: It's a chopper, baby. Fabienne: Whose chopper is this? Butch: It's Zed's. Fabienne: Who's Zed? Butch: Zed's dead, baby. Zed's dead. Bruce Willis - Pulp Fiction. >> >> I toured one last Sunday. Harry Potter was $22.79, the fishoil was more >> >> expensive for fewer of a lowdose blend [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >surprise me. Costco is the essense of capitalism, and the Canadians can >ruin it by taxing it to death, if anyone can. Not true. In fact, I've lived in the USA and have seen where the same product in Canada was the same price in the USA, even when our dollar was at 68 cents to yours. It's very much like the "big mac" factor, which is used to figure out the cost of living. I don't know why Americans get ripped off so much when we pay the same or less for identical consumer goods. >Again I keep wondering what the devil Canada spends all those taxes >on?? Our corporate taxes are lower than the USA's according to the OECD, and our personal income taxes are not all that much higher when the cost of services which are paid for by taxes in Canada are compared to what you pay for the same services through user fees. Canada is 1/10th the population of yours living in a country which is larger in land mass than the USA, that means there are some considerations to be accounted for when it comes to public works, government funded infrastructure and so on. In fact, a comparison of income taxes which I've seen from 2000 had low income Canadians paying less in taxes than the USA, while middle income earners in the USA were slightly above ours. Wealthy people in the USA paid more than in Canada. Since then, Canada has lowered income taxes, but not as much as the USA (which is running a fiscal deficit). I hope that explains it. There are a lot of myths surrounding Canada's so- called high taxation rate, but in many cases there are other factors which make the over all cost of living very close to what it is in the USA. > Our corporate taxes are lower than the USA's according to the OECD, and our > personal income taxes are not all that much higher when the cost of services [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > accounted for when it comes to public works, government funded infrastructure > and so on. > I hope that explains it. There are a lot of myths surrounding Canada's so- > called high taxation rate, but in many cases there are other factors which > make the over all cost of living very close to what it is in the USA. COMMENT: And a few showing Canadian standard of living is lower than the US, one of which is quoted in the article we're discussing. But no matter. Let us assume they are the same. It is a fact that your government spends 45% of your GDP, while ours spends 35% of ours. Breaking it down into upper, lower, and middle and corporate tax brackets can't change that bare fact. Now, I will have to admit that you have a point that we in the US are running a gigantic deficit right now, paying for dumb and expensive foreign wars and a bloated and paranoid fatherland security department. Plus, we've had weather disasters. All told we've been borrowing 500 or 600 billion a year we don't have, mostly from Asia, and have been doing that kind of thing since roughly 9/11. If we didn't do that, our tax/GDP ratio would be more like 40%, since we borrow now as much as 20% of the federal spending, which in turn is about half the total (state and local being the rest). And the increase in fed spending is military related, mostly (though some of the rest is pork :))). But as I hear you tell it, what you Canadians do with your 10% of all that military and health care money you don't spend, is build infrastructure with it in the frozen North. Really? That's a lot of dough, even dividing by 10. > Canada is 1/10th the population of yours living in a country which is larger > in land mass than the USA, that means there are some considerations to be > accounted for when it comes to public works, government funded infrastructure > and so on. COMMENT: Where is it? I see a lot of white stuff and grey stuff and no highways, both on the map and flying over it. Seems to me all that mostly undeveloped expanse would *save* you public works money. As mentioned, I've driven to Fairbanks in the US in Spring, on a nice paved highway (and I've spent plenty of time off that highway at that latitude also, crunching across tundra, and slogging through alders and deep snow through birch forests in the lowlands, wishing to god I was back on a road). But where in Canada could I drive on a highway up to 64 North? This is much further than Dawson. It's about midway up your Northern territories. Where are you hiding all these expensive public works? Actually, this is not really a rhetorical question. If you have some good highways that go up to those latitudes in Canada, I'd like to drive them. I don't think the arctic is only what you see looking down from a Beaver, and I already know I'm not fond of fighting alders. Maybe you guys spend your taxes on dog-sleds? SBH >Maybe you guys spend your taxes on dog-sleds? More on hockey pucks. :0 Nice response by the way. There isn't a Canadian who lives with common sense in this nation who doesn't think that there should be more spent on our military, though a comparison to the exorbanent amount the US spends on its own is relatively unfair. In fact, it wouldn't hurt if the US spent a little more on domestic initiatives because it's my view that many of the "real" domestic issues in the USA ("real" meaning poverty, health care and not enough money towards education from the government, not the current "red herring" controversies which are about teaching "Intelligent Design" to school children, overturning abortion laws and stopping citizens who are gay being married) are being ignored. At the moment, Canada isn't being protected from anyone by the US. Henny I'll leave it for you. Explain to Steve about laying a road on muskeg. Zed > >> >> I toured one last Sunday. Harry Potter was $22.79, the fishoil was more > >> >> expensive for fewer of