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
  #121   ^
Old Fri, Apr-27-18, 00:16
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is offline
Posts: 11,268
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/188/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
As Jean mentioned above, contrary to most cardiologists, Dr Davis believes a CAC score can be lowered. He says he has done it without medications. Even if you are not part of his Undoctored forum, he eventually sends out in his regular newsletter the transcripts on some topics.

Here he lists the six strategies to help reduce a CAC.

https://blog.undoctored.com/reduce-heart-scan-score/

This is some of what Dr. Davis recommends:

Quote:
Fish oil: 3600 mg/day EPA + DHA
Fish oil: we use a true therapeutic dose, which is 3600 milligrams of EPA and DHA (not of fish oil, but of EPA and DHA). Thatís why you canít use krill oil; itís too trivial a dose. Thatís why you canít use flaxseed oil or other sources of linolenic acid. You want the EPA and DHA of fish oil, 3600 mg, broken into two different doses: 1800 mg morning, 1800 mg in the evening.


and this

Quote:
Vitamin D: 25-OH vitamin D 60-70- ng/mL
Next is vitamin D. When I added in vitamin D about 10 so years ago, it was the first time I watched heart scan scores plummet ó dramatic reductions. Before I added vitamin D, we were lucky to get a 0% year-over-year (lack of increase in a heart scan score) or slowed it down maybe 9% per year increase, or maybe a very modest, maybe 3% reduction, from one year to the next. When I added vitamin D, thatís what we started seeing 24% reduction, 36% reduction, 48% reduction, 72 ó incredible amounts of regression, of reduction in the heart scan score. So Vitamin D is crucial.


Bob Niland who answers questions on Dr. Davis's articles shared that he buys Members Mark (Sams) 1200mg Double strength fish oil.
I compared it to one my DH picked up at whole foods and I would have to take 5-6 of the brand he picked up to equal one of the Members Mark brand, so I'm returning the one DH bought. ( I ordered MM brand 2 days ago so waiting for delivery)

https://www.samsclub.com/sams/mm-fi...Id=prod19720090

It also has 2000IU of vitamin D per cap.
EPA and DHA is =540 total so about 3-4 caps in the AM to reach 1800mg and 3-4 1800mg in the PM as Davis recommends.
(as apposed to 15-20 of the brand my DH bought and 2x per day is just crazy so it's going back!)

Last edited by Meme#1 : Fri, Apr-27-18 at 01:03.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #122   ^
Old Sat, Apr-28-18, 19:13
Meme#1's Avatar
Meme#1 Meme#1 is offline
Posts: 11,268
 
Plan: Atkins DANDR
Stats: 210/188/160 Female 5'4"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meme#1
Bob Niland who answers questions on Dr. Davis's articles shared that he buys Members Mark (Sams) 1200mg Double strength fish oil.
I compared it to one my DH picked up at whole foods and I would have to take 5-6 of the brand he picked up to equal one of the Members Mark brand, so I'm returning the one DH bought. ( I ordered MM brand 2 days ago so waiting for delivery)

https://www.samsclub.com/sams/mm-fi...Id=prod19720090

It also has 2000IU of vitamin D per cap.
EPA and DHA is =540 total
so about 3-4 caps in the AM to reach 1800mg and 3-4 1800mg in the PM as Davis recommends.
(as apposed to 15-20 of the brand my DH bought and 2x per day is just crazy so it's going back!)


I got my Sam's delivery of the fish oil caps today, they have 2000IU of D so that's good. I took 2 with food and we'll see if there is any aftertaste.
Reply With Quote
  #123   ^
Old Wed, Jun-13-18, 17:16
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,203
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Putting Amy Berger's new post on high cholesterol here, because most of it is about the CAC and has links to her previous long post on the CAC on another site.
http://www.tuitnutrition.com/2018/0...-keto.html#more
Reply With Quote
  #124   ^
Old Thu, Feb-07-19, 07:29
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,203
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

It's Heart Month again

In two years, the price has been dropping around the country. Think more a function of excess time available on new expensive CT equipment, but the AHA recommendation may be helping demand too. The imaging center we used two years ago is again $99 for Heart Month, but...

Copied from another site:

Quote:
Anybody in the south Florida area. Miami baptist health has a deal $49.00 Offer available February 1-28, 2019 ; must schedule appointment by February 15. A doctorís prescription and appointment are required Https://baptisthealth.net/en/lp/pag...eart-month.aspx

Last edited by JEY100 : Thu, Feb-07-19 at 08:28.
Reply With Quote
  #125   ^
Old Thu, Feb-07-19, 08:00
s93uv3h s93uv3h is offline
Posts: 1,292
 
Plan: Atkins & IF / TRE
Stats: 000/014.5/015 Male 5' 10"
BF:
Progress: 97%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
Putting Amy Berger's new post on high cholesterol here, because most of it is about the CAC and has links to her previous long post on the CAC on another site.
http://www.tuitnutrition.com/2018/0...-keto.html#more
Excellent!



