Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low Carb Health & Technical Forums > Cholesterol, Heart Disease
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151   ^
Old Sun, May-26-19, 05:16
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,202
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Maybe LMA was a zero? My total coronary calcium score had six components, five of them were zero, but all listed on the final score as 0. After LAD, there was "Diagonals" and after RCA was "PDA for Posterior Descending Artery".

When you speak with the lab, also ask how common it may have been an error in the first test. My understanding is that the Agatston scoring method is a computer generated analysis counting up specks of calcium in so many mm of volume. Like with a mammogram, there may be a risk of missing specks but less risk of counting specks that are not there??

And when you call the lab, ask to speak with the MD who signed and reviewed your exam findings. I have spoken with many over the years, and find most love to talk to real live patients, expounding on the results. They spend their days in darkened rooms checking a computer readout and then signing off on digital scans, so when they have a diagnostic exam patient in front of them, the radiologists tend to talk and talk away (and compare your two scans?)
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #152   ^
Old Sun, May-26-19, 06:54
thud123's Avatar
thud123 thud123 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 5,245
 
Plan: ~25NC/IF
Stats: 342.2/231/000 Male 182cm
BF:
Progress: 32%
Default

I agree with Janet, keep pressing to find someone to talk about the dramatic difference in results. If you can find the right person eventually that is really interested in this stuff they'll probably talk your ear off over your head enthusiastically. For example...

Don't ask my about KiteFoiling unless you pack a lunch ha!

Good luck in your Quest Ken. What does one of these cost? Perhaps we could crowd-source an update in 2020 for you. I'd be willing to contribute for sure - I'll start with a promise of $100 dollars.
Reply With Quote
  #153   ^
Old Sun, May-26-19, 10:23
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 13,739
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Dr. Davis of Wheatbelly first came on the low carb scene from the vantage of lowering calcium scores through diet and lifestyle, he's probably another good person to send your story to.


Interesting how some areas of the scan changed more than others. If all this is accurate, I'd wonder if there are some differences in local physiology that make reversal more likely.

I wonder how likely an error really is here. Something like ldl cholesterol, each test is a single sampling, calcium scans by nature come as multiple samplings. If the machine was off or something, somehow it was more off in some areas than others--or at least it seems this would be necessary for there to not be some actual decrease in calcium. Seems to me, which I wouldn't put too too much stock in.
Reply With Quote
  #154   ^
Old Sun, May-26-19, 10:47
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is online now
Posts: 11,243
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/188/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: Texas
Default

~ Maybe there is no mistake?
Reply With Quote
  #155   ^
Old Sun, May-26-19, 17:40
thud123's Avatar
thud123 thud123 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 5,245
 
Plan: ~25NC/IF
Stats: 342.2/231/000 Male 182cm
BF:
Progress: 32%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meme#1
~ Maybe there is no mistake?

I believe that's what Ken, and the rest of us are hoping for Meme
Reply With Quote
  #156   ^
Old Mon, May-27-19, 05:00
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,202
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

I'm also on the side of no mistake, but sure would be nice to engage with the radiologist about how lifestyle changed the supposedly "fixed calcium plaques"

Digging up my March 2016 CAC revealed the Duke Novel risk factor table. As I remember it explained by GP (never seen by any cardiologists) they first look at the standard Framingham Risk Score (age, cholesterol, BP, etc) and then IF you have some novel risk factors, those are added to the overall analysis. So you now way under on the Agatston units, but on the fence for percentile.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_5583.jpg (26.2 KB, 4 views)
Reply With Quote
  #157   ^
Old Mon, May-27-19, 06:35
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 13,739
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Good gosh, there's sides now????

I'm also in the pro-no-mistake faction. My inability to have complete and utter certainty about anything stands against us. Hopefully I'll be able to get along without too much bickering among me.
Reply With Quote
  #158   ^
Old Mon, May-27-19, 08:06
thud123's Avatar
thud123 thud123 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 5,245
 
Plan: ~25NC/IF
Stats: 342.2/231/000 Male 182cm
BF:
Progress: 32%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teaser
Good gosh, there's sides now????

I'm also in the pro-no-mistake faction. My inability to have complete and utter certainty about anything stands against us. Hopefully I'll be able to get along without too much bickering among me.

