«

»

Aug 01

Cholesterol Code – Part IV : Still Correlating… in the reverse

I just attended Low Carb USA at San Diego where I shared much of the data below. And while I was interested in a possible divergence that seemed to appear at the end of May in Part III, it turned out to be more of a one-off, probably due to a higher percentage of protein and a lower percentage of fat than my usual ratio.

In upcoming Part V, I’ll be revealing some new data on a “second N” to my study. I should have that up within the week.

For now, note that the new 21 to 28 data points include a 9 day period where I once again did a total of 7 days of blood draws. Thus, we again can see this mechanism in nearly real time.

I’ll let the graphs speak for themselves…


Three Day Average of Dietary Fat vs the LDL-C in the resulting blood test. The LDL-C still tracks inversely with total fat. (-81%)

Three Day Average of Dietary Fat in the three days before blood draw vs LDL-C of the resulting test


Same blood tests, same dietary fat, but for HDL-C — which clearly tracks positively higher total fat. (65%)

Three Day Average of Dietary Fat in the three days before blood draw vs HDL-C of the resulting test


Same blood tests, same dietary fat — but with a 2 day gap in between (Days -5, -4, and -3), but for LDL-P — which tracks inversely with higher total fat. (-82%)

fat3-2_ldlp28


And finally, same blood tests, same dietary fat — but with a 2 day gap in between (Days -5, -4, and -3), but for small LDL-P — which tracks inversely with higher total fat. (-72%)

fat3-2_smldlp28

If by this point you don’t see this is a highly regulated, highly responsive network in the lipid system (at least for my N=1), then you think I’m some kind of X-Men mutant. (In which case, I dib the name, Captain Cholesterol)

But seriously…

I now have very high confidence that this regulatory pattern is likely present with virtually everyone who is fat adapted (getting the majority of their energy via fat) without an underlying metabolic condition.

It’s also quite possible this applies to those who are not fat adapted yet still with no underlying metabolic condition. For that, we’d need more study.

6 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. Jason Mehrvarz

    Hi,

    Thanks for sharing. I have insanely high LDL-P numbers for which I never had a point of reference. I love seeing yours and comparing them to my numbers.

    I guess I need to step up my fat intake.

    1. Dave

      I don’t know at this point if I consider a higher LDL-P a good or bad thing if you don’t have any underlying metabolic derangement. I’ll cover this in greater detail in an upcoming post all its own.

      But in short, if you feel great on your current diet and your other numbers are good (such as hsCRP), then I’m skeptical you need to intentionally eat different just to change that number.

      On the times I have eaten a lot more in order to test that outlier, I didn’t feel as good as I do when I’m closer to that midline you can see in my graphs between the extremes.

  2. Bill Robinson

    A pleasure to meet you in San Diego.
    Looking forward to more great data from you.

    1. Dave

      Thank you, Bill. There’s quite a bit more to come!

      (In fact, I have some pretty big news to drop on or around this weekend….)

  3. Bill Robinson

    I recommended watching Ken Sikaris:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyzPEii-wo0
    He’s very engaging and has several good videos,
    but you probably know most of his info.

    1. Dave

      Oh yes — he’s actually one of my favs.

      In fact that video you posted I’ve watched at least twice when I was first starting my research.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>