a lowdose blend [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > called high taxation rate, but in many cases there are other factors which > make the over all cost of living very close to what it is in the USA. > Henny > > I'll leave it for you. Explain to Steve about laying a road on muskeg. > > Zed It can be done, and the ALCAN did it. But there's more of that road in Alaska than anywhere else. OF COURSE IT CAN BE DONE. But it's bloody expensive, the upkeep never ends, it shifts all over the place, and Alaska has a lot less muskeg than northern Ontario, northern Manitoba, northern Quebec and relevant parts of the territories. Where the settlements are. There are roads all over the north. They just aren't there during break up and freeze up. You can get there, you just may not be able to do it all by driving. But you can drive to Inuvik during summer. And well anytime really if you like an adventure. Ahhh but I bet the seat on that Mercedes is heated. Anyway, you hoo anyone out there wants an adventure? Try the ice roads. Follow that semi. Zed "First we'll take Manhattan" Leonard Cohen > > Henny > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > It can be done, and the ALCAN did it. But there's more of that road in > Alaska than anywhere else. > OF COURSE IT CAN BE DONE. But it's bloody expensive, the upkeep never > ends, it shifts all over the place, and Alaska has a lot less muskeg > than northern Ontario, northern Manitoba, northern Quebec and relevant > parts of the territories. Since it's separated from these by a rather arbitrary political line, I rather doubt that. > Where the settlements are. There are roads > all over the north. They just aren't there during break up and freeze [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Mercedes is heated. Anyway, you hoo anyone out there wants an > adventure? Try the ice roads. Follow that semi. COMMENT: No heated seats in Mercedes that old, and also no traction. FYI I have an 89 Chevy Suburban I use in desert and mountains. At 7000 lbs it's twice the weight of the Mercedes and a terrible gas hog, but it has gotten me over many a rough road, due to proper gearing and 4WD. These days it gets only enough driving to keep it in shape. SBH > > OF COURSE IT CAN BE DONE. But it's bloody expensive, the upkeep never > > ends, it shifts all over the place, and Alaska has a lot less muskeg [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Since it's separated from these by a rather arbitrary political line, I > rather doubt that. I have not been (actually touched down) in Alaska. But I can tell you northern B.C. is very different from northern Alberta for example and northern Manitoba different again. It's the precambrian shield and the way it swoops circular around the pole. Alaska is like a more northern B.C. with a soupcon of tundra for titillation. I was thinking about your trip plans today and to be honest I'm afraid for you (not to mention the locals when you get there but...) and wondering if you realize HOW different it will be? I've never HEARD of alders in the territories, or the northern prairies (rock and muskeg country). I had to look them up. Trust me Steve what you're describing as Alaska is not the tundra I know. The Dempster highway is not a gentle winding drive with ocean breezes from one Hilton to the next. Did you get those links I posted for you? It's a straight road through black fly hell dotted with little poverty stricken native settlements and scattered (and I do mean scattered) villages--I believe there are four between Whitehorse and Inuvik) where a quart of milk will set you back $3. And you're gonna have bring pack animals. Well, that or a loaded Winnebago, tents, your water and most of your food, extra gas, and a separate vehicle for Deet. If you stick to the Yukon it will be somewhat like Alaska BUT on the other side of the range with all the weather and flora difference. I'd recommend Ben Gadd's book: http://www.dogknows.com/corax/hcr/ > > Where the settlements are. There are roads > > all over the north. They just aren't there during break up and freeze [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > SBH The distance too is very much more than the drive you mentioned around Alaska. You might want to fly to Dawson or Whitehorse, and then drive. Whitehorse will have major airline service from Calgary. Again, you really need to research this. This may not be the vacation for you. You will be entering an area that is very much less sophisticated and developed than Alaska, very barren (duh that's why...) and well, to be honest, maybe better than Kashechewan, but still, third world living for most of the residents that don't live in Yellowknife, Whitehorse or Inuvik. If you can get to Holman Island, all your dreams of a trip in the north will come true. Then, if you wanted to drive throught the northern parts of Manitoba or Saskatchewan you'd be driving through dense boreal forest. Not so in the territories. The land of little sticks. Three foot jackpine that are 60 years old. Perhaps I neglected to mention (had to pause to sniffle and blow my nose) how beautiful it is, and how much I miss it? > > > OF COURSE IT CAN BE DONE. But it's bloody expensive, the upkeep never > > > ends, it shifts all over the place, and Alaska has a lot less muskeg [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > the territories. The land of little sticks. Three foot jackpine that > are 60 years old. The treeline is that line that divides sub-Arctic and Arctic. Anything above the treeline is Arctic...tundra. Not much growth higher than your your ankles. Parts of north eastern Manitoba which are above the treeline are more Arctic Zone than 50 miles south of Inuvik. http://www.iti.gov.nt.ca/parks/education/p_t/treeline.htm You mentioned spring. Spring is not a good time for a tourist. Spring is a GREAT time if you live there (relief). But spring in the Arctic is no sooner than end June. For best travelling consider August or September. http://www.iti.gov.nt.ca/parks/travel_general_info/travel_by_road.htm