Reply With Quote
  #126   ^
Old Wed, Feb-20-19, 13:03
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,203
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

New podcast with Ivor Cummins.
http://lowcarbmd.com/episode-16-ivor-cummins

About minute 23:40, he starts listing other risk calculators.
A few include CAC, he thinks the Astro-Charm the best:

http://astrocharm.org

MESA another one: https://ebmcalc.com/MESA.htm

Last edited by JEY100 : Wed, Feb-20-19 at 13:08.
Reply With Quote
  #127   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-19, 08:56
khrussva's Avatar
khrussva khrussva is offline
Posts: 7,581
 
Plan: My own - < 30 net carbs
Stats: 440/213/210 Male 5' 11"
BF:Energy Unleashed
Progress: 99%
Location: Central Virginia - USA
Default

Thanks for the podcast link, Janet. I listened to it on my walk last night. I have to admit that there were parts of it that I didn't really want to hear -- like the part where they discussed a subset of the population where a statin might be of real benefit. I met the criteria for that group. It seems that Ivor is walking back a little on his previous belief that stopping the progression of plaques -- dealing with the root causes - is all that need be done. People, like me, with a higher CAC score may want to consider statins to be of benefit is not news that I wanted to hear. But as they point out in the podcast, of those with higher CAC scores, do statins provide benefit only to those who continue to progress down the CVD road -- or is the benefit universal? That is the $64 question. And as they said, it is not the financial interests of big Pharma to conduct a study to answer that question. They'll sell more drugs with the blanket coverage of the entire group. I'd like to put the statin issue to rest, but it never seems to go away.
Reply With Quote
  #128   ^
Old Thu, Feb-21-19, 11:57
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 3,107
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Too many with vested interests to remove the statin distortions. It won't go away for quite some time. Listening to SiriusXM doctor radio, the weekly cardiology show hosted by Dr. Fred Feit, who is as firmly in the statin camp as can be imagined, regularly reinforces the statin benefits and uses LDL as an indicator to recommend statins for those who don't have CVD or a previous heart event history. Given recent findings in the PURE study indicating reduced mortality for those with higher LDL, we are currently living in a bizarro world. It will take some time to get sorted.
Reply With Quote
  #129   ^
Old Fri, May-17-19, 14:48
khrussva's Avatar
khrussva khrussva is offline
Posts: 7,581
 
Plan: My own - < 30 net carbs
Stats: 440/213/210 Male 5' 11"
BF:Energy Unleashed
Progress: 99%
Location: Central Virginia - USA
Default Follow-up CAC Heat Calcium scan

I had my annual checkup earlier this week. I've been eating VLC lately, so predictably my LDL-C has jumped well above what my doctor deems acceptable. She pushed hard on the statin this time and was quite annoyed with me that I continue to refuse her advice. She did, however, approve a follow up CAC Heart Calcium scan, convinced that what I have been doing would surely be adding to the score. I had my follow-up scan today.

In January 2017 my calcium score was 346. That was a score in the 90th percentile for my age. I had the calcified arteries of the average 75 year old and I was just 53. From what I've read that score can increase 25% to 30% per year for those continuing on with the diet and lifestyle that brought on the CVD in the first place. I've also read that a 15% (or less) progression greatly reduces the risk of a CVD event. I was hoping for no progression but would have been happy with any score less than 480 (a 15% annual progression).

When the scan was completed they rolled me out of the donut hole where I noticed two LED numbers on the machine that read 610 on one side and 437 on the other. I asked the technician if one of those was my score. She said no. I would have taken the lower number, but the larger number would not have been good news. Anyway - the technician called me back into her office to review the scan. They didn't do that last time -- they just gave me the number.

The technician was a little flustered and somewhat frantic. She was confused by my results. She said that CAC scores "don't go down" -- but mine did. She kept flipping through slices of my heart looking for more calcium to mark that the scanner software had not picked up. Every anomaly that she found as potential calcium came up dry. She thought that the machine might have had a problem or something -- again, because calcium scores "don't go down!" She said that one of their doctor's was going to review my results and send me the final report next week. But my tentative score today was... 158. That's 54% less calcium than there was 2 years 4 months ago. I don't know whether this is good or bad. After all, it doesn't happen. But I'm taking this as a good thing. No progression is good. Hopefully regression -- a lot of regression -- is even better. I started this WOE 5 years ago. These results make me wonder what my score might have been if done BEFORE I started LCHF.

I'm not sure what my doctor is going to say. She was expecting significant progression as a result of my high cholesterol and my refusal to take statins. Even after what she has seen she is still not fully on board with my WOE. Will this finally convince her that this is a healthy way to eat? IDK. I hope so.

Last edited by khrussva : Fri, May-17-19 at 21:28.
Reply With Quote
  #130   ^
Old Fri, May-17-19, 15:20
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 3,107
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khrussva
I had my annual checkup earlier this week. I've been eating VLC lately, so predictably my LDL-C has jumped well above what my doctor deems acceptable. She pushed hard on the statin this time and was quite annoyed with me that I continue to refuse her advice. She did, however, approve a follow up CAC Heart Calcium scan, convinced that what I have been doing would surely be adding to the score. I had my follow-up scan today.

