Too high HDL?

Discussion in 'Food and nutrition' started by Enrico C, Mar 16, 2006.

  1. Enrico C

    Enrico C Guest

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

    75 is too high?
     
    Tags:


  2. Enrico C

    Enrico C Guest

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

    > 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
     
  3. Jim Chinnis

    Jim Chinnis Guest

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

    >Is there such a thing as a too high HDL cholesterol level?
    >
    >75 is too high?


    Certainly not.
    --
    Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA [email protected]
     
  4. Enrico C

    Enrico C Guest

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

    > Enrico C <[email protected]> wrote in part:
    >
    >>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?
     
  5. Just Cocky

    Just Cocky Guest

    On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 20:47:06 +0100, Enrico C
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:31:12 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
    ><news:[email protected]> on sci.med.nutrition
    >:
    >
    >> Enrico C <[email protected]> wrote in part:
    >>
    >>>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...
     
  6. Jim Chinnis

    Jim Chinnis Guest

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

    >On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:31:12 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
    ><news:[email protected]> on sci.med.nutrition
    >:
    >
    >> Enrico C <[email protected]> wrote in part:
    >>
    >>>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 protected]
     
  7. 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.
     
  8. Just Cocky

    Just Cocky Guest

    On 16 Mar 2006 16:06:08 -0800, "[email protected]"
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >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...
     
  9. Enrico C

    Enrico C Guest

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

    > 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...?
     
  10. Just Cocky

    Just Cocky Guest

    On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:59:20 +0100, Enrico C
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:53:54 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
    ><news:[email protected]> on sci.med.nutrition
    >:
    >
    >> 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.

    >
    >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
     
  11. Jim Chinnis

    Jim Chinnis Guest

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

    >On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 22:53:54 GMT, Jim Chinnis wrote in
    ><news:r2rj12p[email protected]> on sci.med.nutrition
    >:
    >
    >> 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 protected]
     
  12. Max C.

    Max C. Guest

    > 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.
     
  13. Enrico C

    Enrico C Guest

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

    > On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:59:20 +0100, Enrico C
    >>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.
    >
    >>
    >>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 *
     
  14. Just Cocky

    Just Cocky Guest

    On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:25:05 +0100, Enrico C
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:32:10 -0500, Just Cocky wrote in
    ><news:[email protected]> on sci.med.nutrition
    >:
    >
    >> On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:59:20 +0100, Enrico C
    >>>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.
    >>
    >>>
    >>>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.
     
Loading...