Cholesterol results from blood test
Posted , 3 users are following.
Just got my results. Total 3.0, and Serum 5.69 - what does this mean? Male 60.
1 like, 12 replies
We want the community to be a useful resource for our users but it is important to remember that the community are not moderated or reviewed by doctors and so you should not rely on opinions or advice given by other users in respect of any healthcare matters. Always speak to your doctor before acting and in cases of emergency seek appropriate medical assistance immediately. Use of the community is subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and steps will be taken to remove posts identified as being in breach of those terms.
×
Notes on Cholesterol results from blood test
sonya10 nick36883
Posted
im a little confused with your numbers as Serum 5.69 is the total amount of Cholestrol in your body. So what the ' total 3.0 ' is I've no idea.
Serum is total and you can't have 2 different figures for it.
nick36883 sonya10
Posted
Serum 5.69
HDL 1.89
Total 3.0 ratio
LDL 3.45
Does this make sense?
nick36883 sonya10
Posted
Serum 5.69
HDL 1.89
Total 3.0 ratio
LDL 3.45
Does this make sense?
sonya10 nick36883
Posted
HDL is so called 'good ' cholesterol and recommended level is above 1, yours is 1.89 so that's good.
LDL so called ' bad ' cholesterol is recommended to be 3 or lower at 3.45 I wouldn't worry that's a great ratio between HDL & LDL
having explained your cholesterol levels I'd just like to add I do not believe in ' bad' Cholestrol but that's for another discussion.
i notice the doctors didn't give you a Triglyceride level? which is the amount of fat in blood stream and always measured on a cholesterol test.
nick36883 sonya10
Posted
brian03294 nick36883
Posted
I was interested to read a recent study in which the associations between LDL- and HDL-C levels and degree of arterial disease were assessed in a group of individuals age 80 and over [1]. Arterial disease was assessed via calcium scoring. This test is believed to provide an accurate measure of the degree of build up of ‘atherosclerotic plaque’ on the inside of the arteries around the heart.
In this study, low levels of HDL-C were associated with higher calcium scores (and therefore the degree of arterial disease). This finding is consistent with conventional wisdom. However, this study also found that there was no association at all found between LDL-C levels and calcium scores in this population. This result does ask questions about the general assumption that higher levels of LDL-C are a ‘bad sign’ in older individuals.
In fact, there is evidence to the contrary. For instance, in a study published earlier this year, higher levels of both total cholesterol and LDL-C were found to be associated with a reduced risk of death in individuals aged 85 followed for 10 years [2].
In another study published last year, researchers assessed the levels of cholesterol and risk of death in almost 120,000 adults living in Denmark [3]. The researchers found that having higher than recommended levels of total cholesterol was associated with a reduced risk of death.
For instance, in men aged 60-70, compared with those of total cholesterol levels of less than 5.0 mmol/l, those with total cholesterol levels of 5.00-5.99 had a 32 per cent reduced risk of death. For those with levels 6.0-7.99 mmol/l, risk of death was 33 per cent lower. Even in individuals with levels with 8.00 mmol/l and above, risk of death was no higher than it was for those with levels less than 5.0 mmol/l.
The results were similar for women too. In women aged 60-70, levels of 5.0-5.99 and 6.0-7.99 were associated with a 43 and 41 per cent reduced risk of death respectively.
In individuals aged 70 and over, the results were similar, except here, levels of total cholesterol of 8.00 mmol/l or more were associated with a reduced risk of death too (in both men and women).
In short, we are misguided if we assumed that higher levels of cholesterol are a sign of increased death risk. In older individuals, there is evidence that the reverse is true.
References:
1. Freitas WM, et al. Low HDL cholesterol but not high LDL cholesterol is independently associated with subclinical coronary atherosclerosis in healthy octogenarians. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2014 Jun 7. [Epub ahead of print]
2. Takata Y, et al. Serum total cholesterol concentration and 10-year mortality in an 85-year-old population. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:293-300
3. Association of lipoprotein levels with mortality in subjects aged 50 + without previous diabetes or cardiovascular disease: A population-based register study. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care 2013;31(3):172-180
nick36883
Posted
sonya10 nick36883
Posted
the NHS recommended Triglyceride level is 1.7 and under, yours is only 0.77 and that's really good.
brian03294 nick36883
Posted
Triglycerides Levels (Values and Reference Range)
■Normal : less than 150 mg/dL (1.7 mmol/L)
■Bordline High = 150 to 199 mg/dL (1.7 to 2.2 mmol/L)
■High = 200 to 499 mg/dL (2.3 to 5.6 mmol/L)
■Very High = 500 mg/dL or higher (5.6 mmol/L)
However from last post:-
"In short, we are misguided if we assumed that higher levels of cholesterol are a sign of increased death risk. In older individuals, there is evidence that the reverse is true."
A High Triglycerides Level is associated with a poor diet high in "high glycemic index foods" mostly carbs such as sugar, flour / bread, potatoes etc etc and low in healthy fats like olive oil, and natural saturated fats like butter and coconut oil etc.
brian03294
Posted
nick36883 sonya10
Posted
nick36883 brian03294
Posted