>>>> this I like <<<<
Reply With Quote
  #159   ^
Old Mon, May-27-19, 08:36
khrussva's Avatar
khrussva khrussva is online now
Posts: 7,571
 
Plan: My own - < 30 net carbs
Stats: 440/213/210 Male 5' 11"
BF:Energy Unleashed
Progress: 99%
Location: Central Virginia - USA
Default

I'm on my side. I just have not figured out what side that is yet. My first reaction was HOLY COW! I still feel that way. But now I'm not sure if it is a reaction to an unbelievable calcium reduction on an incomprehensible mistake. I am a software developer and data analyst. If I were told to test and debug the new report format and was given both of my results as examples my gut feeling is that I would expect to find a bug or two in the new report. An 85% drop in the LAD while only an 8% drop in the LCX??? But then again, how many of these scans have they done since the format change? Surely a major problem would have been caught by now.

That's why I really do need to talk with the doctor that reviewed my scan. I want to make sure that he reviewed both. One problem with getting unbelievable results is that they are unbelievable. Dave Feldman said that he'd only heard of two examples of a CAC score dropping by more than 100. Mine dropped nearly 200. My doctor didn't even call me about it. She left that to the cardiologist and he didn't have anything to say either. So excitement has turned to doubt. I do think my score went down. But down 54%? I need more confirmation to erase my doubts. It doesn't help that they changed their software and results report in the past 2 years. I went to the same lab and was scanned by the same machine for a reason. I wanted results that were comparable with a high degree of accuracy. New software, new algorithms. new formulas, and a fresh new layout was not what I'd hoped for. That only threw mud in the water.

I'll keep you all posted. IMHO, they should be very interested in looking into this. If there is a problem with my results, then they've got a serious problem. People are not paying $160 a pop for meaningless results.

BTW: Thanks for the offer, Thud. That was very nice of you. But the test isn't that expensive. I don't live in New Zealand.

Last edited by khrussva : Mon, May-27-19 at 13:50.
Reply With Quote
  #160   ^
Old Mon, May-27-19, 09:53
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 3,103
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

So, without declaring a camp and with a glass half full response, it could turn out that the first CAC result was distorted as well. There's a reason for SW updates. Let's hope it was to improve overall accuracy and to limit rogue results.
Reply With Quote
  #161   ^
Old Mon, May-27-19, 10:00
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is online now
Posts: 4,563
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/128/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 106%
Location: Vermont
Default

So it really does seem like 2 things are needed, a conversation with the doctor who read the score/scores, and a third test in a year. Certainty is impossible to come by in this world however much we wish for it.
Reply With Quote
  #162   ^
Old Mon, May-27-19, 13:26
Grav Grav is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 1,089
 
Plan: Banting
Stats: 302/187/187 Male 175cm
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: New Zealand
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khrussva
I'll keep you all posted. IMHO, they should be very interested in looking into this. If there is a problem with my results, then they've got a serious problem. People are not paying $160 a pop for meaningless results.

BTW: Thanks for the offer, Thud. That was very nice of you. But the test isn't that expends eve. I don' live in New Zealand.

I've long claimed that the two worst things about living in New Zealand are the earthquakes and the spotty internet/mobile services. But I think expensive CAC tests ($2000 NZD or about $1300 USD) would make a worthy #3 to that list.
Reply With Quote
  #163   ^
Old Tue, May-28-19, 02:29
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,202
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Grav, for that price you could book a package holiday to Miami next February and have a CAC done at Baptist Health for $49 US.

I forget who is also a member of the Ketogenic Forums, but there is a newish thread there titled "CAC Scores Not 0: Add your knowledge here" The health sub-forums are good, the cholesterol one has interesting topics, so it is worth going through the steps to search and read that forum when needing specific advice.


First post:

Quote:
Lots of threads about “you need to get a CAC done”, but very little about after you get a score and it isn’t 0. I want this thread to be a place where questions and answers can be found. It is possible to reduce the calcium build up, stabilize or reduce the growth.

This topic is now literally close to my heart. I did my CAC, went to Dr. William Blanchet’s facility, and the score was 328.98 and that is in the 90th percentile for my age range. The clinic comments are : '" the ascending aoria is mildly calcified extending into the ostium of the right coroanary artery. This is consistent with mild extra-cardic vascular atherosclerosis. In addition the patient has aortic annular sclerosis." I got instructions on how to stop the increase or lower its progression.