http://www.thelon.com/autumn.htm http://www.nahanni.com/ http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/nt/nahanni/visit/visit1_E.asp#over > You mentioned spring. Spring is not a good time for a tourist. Spring > is a GREAT time if you live there (relief). But spring in the Arctic is > no sooner than end June. For best travelling consider August or > September. COMMENT: This I know--- popular wisdom in Alaska is that the four seasons are Winter, June, July, and August. However, if you can mange to get there in a year with an early Spring, you'll see Alaska at the nicest it ever gets, exactly because there are no bugs. I drove the Fairbanks loop in an usually early and tremendously beautiful Spring in early May of 2000. The whole country had just come out a deepfreeze, and was just lying there, cryogenically preserved, breathless and warm and crystalline with clear roads between 10 foot drifts in the South. No flies and I believe there was one mosquito out that early. But she felt like a BB when batted. You could see Denali very plainly from Ancorage, and of course it only got better as you drove past it. It's a monster--- 4 miles up from the plain where it stands, not a measly two or three. But no, don't plan a trip like this at that time. It happens only to the lucky and the ignorant. And the few who can hop a flight on short notice. SBH > > > OF COURSE IT CAN BE DONE. But it's bloody expensive, the upkeep never > > > ends, it shifts all over the place, and Alaska has a lot less muskeg [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > alders in the territories, or the northern prairies (rock and muskeg > country). I had to look them up. http://www.iti.gov.nt.ca/parks/education/p_t/trees_shrubs_page7.htm You probably wouldn't know one if you stepped on it. They're the green bushy grap you have to get through between the trees. And sometimes even where there is no trees. No, there are few alders on the tundra, but that's one thing that makes it tundra. >Trust me Steve what you're describing > as Alaska is not the tundra I know. The Dempster highway is not a > gentle winding drive with ocean breezes from one Hilton to the next. Neither is the ALCAN or the Fairbanks loop. It's good road, but if you break down, there's nobody forever and ever, except the occasional passing vehicle. > Did you get those links I posted for you? It's a straight road through > black fly hell dotted with little poverty stricken native settlements [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > loaded Winnebago, tents, your water and most of your food, extra gas, > and a separate vehicle for Deet. COMMENT: Well, some of this is seasonal, and the rest is crappy roadbuilding, perhaps. SBH >>OF COURSE IT CAN BE DONE. But it's bloody expensive, the upkeep never >>ends, it shifts all over the place, and Alaska has a lot less muskeg [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Since it's separated from these by a rather arbitrary political line, I > rather doubt that. ...and miles and miles and miles... and geology differences... e.g.: <http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/gmc/exrc_e.php> >>Where the settlements are. There are roads >>all over the north. They just aren't there during break up and freeze [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > gotten me over many a rough road, due to proper gearing and 4WD. These > days it gets only enough driving to keep it in shape. TANSTAAFL. Mass plus muscle gets it done. The penalty is energy needed to put in. Pastorio > >>OF COURSE IT CAN BE DONE. But it's bloody expensive, the upkeep never > >>ends, it shifts all over the place, and Alaska has a lot less muskeg [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Since it's separated from these by a rather arbitrary political line, I > > rather doubt that. <>...and miles and miles and miles... and geology differences... e.g.: http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/gmc/exrc_e.php<> OMIGAWD what a wonderful site! I'm going to spend several weeks there some night soon Bob. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Steve's homework: John Franklin http://www.ric.edu/rpotter/SJFranklin.html The graves. http://www.ric.edu/rpotter/franklinsites.html Frozen in Time http://www.johngeiger.net/fit/01/index.html "It's as if he's unconscious," marvelled Owen Beattie as he lifted the slim body of twenty-year-old Chief Stoker John Torrington to the surface, the young man's head lolling onto his shoulder." Starvation, scurvy, lead poisoning, and cannibalism ended a famous 1845 voyage through the Arctic in search of the Northwest Passage, the subject of Frozen in Time: The Fate of the Franklin Expedition (Vancouver: GreyStone Books, 2004; $15.95), by anthropologist Owen Beattie, who found the crew's gruesome remains in the 1980s. In this updated edition, Beattie gives the evidence for the crew having lead poisoning from tinned foods, which they ate to prevent scurvy (it didn't work). They were victims, quips novelist Margaret Atwood in her witty introduction, "of bad packaging." > >>Where the settlements are. There are roads > >>all over the north. They just aren't there during break up and freeze [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Pastorio Gas in Whitehorse was $1.10 a litre today. Tell me your fill cost for the Suburban? > Perhaps everything in Candian COSTCOs is 50% more, due to Canadian > import fees, surcharges, taxes, and socialist blahblah. Wouldn't [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Again I keep wondering what the devil Canada spends all those taxes > on?? On our budget surplus and paying down our debt. The money is wasted on Quebec, who, in return, speak of having another vote about leaving Canada. That's why they get so much money. Many federal politicians are from Quebec. >Again I keep wondering what the devil Canada spends all those taxes >on?? It's not the US bloated military, certainly. And it's not the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >vs the US 35% (figuring total tax burden by dividing all State budget >expenditures by GDP.) -- ): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" :( (: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net :) > The money is wasted on Quebec, who, in return, speak of having another > vote about leaving Canada. That's why they get so much money. > Many federal politicians are from Quebec. Many federal politicians are from the rest of Canada. In fact...the majority. My but this has been an interesting thread. We've hardly left a racist stone unturned. > >Again I keep wondering what the devil Canada spends all those taxes > >on?? It's not the US bloated military, certainly. And it's not the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" :( > (: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net :) >>>Costco memberships are $50 annually and one would have to add that to >>>the price of the fishoil. