Too high HDL?

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:43:50 +0100, Enrico C wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition :

Quoted message said:

Is there such a thing as a too high HDL cholesterol level?

75 is too high?

being TC = 184mg/dL, triglycerides = 55, LDL = 99, TC:HDL = 2.5

Enrico C <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

Is there such a thing as a too high HDL cholesterol level?

75 is too high?

Certainly not.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA [email hidden]

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:31:12 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition
:

Quoted message said:

Enrico C <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

Is there such a thing as a too high HDL cholesterol level?

75 is too high?

Certainly not.

The higher HDL, the better?
What level would be too high?

Enrico C said:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:31:12 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition
:

Quoted message said:

Enrico C <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

Is there such a thing as a too high HDL cholesterol level?

75 is too high?

Certainly not.

The higher HDL, the better?
What level would be too high?

LDL and HDL have complementary actions. As such, they need to be
balanced. Unfortunately, I don't know what the best ratio is...

Enrico C <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:31:12 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition
:

Quoted message said:

Enrico C <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

Is there such a thing as a too high HDL cholesterol level?

75 is too high?

Certainly not.

The higher HDL, the better?
What level would be too high?

What level are you worried about? I'd say too high a level is a theoretical
issue only.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA [email hidden]

I got a total chol. of 155 mg/dl and an HDL of 105 mg/dl, so hopefully
75 is nowhere near to high. AFAIK, the higher the better.

email hidden said:

I got a total chol. of 155 mg/dl and an HDL of 105 mg/dl, so hopefully
75 is nowhere near to high. AFAIK, the higher the better.

Your total cholesterol is probably too low...

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:53:54 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition
:

Quoted message said:

What level are you worried about? I'd say too high a level is a theoretical
issue only.

I'd like to know what the optimal range is.

I guess the present HDL=75 (on TC=184, LDL=99 and TGL=55, TC:HDL=2.5)
is farly good.

Would, say, HDL=100 (and a lower LDL) be better, worse, just the
same...?

Enrico C said:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:53:54 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition
:

Quoted message said:

What level are you worried about? I'd say too high a level is a theoretical
issue only.

I'd like to know what the optimal range is.

According to the book "The Life Extension Revolution" by Miller
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553803530/) the optimal HDL range
is 50-120mg/dl.

Quoted message said:

I guess the present HDL=75 (on TC=184, LDL=99 and TGL=55, TC:HDL=2.5)
is farly good.

According to teh same book, the optimal values are:

TC: 160-180mg/dl
LDL: <100mg/dl
TGL: 40-100mg/dl
TC/HDL: 3-4 (men), 2-3 (women)
LDL/HDL: <2
TGL/HDL: <2

Enrico C <[email hidden]> wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:53:54 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition
:

Quoted message said:

What level are you worried about? I'd say too high a level is a theoretical
issue only.

I'd like to know what the optimal range is.

I guess the present HDL=75 (on TC=184, LDL=99 and TGL=55, TC:HDL=2.5)
is farly good.

Would, say, HDL=100 (and a lower LDL) be better, worse, just the
same...?

It would certainly be better. If you want to determine where negative
effects of high HDL begin to show up, you'd probably have to find a way to
boost them above the levels that are currently seen and then conduct
studies.

One finding in some of the studies of the extremely elderly is that HDLs of
above 100 are not uncommon.
--
Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA [email hidden]

Quoted message said:

One finding in some of the studies of the extremely elderly is that HDLs of
above 100 are not uncommon.

That's not a surprise, since cell degradation would be elevated in the
extremely elderly. HDL's job is to carry damaged or used cholesterol
molecules back to the liver where it can be rebuilt or disposed of. As
the body ages, it is natural for cholesterol levels to rise. One
theory is that the levels rise in order to repair the increasing damage
happening in the aging body.

Max.

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:32:10 -0500, Just Cocky wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition
:

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:59:20 +0100, Enrico C

Quoted message said:

I'd like to know what the optimal range is.

According to the book "The Life Extension Revolution" by Miller
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553803530/) the optimal HDL range
is 50-120mg/dl.

Quoted message said:

I guess the present HDL=75 (on TC=184, LDL=99 and TGL=55, TC:HDL=2.5)
is farly good.

According to teh same book, the optimal values are:

TC: 160-180mg/dl
LDL: <100mg/dl
TGL: 40-100mg/dl
TC/HDL: 3-4 (men), 2-3 (women)
LDL/HDL: <2
TGL/HDL: <2

Thanks! Are those values supported by a consensus?

--
Enrico C

* cut the ending "cut-togli.invalid" string when replying by email *

Enrico C said:

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:32:10 -0500, Just Cocky wrote in
<news:[email hidden]> on sci.med.nutrition
:

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:59:20 +0100, Enrico C

Quoted message said:

I'd like to know what the optimal range is.

According to the book "The Life Extension Revolution" by Miller
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553803530/) the optimal HDL range
is 50-120mg/dl.

Quoted message said:

I guess the present HDL=75 (on TC=184, LDL=99 and TGL=55, TC:HDL=2.5)
is farly good.

According to teh same book, the optimal values are:

TC: 160-180mg/dl
LDL: <100mg/dl
TGL: 40-100mg/dl
TC/HDL: 3-4 (men), 2-3 (women)
LDL/HDL: <2
TGL/HDL: <2

Thanks! Are those values supported by a consensus?

Those values are considered by the author (an anti-aging MD) who wrote
the book, optimal for anti-aging purposes. Given the anti-aging
context, I doubt you could find consensus on these. By the way, the
author also thinks that inflammation is the problem with cholesterol
of secondary significance only.