Ivor’s interview with Dr. Blanchet came out after I had my scan done. Link is below. The biggest takeaways I had from that interview were:

The dental health relationship to coronary health. I will be flossing a lot more going forward. Beats taking a statin any day! Dr. B. personally reduced his own score by 18% in a year by just adding additional brushing and flossing to his routine.

Colored berries are the preferred fruits and you should eat them, along with lots of green veggies and lean meats.

He recommends low carb diet.

Avoiding vegetable oils and trans fatty foods

Brisk walks for half hr. 3X a week. The runners in Boulder that he works with have a hard time that recommendation, LOL.

For higher scores, over 100, B3 (slow released nicotinic acid) D3, and Omega 3 oils, and VitK2 are needed supplements.

If your dr. recommends statins,they can be synergistic to the supplements. For most of his patients they are not needed at all. He has been doing this for 15+ yrs. last time a patient of his had a heart attack was 6 yrs. ago. He is all about prevention of attacks.

Link... thefatemperor.com – 12 Apr 19 1 Bill Blanchet MD - Eliminating Heart Attacks...and Much More Podcast #17 |... Bill Blanchet MD is a cardiologist, preventative intervention expert and also an exceptional expert in cardiovascular imaging. He has near-eliminated heart attacks and repeat heart attacks in his patients over the last 15+ years. Here we... Here is a link to an older discussion on the forums that has some great info in it as well. Bad Calcium Score. How to reduce it I agree with Rob.

Personally, I will never take statins. Inflammation is the problem, not saturated fat IMO. I would avoid industrial seed oils like the plague(which is basically what they are wink ) Ivor Cummins has some great science based info on this subject.


There are only a few follow up comments about this so far, but there are a few other active threads about CAC scores. There is one titled Why did my CAC increase? Her First scan was 107, second it dropped to 98, third it went back up to 154. Advice similar as same member is commenting.

Last edited by JEY100 : Tue, May-28-19 at 02:54.
Reply With Quote
  #164   ^
Old Tue, May-28-19, 08:13
khrussva's Avatar
khrussva khrussva is online now
Posts: 7,571
 
Plan: My own - < 30 net carbs
Stats: 440/213/210 Male 5' 11"
BF:Energy Unleashed
Progress: 99%
Location: Central Virginia - USA
Default

I called the lab today (VCS - Virginia Cardiovascular Specialists) and attempted to make an appointment with Dr. Phillips - the cardiologist who reviewed my latest scan. Murphy's Law. He is retiring in a few weeks and is not taking any new appointments. But as it turns out, he is just one of many cardiologists associated with VCS and the cardiologist I saw 2 years ago is also associated with VSC. He has access to my image data and can perform the same review that Dr. Phillips would have done. Murphy's Law again. My cardiologist has no time slots available until September. So what we did was to book an appointment with another cardiologist from the same practice as the first doctor that I saw. The purpose of the appointment is to compare results of the two scans and to validate their accuracy. That will happen this Wednesday. Hopefully I will find reason to erase my doubts about this astounding drop in my calcium score.

I did ask about the change in the report since the first CAC scan was done. They did upgrade their machine and it is supposed to be even more detailed & accurate at detecting disease. But how much more accurate is my question. Was my first scan a wild, bogus, guess? A software update should not be responsible for a 54% variance.

While I was on the phone I asked about getting image data from both scans burned to a CD. I told her that with my "unbelievable" reduction in calcification I may want to get a 3rd party review done. She put in that request, too. I'm glad that I asked.

Janet - I have not posted on the Ketogenic Forums lately, but I am a member. They tend to be a little more geeky on that forum, so I may add my results to the mix on that thread that you mentioned. Maybe I'll learn something. I'll wait until after Wednesday, though. If a huge mistake comes to light as a result of this review, I'd rather not be in a position to have to retract my claims from all over the internet. I've posted this in a couple of places already. I want to keep the CAC story current and complete everywhere that I'm talking about it.

My never-ending story continues. I'll keep you all posted on any new information.
Reply With Quote
  #165   ^
Old Tue, May-28-19, 14:59
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,202
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Bill Blanchet MD interview will be very encouraging. He claims the reason we heard CAC scores only progress is that they were trying to manage results with statins. With his protocol, about third CAC scores regress and a third stay the same.
His views on aspirin, Vit D, Fish Oil and the other recent studies that claimed little efficacy well worth a listen for anyone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxTIxwfCoGQ
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:58.


Copyright © 2000-2019 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.