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > day, my wife 60). That's $120. If my wife filled up there it would be > over $200 saved a year in gas. Today it was 1 cent cheaper than all the other stations in the area; and I mean all. Exxon same price as the discounters. Costco $2.28 vs. $2.29. Pastorio Red Herring here? One would only add the membership dollar amount portion relative the money spent on fish oil (about $13.00 per 300 capsules) Factoring in the $50.00 member ship brings the cost up by no more than 50 cents per bottle, if that much. Mike >> > Red (sockeye) salmon has been recommended for eating because it can't >> > be cultured, and cultured salmon has variable quantities of EPA and DHA [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > $12.99 for 180 softgels > There's been some complaining in this newsgroup about pesticide and > organohalogen contamination of wild caught fish, but that's a problem > with cultured fish, too (even more so). Whether there's enough of these > things (polutants which are NOT mercury) to be worried about, I cannot > say. All chemicals are detectable everywhere, in SOME amounts. It's the > dose only that makes the poison. If I understand it correctly, fish oil that's been distilled or labeled "cholesterol free" has been processed in a way that removes the offending pollutants no matter where the fish is from. Susan > If I understand it correctly, fish oil that's been distilled or labeled > "cholesterol free" has been processed in a way that removes the > offending pollutants no matter where the fish is from. > > Susan COMMENT: One hopes so, but some of those polutants are volatile, too, so it's not a done deal. Do you have any studies where they've measured this, to see? I can't seem to find any. It is mainly out of faith that any kind of purificatin is good purification, that I take the distilled stuff. However, irony of ironies, it's possible they may be distilling out the stuff in fishoil that actually prevents the heart attacks. :) SBH > One hopes so, but some of those polutants are volatile, too, so it's > not a done deal. Do you have any studies where they've measured this, > to see? I can't seem to find any. I probably don't. OTOH, the Eades make the claim in Protein Power, most of which has supporting citations. > It is mainly out of faith that any kind of purificatin is good > purification, that I take the distilled stuff. However, irony of > ironies, it's possible they may be distilling out the stuff in fishoil > that actually prevents the heart attacks. :) I sure hope not! Susan > I probably don't. 88888889 >OTOH, the Eades make the claim in Protein Power, most > of which has supporting citations. so far it is absolutely amazingly fasxinating Like I said, this sounds better than any of the announcements that are out there. Send us details. >> It is mainly out of faith that any kind of purificatin is good >> purification, that I take the distilled stuff. However, irony of >> ironies, it's possible they may be distilling out the stuff in fishoil >> that actually prevents the heart attacks. :) > > I sure hope not! it is a confusing story but basically mayhave to go out of pocket a bit mk5000 "I always wonder what that means. To me, actors just seem to be doing what people do. What is "stupendous" about acting like an ordinary person of some sort? They aren't like musicians, who do things that are obviously far beyond what ordinary people can do."--danimal > > Red (sockeye) salmon has been recommended for eating because it can't > > be cultured, and cultured salmon has variable quantities of EPA and DHA [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > SBH If you have a freezer <<cough>> you can buy whole dressed wild Alaska Salmon in season and freeze it. Then you can bake the whole fish in aluminum foil, with lemon or grapefruit slices, sliced or diced onion or shallots, white wine, salt and pepper, fresh thyme sprigs. Or you can do that on the barbecue if you do that. Then divide it into portions and freeze or refrigerate the leftovers for your sandwiches, pasta, salads, crackers and brie! Or: Cut the fish into steaks or fillet and freeze in individual aluminum foil packets done as above, to do in the oven or on the barbecue as needed. Fresh fish has a better mouth-feel than canned, better taste, and may be cheaper. And you can eake in the white wine. > If you have a freezer <<cough>> you can buy whole dressed wild Alaska > Salmon in season and freeze it. It's on my list of things to do. I think I'll also add some red-oil salmon capsules to my distilled stuff, for reasons mentioned (perhaps they distill out the good stuff?). I'm a fan of brightly colored supplements and foods, for their magical properties. SBH > > "2) what is the omega-3 fatty acid content? That's the important > > fraction" [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > SBH I take EPA-DHA Omega-3 Fish Oil 500 EPA 300 MG DHA 200 Mg 300 Soft Gels for $42 US I take 1 a day This from "The Vitamin Shoppe" Item # VS-1045 Grasping for longivity. Bill SignatureGarden Shade Zone 5 S Jersey USA in a Japanese Jungle Manner.39.6376 -75.0208 This article is posted under fair use rules in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and is strictly for the educational and informative purposes. This material is distributed without profit. Sam Adams-- "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds" > I take EPA-DHA > Omega-3 Fish Oil 500 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Bill Grasping for financial ruin! The same stuff at COSTCO (same number of roughly equivalent caps, containing 450 mg EPA+DHA) is about a third of the price. SBH > > I take EPA-DHA > > Omega-3 Fish Oil 500 [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > SBH What is COSTCO ? 