my test results

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

hopehope_123 - 21 Sep 2006 07:03 GMT

Hi Everybody ,

I am 31 years old ,male. These are my two cholesterol test results. The
first was 9 months ago , and the second was 10 days ago:

I am 175cm tall. , 71kg.

First test:

31.dec.2005 ( at that time i was 75kg.)

hdl: 47
ldl: 133 ( the test reference value says the ldl must be lower than
130)
total cholesterol: 197
trigliserid: 87
glukoz: 83
lipoprotein: <3

Second test: ( 10 days ago)

now i am 71kg.

hdl: 54
ldl: 126
total cholesterol: 198
trigliserid: 89
glukoz: 93
lipoprotein: <7
homosistein: 13

How can i consider these values? During this 9 months period , my aim
was to lose weight , increase hdl , decrease ldl , and my hdl has
increased 7 , ldl decreased 7 . Are this changes significant? And total
cholesterol is 198 , how can i comment this value based on my hdl and
ldl ?

The only thing that is beyond the reference values of the test is
homosistein . ( according to the lab , it must be <12) what does this
mean?

Thank you very much for all your messages.

Kind regards,
tolga

Reply to this Message

Juhana Harju - 21 Sep 2006 08:51 GMT

: The only thing that is beyond the reference values of the test is
: homosistein. ( according to the lab , it must be <12) what does this
: mean?

Homocysteine is one of the many risk factors of heart disease. To lower
homocysteine it would be advisable to increase folate rich foods in the diet
i.e. green leafy vegetables, lentils, beans, red beet, carrots, and
broccoli. Also consider supplementing with vitamin B12.

Signature

Juhana

Reply to this Message

Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 21 Sep 2006 10:11 GMT

> Hi Everybody ,
>
> I am 31 years old ,male. These are my two cholesterol test results. The
> first was 9 months ago , and the second was 10 days ago:
>
> I am 175cm tall. , 71kg.

You may still be about 10 lbs heavier than optimal.

> First test:
>
> 31.dec.2005 ( at that time i was 75kg.)
>
> hdl: 47

Not optimal.

> ldl: 133 ( the test reference value says the ldl must be lower than
> 130)

Not optimal.

> total cholesterol: 197

Ok.

> trigliserid: 87

Ok.

> glukoz: 83

Ok.

> lipoprotein: <3

Ok.

> Second test: ( 10 days ago)
>
> now i am 71kg.
>
> hdl: 54

Better.

> ldl: 126

Better.

> total cholesterol: 198

Ok.

> trigliserid: 89

Ok.

> glukoz: 93

Ok.

> lipoprotein: <7

Ok.

> homosistein: 13

High.

> How can i consider these values? During this 9 months period , my aim
> was to lose weight , increase hdl , decrease ldl , and my hdl has
> increased 7 , ldl decreased 7 . Are this changes significant?

Yes.

> And total
> cholesterol is 198 , how can i comment this value based on my hdl and
> ldl ?

Total comes from HDL + LDL + Trigs/5

> The only thing that is beyond the reference values of the test is
> homosistein . ( according to the lab , it must be <12) what does this
> mean?

You may not be getting enough B12, B6, and/or folate in your diet.

Your doctor should be able to advise you on what needs to be done about
this while continuing to guide you on how to lose weight safely and
permanently.

> Thank you very much for all your messages.

You are welcome.

All thanks and praises belong to GOD, whom I love with all my heart,
soul, mind, and strength.

Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,

Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung
Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit

As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/a77da2d26da0ab97?

Reply to this Message

Jim Chinnis - 21 Sep 2006 16:06 GMT

"hopehope_123" <hopehope_123@yahoo.com> wrote in part:

>How can i consider these values? During this 9 months period , my aim
>was to lose weight , increase hdl , decrease ldl , and my hdl has
>increased 7 , ldl decreased 7 . Are this changes significant? And total
>cholesterol is 198 , how can i comment this value based on my hdl and
>ldl ?

Yes, the changes on the whole are probably meaningful--mostly the increase
in hdl. Forget about total cholesterol.

>The only thing that is beyond the reference values of the test is
>homosistein . ( according to the lab , it must be <12) what does this
>mean?

Statistically, it appears to be a marker for heart disease and other risks.
Your reading is not very high. So far, randomized trials that have lowered
homocysteine by increasing folate intake and other B-vitamins have shown
either no benefit or a trend to worse outcomes. So I would not increase
folate in my diet unless you have reason to think it is abnormally low.

I wouldn't worry about it except perhaps--if there is a family history of
early heart disease or some other reason to be concerned--as a reminder to
keep other controllable risk predictors in good ranges. You could probably
do more to decrease ldl, increase hdl, reduce tgl, keep weight good,
exercise, etc.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA

Reply to this Message

Juhana Harju - 21 Sep 2006 19:34 GMT

:: The only thing that is beyond the reference values of the test is
:: homosistein . ( according to the lab , it must be <12) what does this
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
: So I would not increase folate in my diet unless you have reason to
: think it is abnormally low.

Folate from diet and folic acid from supplements have different outcomes. I
would definitely increase folate in the diet to reduce high homocysteine.

Signature

Juhana

Reply to this Message