When I started Atkins back in late February, my lipid panel showed:

Total Cholesterol 197
HDL 42
LDL 128
Triglycerides 134

A week ago I got my new numbers:

Total Cholesterol 147
HDL 43
LDL 92
Triglycerides 60

Tomorrow I get to visit my cardiologist (the one who thinks that the Atkins WOE is a "recipe for an early grave").

While there's certainly still room for improvement, I'm nevertheless going to enjoy this.

-M.

Nothing like cold hard facts to tie up a few tongues. I find that I am doing a lot of explaining to friends since the New York Times article came out.

Way to go

COlin

I had my appointment with my cardiologist today. After a few minutes of discussing some other test results -- and him spending 5 minutes extolling the virtues of Dean Ornish -- I asked him what sort of quantative measures of improvement he would use.

"Oh, mostly blood tests" he said. "A lipid panel is probably the most important measurement we can make.

"Yeah, " I said. "I'd heard that. Well, my primary care doctor ran a lipid panel back in February before he started me on Atkins. You probably have that in my file."

He looked. "Yep. It's here. Your total cholesterol isn't terrible, but your LDL and triglycerides aren't so good."

I was almost in pain from resisting the urge to smile. "Here's the repeat panel from about 10 days ago." I showed it to him. He was quiet for a minute, and just flipped back and forth between the two results.

"Uh, well, that's certainly better...." He wasn't very enthusiastic.

I was all innocence. "Is that a satisfactory improvement over just a few months? Are there any other important measures we should check?"

"No...no, this is good. This is good." He looked kind of stunned. "Did, uh, did your regular doctor start you on one of the 'statins' at the same time?" he asked.

"Nope. This is completely due to Atkins. Any reason for me not to continue with it?" He was still pretty subdued.

"No, I guess not. We'll want to watch things though."

I finally did smile at him.

"You hate this, don't you?" I said.

"Yes, " he admitted. "I still don't think Atkins is a heart-healthy diet. In fact, I have to admit I still think it's a terrible diet. But on the other hand, I can't argue that these results are good." He started to hand them back to me.

"No, no," I said. "Let's just put 'em in the file." He was definitely not happy. "Have you ever actually read Dr. Atkins' book?" I asked.

"No, " he said. "I haven't."

"Maybe, " I gently said, "you should. "

---

He probably forgot all about this conversation before he was in to see his next patient, but it was sweet for me.

-M.

nice story, mark! you were very kind to your cardiologist, which is probably the best way to teach the ignorant.

You could still get your HDL up and LDL down, but you don't want to lower your total cholesterol any more than this. Though correlation does not equal causation, still, total cholesterol numbers under 160 are associated with higher rates of stroke, accident, suicide, murder (don't ask me! I'm just reporting the stats! lol), and cancer.

If we didn't have cholesterol in our cells (and therefore in our bloodstream, available to be utilized), we'd melt into a pile of goo, not unlike the wicked witch of the west.

Oh, Mark........ I just LOVE that story!!! Just as good as being a fly on the wall!!! Thank you for sharing that!!