42/300 = 14 cents a day You are suggesting five cents a day. Do you count pennies in 2005? I leave them at the register otherwise my house vacuum gets em. Bill SignatureGarden Shade Zone 5 S Jersey USA in a Japanese Jungle Manner.39.6376 -75.0208 This article is posted under fair use rules in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and is strictly for the educational and informative purposes. This material is distributed without profit. Sam Adams-- "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds" > > > I take EPA-DHA > > > Omega-3 Fish Oil 500 [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Bill COMMENT: If you only take 1 a day I suppose it doesn't matter. I take 10 a day (about equal to 7 oz of salmon) and it does to me, if only as a matter of aesthetics in not buying the same stuff in a diffferent bottle, for 3 times as much. Costco's 300 mg EPA/DHA standard fishoil cap is only 2.3 cents. FYI Costco: a large discount store in the US, where people who do not wish to flush their money down the toilet, shop. See also Walmart, Target, Food-4-Less, and the like. Being a fan of capitalism and the way it's transforming the world, I enjoy megastores. Today, as an example, I note that Costco has added a "universal casket" kiosk. I am not making this up. There are sample "corners" of 6 universal casket types to touch and feel, and a photo, and some promo. And order forms. Cost for any casket is $800, plus shipping free in a 75 mile radius (order to delivery time 48 hours). Outside that radius, shipping charge $125. You can have The Kentucky Rose Casket, the Brian Casket, the Mother Casket, the In God's Care casket, the Morgan Casket, and finally the Catholic special, the Lady of Guadelupe Casket. Just fill out the handy Costco Wholesale order form with name of deceased, contact info, Date of Viewing and Service, Funeral Home contact info, and there you are. You can confirm orders by calling 1-866-458-2800. I've seen stand-alone casket wholesale stores in places like San Francisco, for some years (in the 1990's people were dying to get in). However, this is the first time I've seen a casket section in a megastore. The price of $800 is extremely reasonable for this kind of thing. And I'll bet it gives the average funeral director the same feeling my vet gets when he sees the TV-mail order PETMEDs. But that's Gresham's Law of the Jungle. Over in another corner of the Costco store are basinetts. You may have heard of cradle to grave socialism? In the US, it's possible to see cradle to grave capitalism, and all under one roof. And it's not that expensive, because it all comes from China. You see. I'm glad I don't have to explain this. :) SBH ...> FYI Costco: a large discount store in the US, where people who do not > wish to flush their money down the toilet, shop. See also Walmart, > Target, Food-4-Less, and the like. > >... We pay for the "executive membership", and buy enough that the annual rebate is more than that particular membership fee, so it is essentially a free membership. We have three teenagers to feed, so food is a big ticket item (we are up to between 5 to 6 gallons of milk per week, plus bread, cheese, fruit, frozen vegies... their frozen green beans are excellent, juice, meat, coffee, laundry detergent, and toilet paper... why do kids need so much toilet paper?). We tend not to buy computers or large scale electronics there because they do not have a decent repair policy (my laptop has already been repaired once, and looks like it needs again even though it is 18 months old). Though they do sell silly things like Kevin Trudeau's book and noni juice. > I take EPA-DHA > Omega-3 Fish Oil 500 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Grasping for longivity. oh My God . . . I had mostly heard its like an upscale buffet. I finally have looked it up. It's a place doable for lunch, and egads, I may go soon. $25 for lunch, they say, but check this friggin stuff out! > > This from "The Vitamin Shoppe" Item # VS-1045 > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > $25 for lunch, they say, but check this friggin stuff out! COMMENT: If you want (more or less) healthy yuppified imported food, which would be upscale except it's on the cheap, I recommend _Trader Joe's_ if you have one near you. They don't do lunch, though. There's a Vitamin Shoppe near me and they don't have anything but supplements. You sure you have the right place? > COMMENT: > > If you want (more or less) healthy yuppified imported food, which would > be upscale except it's on the cheap, I recommend _Trader Joe's_ if you > have one near you. Perhaps she is a moron? who thinks that eating expensive vitamins is a substitute for real food. she probably needs a sedative tho. or maybe she has taken too much valium which would be sad. First of all, valium is a controlled drug, so you can go to jail for over-prescribing it. Not so with antibiotics. The only jail you should go to for over-prescribing antibiotics is "stupid-jail". Second, it is really really really really hard to say "NO" to a patient who demands antibiotics (within reason). >They don't do lunch, though. do they sell antibiotics? It is so hard to overprescribe those things, that (I am not kidding you) patients will switch doctors and report you to authorities for not caring about your patients. Sure, you won't lose the fight if they report you, but who wants to spend the next 2 years of their life going through an