In January 2017 my calcium score was 346. That was a score in the 90th percentile for my age. I had the calcified arteries of the average 75 year old and I was just 53. From what I've read that score can increase 25 to 30% per year for those continuing on with the diet and lifestyle that brought on the CVD in the first place. I've also read that a 15% (or less) greatly reduces the risk of a CVD event. I was hoping for no progression but would have been happy with any score less than 480 (a 15% annual progression).

When the scan was completed they rolled me out of the machine where I noticed two LED numbers on the machine that read 610 on one side and 437 on the other. I asked the technician if one of those was my score. She said no. I would have taken the lower number, but the larger number would not have been good news. Anyway - the technician called me back into her office to review the scan. They didn't do that last time -- they just gave me the number.

The technician was a little flustered and somewhat frantic. She was confused by my results. She said that CAC scores "don't go down" -- but mine did. She kept flipping through slices of my heart looking for more calcium to mark that the scanner software had not picked up. Every anomaly that she found as potential calcium came up dry. She thought that the machine might have had a problem or something -- again, because calcium scores "don't go down!" She said that one of their doctor's was going to review my results and send me the final report next week. But my tentative score today was... 158. That's 54% than there was 2 & years 4 months ago. I don't know that this is good or bad. After all, it doesn't happen. But I'm taking this as a good thing. No progression is good. Hopefully regression -- a lot of regression -- is even better.

I'm not sure what my doctor is going to say. She was expecting significant progression as a result of my high cholesterol and my refusal to take statins.

Great news! I'll be curious what your doctor will say. Assuming 158 is accurate, and it is as the technician is the one who confirms the score and writes the report. Given that CAC is relatively recent technology with not a lot of history of results, especially categorized by WOE, I'm not surprised. Also, we have very little knowledge of whether it's possible, and if so, what can reverse the tendency to deposit calcium in coronary arteries. I've always suspected that there might be the possibility of correction and reduction in calcium deposits due to lifestyle changes, which is one of the reasons I eat very low carb/ keto and supplement with vitamin K2. Ken, I have to think that you may not be the only one who has experienced this change, as there are many of us who are following VLC, keto, low carb who may get similar results. Wonder if you shared this with someone like Dr. Jeffry Gerber out of Denver whether he or other like-minded physicians have patients who have experienced this. At any rate, this result is a solid confirmation to keep doing what you're doing.
Reply With Quote
  #131   ^
Old Fri, May-17-19, 15:39
khrussva's Avatar
khrussva khrussva is offline
Posts: 7,581
 
Plan: My own - < 30 net carbs
Stats: 440/213/210 Male 5' 11"
BF:Energy Unleashed
Progress: 99%
Location: Central Virginia - USA
Default

Thanks Rob. My "calcium scores don't go down" comment was referring to what the technician was saying. My doctor also seemed to think that no progression was just wishful thinking. But I was actually hopeful that this might happen. I remember seeing a video (likely a link from Janet) where Dr. William Davis (Wheat Belly) discussed cases of up to a 70% reduction in CAC scores by folks following his protocol. So as I had that scan done today I knew that I was doing all that I know how to do to improve my chances at a long and healthy life. I believed that a reduction was possible -- but, frankly, I usually don't have that kind of luck. The results were a pleasant surprise.
Reply With Quote
  #132   ^
Old Fri, May-17-19, 17:21
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is online now
Posts: 4,569
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/128/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 106%
Location: Vermont
Default

Yes, Dr Davis says that the score can go down. Gotta love this way of eating when your chronological age goes up but the age of your arteries gets more youthful.
Reply With Quote
  #133   ^
Old Fri, May-17-19, 17:27
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is online now
Posts: 4,569
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/128/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 106%
Location: Vermont
Default

It's important to remember that all these so called normals are based on people eating the SAD. Those of us who eat very low carb don't fit the parameters that have been studied. Since most of our doctors don't have a clue when it comes to low carb eating their advice is often way off base, as we all know.
Reply With Quote
  #134   ^
Old Fri, May-17-19, 20:05
thud123's Avatar
thud123 thud123 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 5,249
 
Plan: ~25NC/IF
Stats: 342.2/229/000 Male 182cm
BF:
Progress: 33%
Default

Pertty darn interesting result. Who knows what it means. I love it when experts scratch their heads along with us laymen and women. More fun with your GP on next visit i'm sure
Reply With Quote
  #135   ^
Old Fri, May-17-19, 23:13
GRB5111's Avatar
GRB5111 GRB5111 is offline
Posts: 3,107
 
Plan: Ketogenic (LCHFKD)
Stats: 227/186/185 Male 6' 0"
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
Default

Yes, and I've heard the CAC scores "don't go down" from others as well. As you mention, I recall Dr. Davis making the comment that he has patients who have experienced significant reductions when WOE has been changed. I'd like more details.

Last edited by GRB5111 : Sat, May-18-19 at 13:20.
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 07:19.


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