AVMA or AMA in the case of MDs investigation. Costly time consuming hassle. And you still lose the patient in the end anyway. > There's a Vitamin Shoppe near me and they don't have anything but > supplements. are the vitamins they carry filled with challenges such as those related to antibiotics. And yes, the doctors are FULLY aware of the "challenges associated with it" because unlike Lily-the-dense, they went to medschool. Sometimes the path of least resistance really is the route that keeps the peace (give them the damned antibiotics! >You sure you have the right place? sometimes it's just not worth it to fight about it all the time) And perhaps most important in the list of Lily's growing stupidity, vitamins and antibiotics have less to do with mutating viruses than halibut has to do with downhill skiing. mk5000 "i imagine one of these creatures coming out of a factory in the world of Blade Runner, Brazil, star wars or the matrix"--david zimberoff ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Houston chiropractor who charges $80 per session recently spoke to my Senior Citizens group. He said that Omega 3 fatty acids enhance brain function, organ function, and cell metabolism in general. He said the Omega 6 fatty acids boost the immune system. He says that a tin of sardines or herring yield about 1000 milligrams of omega fatty acids. He says that only pharmaceutical grade fish oil is free of mercury, lead, pcb's, and other pollutants. He has prescribed up to 24 gels (24 grams) per day of fish oil for the lowering of serum cholesterol, triglycerides, and glucose. He says that heart patients are referred to him by surgeons who want these serum levels lowered quickly in preparation for heart surgeries. IIRC, it takes him 10 to 14 days to sufficiently lower the serum levels in obese and hyperglycemic patients. There is more to it than just popping the pills. For one thing, I think the patient has to drink a gallon of water per diem. David H ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Susan says... > Your numbers look excellent, especially since not only > is your HDL high, but your TGL is low, and it's > considered a more predictive risk factor for CVD. Your > TG/HDL ratio is 1. You're probably gonna hafta find > something other than CVD to die of. I'm afraid CVD is a bit more likely than the lipids would suggest. Both of my 1st degree male relatives had heart attacks at age 43. I've sailed into my 50's without that, but there's no reason to believe I didn't get the same genetics. And I have high blood pressure - reasonably well controlled. And finally, for the first time the fasting blood sugar reading came back high (114). Still trying to figure that one out because my non-fasting levels are lower than that, so it may mean nothing. Anyway, I try to do what I can, within reason, to head off the genetics. > I lowered my LDL 70 points with the use of panthethine, > after having lowered it once before by switching to a > low starch/sugar diet. But I don't think you have > anything to worry about, from all I've read in the > literature. I'll read up on that. Thanks. > Susan says... > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Anyway, I try to do what I can, within reason, to head off > the genetics. The target LDL goals are dependent on all the risk factors and then add them up. Suggest to your doctor to do a VAP test to see the subfractions. It is cheap and compares to the regular lipid panel in cost. The fasting BS, although diagnostic of diabetes is relatively the last abnormality that takes place. A postprandial after meal glucose can determine glucose intolerance earlier. They become abnormal before the fasting does. > I'm afraid CVD is a bit more likely than the lipids would > suggest. Both of my 1st degree male relatives had heart > attacks at age 43. I've sailed into my 50's without that, > but there's no reason to believe I didn't get the same > genetics. Did they have lipid profiles like yours? >And I have high blood pressure - reasonably well > controlled. And finally, for the first time the fasting > blood sugar reading came back high (114). Still trying to > figure that one out because my non-fasting levels are lower > than that, so it may mean nothing. Uh, NO! Your fbg is the one number you've mentioned here that is of great concern. Most diabetics are diabetic long before their fbg ever goes into what's the alleged diabetic range. I'm diabetic, and I've yet to have a fbg above 111, even when badly controlled. It's never nothing. But what's much more important is to get a free (or almost free with rebates, etc) bg meter and to start testing your 1 hr and 2 hr post meal bg. Anything above 105 doesn't happen in those with intact pancreatic function. These numbers are reliable, whereas everytime it's been studied, fbg has failed to detect most diabetes til it's well advanced. > Anyway, I try to do what I can, within reason, to head off > the genetics. I'll see your gentics and raise you a few CVD related deaths by that age, where your relatives had heart attacks. My lipids are about like yours, except for higher TGL, and my doc and I are happy. > > I lowered my LDL 70 points with the use of panthethine, > > after having lowered it once before by switching to a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I'll read up on that. Thanks. Here are some abstracts: > 1: Minerva Med. 1990 Jun;81(6):475-9. Related Articles, Links > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Cardiovascular diseases are the main cause of death also in women. Their incidence, rapidly growing in the peri-menopausal period, is related to serum levels of total cholesterol and its LDL fraction. It was also shown that the peroxidation of LDL is an additional factor in the genesis of atherosclerotic vascular disease. As long-term treatments with synthetic lipid-lowering drugs may cause undesirable side effects, while pantethine is known to be well tolerated, we treated 24 hypercholesterolemic women (total serum cholesterol greater than or equal to 240 mg/dl), in perimenopausal age (range: 45-55 years, mean +/- SD = 51.6 +/- 2.4) with 900 mg/day of pantethine. This is a precursor of coenzyme A, with an antiperoxidation effect in vivo, and our aim was to confirm its lipid lowering activity in this particular type of patients. After 16 weeks of treatment, significant reductions of total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and LDL-C/HDL-C ratio could be observed. No remarkable c hanges of the main laboratory parameters (fasting blood sugar, B.U.N., creatinine, uric acid) were seen. Efficacy percentages of the treatment were about 80%. None of the patients complained of adverse reactions due to the treatment with pantethine. In conclusion, we suggest that pantethine should be considered in the long-term treatment of lipid derangements occurring in the perimenopausal age. > PMID: 2359503 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] > 1: Acta Biomed Ateneo Parmense. 1984;55(1):25-42. Related Articles, Links [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > The hypolipidemizing effects of Pantethine were investigated by the Authors in 37 hypercholesterolemic and/or hypertriglyceridemic patients. Of these, 21 were also diabetic, in a satisfying glucidic compensation, in order to verify the action of this drug also in this metabolic condition. The study was carried out for three months and during this period the patients were given Pantethine at the dose of 600 mg/die orally. At the 30th, the 60th, the 90th day of treatment the following parameters were controlled: cholesterolemia, HDL cholesterol, apolipoproteins A and B, triglyceridemia, systolic and diastolic arterial pressure, uricemia, body weight. Thirty days after suspending the treatment, the parameters were controlled again to detect a possible "rebound" effect. The results were analyzed on the whole case-record, subdividing the patients in dislipidemic and diabetic-dislipidemic, and on the basis of the Fredrickson's classification. Pantethine induced in all groups a q uick and progressive decrease of cholesterolemia, triglyceridemia, LDL cholesterol and Apolipoproteins B with increased HDL cholesterol and Apolipoproteins A. After suspending the treatment, there is a clear inversion of the state of these parameters. The Authors conclude that the present work shows that Pantethine, a natural and atoxic substance, an important component of Coenzyme A, is efficacious in determining a clear tendency towards normalization of the lipidic values. > PMID: 6232801 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] > 1: Atherosclerosis. 1984 Jan;50(1):73-83. Related Articles, Links [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Pantethine (P), the stable disulphate form of pantetheine, major component and precursor of coenzyme A, was evaluated within a double-blind protocol (8 weeks for P or for a corresponding placebo) in 29 patients, 11 with type IIB hyperlipoproteinemia, 15 with type IV, and 3 with an isolated reduction of high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels. In type IIB patients, P (300 mg t.i.d.) determined a highly significant lowering of plasma total and low density lipoprotein (LDL) associated cholesterol (-13.5% for both parameters). In the same patients, HDL-C levels increased about 10% at the end of treatment. Switching from P to placebo was associated with a rapid return to the baseline cholesterolemia. Both in type IIB and type IV patients, plasma triglyceride levels were reduced around 30%, when P was given as the first treatment; when it was preceded by placebo, reductions were less striking (respectively, -17.8% for type IIB and -13.0% for type IV, at the end of P treatment). HDL-C levels were not increased by P, either in type IV, and in the patients with low HDL cholesterolemia. In type IV, LDL cholesterol levels showed a variable response to P: they tended to increase when below 132 mg/dl, prior to treatment, and to be reduced when above this level. This study provides evidence for a significant hypocholesterolemic effect of P, a natural compound free of overt side effects. It also indicates that P may raise HDL-C levels in type IIB patients, while moderately reducing triglyceridemia. > Publication Types: > • Clinical Trial [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Pantethine (P), a coenzyme A precursor, was administered to cholesterol-fed rabbits (0.5% cholesterol diet + 1% pantethine) for 90 days. At the end of treatment, plasma total cholesterol levels were reduced 64.7% and the HDL/total cholesterol ratio increased in P-treated animals; a significant rise of the apo A-I/A-II ratio was detected in HDL. VLDL lipid and protein levels were, on the other hand, reduced by P. The cholesterol-ester content of both liver and aortic tissues was not significantly affected by P.. Although the total aortic area with evident plaques was reduced only 18.2%, the microscopical examination of sections from the major vessels of P-treated animals, showed a reduction in the severity of lesions, both in the aorta and in the coronary arteries. These findings suggest that P, in addition to significantly lowering plasma cholesterol levels in rabbits on an experimental diet, may modify lipid deposition in major arteries, possibly by affecting lipoprotein c omposition and/or exerting an arterial protective effect. > PMID: 6442152 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] > Clin Ther. 1986;8(5):537-45. Related Articles, Links [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > A one-year clinical trial with pantethine was conducted in 24 patients with established dyslipidemia of Fredrickson's types II A, II B, and IV, alone or associated with diabetes mellitus. The treatment was well tolerated by all patients with no subjective complaints or detectable side effects. Blood lipid assays repeated after 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment revealed consistent and statistically significant reductions of all atherogenic lipid fractions (total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B) with parallel increases of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein A. The results were equally good in patients with uncomplicated dyslipidemia and in those with associated diabetes mellitus. The authors conclude that pantethine (a drug entity related to the natural compound, pantetheine) represents a valid therapeutic support for patients with dyslipidemia not amenable to satisfactory correction of blood lipids by diet alon e. > PMID: 3094958 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] > Acta Biomed Ateneo Parmense. 1987;58(5-6):143-52. Related Articles, Links [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Recent investigations have confirmed the effectiveness and the excellent tolerability of pantethine, a derivative of pantetheine, an essential part of the acetylation coenzyme CoA, administered P.O., in normalizing the blood lipid concentrations of patients with hyperlipidemias. A group of 18 patients with hyperlipidemias (9 M, 9 F), with an average age of 52.6 years, was submitted to pantethine parenteral treatment. After a 20 days wash-out, pantethine (400 mg/day; BID) was administered intramuscularly, for 20 days. Total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, apo A-1 and B lipoprotein, uric acid in serum, glycemia, CBC, B.U.N., creatininemia, E.S.R., SGOT, SGPT, bilirubinemia, cardiac frequency, blood pressure and body weight were controlled before and after treatment. The drug showed to have a therapeutic effectiveness by a rapid and significant improvement in the blood lipid pattern with reduction of total cholesterol, triglycerides and apo-B lipoprotein and incr ease of HDL-cholesterol and apo A-1 lipoprotein. The tolerability of pantethine at the stated dosage and mode of administration was invariably excellent, with non complaints or visible side effects imputable to the test drug. BUN, creatininemia, glycemia, SGOT, SGPT, bilirubinemia, E.S.R., CBC, cardiac frequency and blood pressure readings showed no noteworthy changes throughout the study. > PMID: 2970754 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Recent investigations have confirmed the effectiveness and the excellent tolerability of pantethine, a derivative of pantetheine, an essential part of the acetylation coenzyme CoA, administered P.O., in normalizing the blood lipid concentrations of patients with hyperlipidemias. A group of 18 patients with hyperlipidemias (9 M, 9 F), with an average age of 52.6 years, was submitted to pantethine parenteral treatment. After a 20 days wash-out, pantethine (400 mg/day; BID) was administered intramuscularly, for 20 days. Total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, apo A-1 and B lipoprotein, uric acid in serum, glycemia, CBC, B.U.N., creatininemia, E.S.R., SGOT, SGPT, bilirubinemia, cardiac frequency, blood pressure and body weight were controlled before and after treatment. The drug showed to have a therapeutic effectiveness by a rapid and significant improvement in the blood lipid pattern with reduction of total cholesterol, triglycerides and apo-B lipoprotein and incr ease of HDL-cholesterol and apo A-1 lipoprotein. The tolerability of pantethine at the stated dosage and mode of administration was invariably excellent, with non complaints or visible side effects imputable to the test drug. BUN, creatininemia, glycemia, SGOT, SGPT, bilirubinemia, E.S.R., CBC, cardiac frequency and blood pressure readings showed no noteworthy changes throughout the study. > PMID: 2970754 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Susan Susan says... > Did they have lipid profiles like yours? Don't know about my father's. My brother's HDL and LDL were both lower than mine. >> And I have high blood pressure - reasonably well >> controlled. And finally, for the first time the >> fasting blood sugar reading came back high (114). >> Still trying to figure that one out because my >> non-fasting levels are lower than that, so it may mean >> nothing. > Uh, NO! Your fbg is the one number you've mentioned > here that is of great concern. Most diabetics are [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > whereas everytime it's been studied, fbg has failed to > detect most diabetes til it's well advanced. I'm curious how/why you were diagnosed as diabetic if you never had fbg above 110. Also, in reading up about this after you scared me half to death, a two-hour reading on the glucose tolerance test of 140 or below is considered normal. 140-200 is pre-diabetes. Is the glucose tolerance test similar to a meal, or a stronger challenge? What's puzzling to me is that looking back at annual tests over the last 10 years, if anything my non-fasting bg levels are lower than my fasting levels, but they've all been in the range 97-110 until this latest one. Well, I had a non-fasting level of 105 a month ago. We'll retest in a few weeks and see what it looks like. Meanwhile, where would I get a cheap meter? > I'll see your gentics and raise you a few CVD related > deaths by that age, where your relatives had heart > attacks. Well, actually, one attack was fatal. > Here are some abstracts: Thanks very much. > I'm curious how/why you were diagnosed as diabetic if you > never had fbg above 110. I knew I had severe insulin resistance when I developed ovarian cysts at 40. Then I developed severe peripheral neuropathies in addition to my severe dyslipidemia and labile hypertension. All conditions reversed on a low carb diet. I got a bg meter and began testing; my post prandials were very well into the diabetic range. I was medically diagnosed when I presented these numbers to my doc. I'd never had an fbg above 109, or lower than 109 for 10 years. > Also, in reading up about this > after you scared me half to death, a two-hour reading on the > glucose tolerance test of 140 or below is considered normal. > 140-200 is pre-diabetes. Those targets and diagnostic levels were developed to prevent diagnosis of type 2 diabetes back when no treatments were available. The concern was that it |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message