Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive oil?

		Active Topics - Archive
FAQ Search Memberlist Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in Archive

Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive oil?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Health Care Forums Forum Index -> Cardiology

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Peabody
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:33 pm Post subject: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive oil?

I got the following lab results yesterday: TOT 222 HDL 71 LDL 136 TRI 71 TOT/HDL 3.1 I get a lot of exercise, have low bodyfat, eat a pretty good diet, drink one glass of red wine every day, and have a flat stomach, so I think I'm already doing the usual suggested lifestyle things. My doc isn't ready to put me on a statin yet, I think mainly because of the high HDL, and I'm not ready to start taking them yet, but I wondered if there are other things I might do to lower LDL, particularly with respect to diet, or supplements. One thing I've wondered about is olive oil. I know that there are benefits of replacing other fats/oils with olive oil, but have there been any studies about eating "extra" olive oil on top of the regular diet. I mean, what if you just drank a tablespoon of olive oil, by itself, a couple times a day? Do we know what the effect would be on LDL and HDL? Well, I guess I need to go from 1% milk to skim (a quart a day), and maybe cut out that ounce of Dove dark chocolate that I eat with the red wine (ouch!), but otherwise I don't know that there's all that much saturated fat or cholesterol to cut out.

Susan
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:42 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

x-no-archive: yes

Peabody wrote:

Quote:

Your numbers look excellent, especially since not only is your HDL high,
but your TGL is low, and it's considered a more predictive risk factor
for CVD. Your TG/HDL ratio is 1. You're probably gonna hafta find
something other than CVD to die of.

Quote:

One thing I've wondered about is olive oil. I know that there are
benefits of replacing other fats/oils with olive oil, but have there
been any studies about eating "extra" olive oil on top of the
regular diet. I mean, what if you just drank a tablespoon of olive
oil, by itself, a couple times a day? Do we know what the effect
would be on LDL and HDL?

Well, I guess I need to go from 1% milk to skim (a quart a day),
and maybe cut out that ounce of Dove dark chocolate that I eat with
the red wine (ouch!), but otherwise I don't know that there's all
that much saturated fat or cholesterol to cut out.

Your numbers are enviable. The individual raw numbers are not as
important as the pattern, and the LDL particle size. Your low TGL and
high HDL suggest that your LDL particles are the harmless, large fluffy
type. You may want to ask to have them directly measured. To even
speak of a statin in this context shows how bizarre our thinking has
become as a result of statin overselling.

I lowered my LDL 70 points with the use of panthethine, after having
lowered it once before by switching to a low starch/sugar diet. But I
don't think you have anything to worry about, from all I've read in the
literature.

This opinion (like any other on usenet) is worth what it cost you, BTW,
unless you research the information on your own and make your own
informed choices.

Susan

Susan

fresh~horses
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:59 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive oi

Susan wrote:

Quote:

x-no-archive: yes

Peabody wrote:
I got the following lab results yesterday:

TOT 222
HDL 71
LDL 136
TRI 71
TOT/HDL 3.1

I get a lot of exercise, have low bodyfat, eat a pretty good diet,
drink one glass of red wine every day, and have a flat stomach, so I
think I'm already doing the usual suggested lifestyle things.

My doc isn't ready to put me on a statin yet, I think mainly because
of the high HDL, and I'm not ready to start taking them yet, but I
wondered if there are other things I might do to lower LDL,
particularly with respect to diet, or supplements.

Your numbers look excellent, especially since not only is your HDL high,
but your TGL is low, and it's considered a more predictive risk factor
for CVD. Your TG/HDL ratio is 1. You're probably gonna hafta find
something other than CVD to die of.

One thing I've wondered about is olive oil. I know that there are
benefits of replacing other fats/oils with olive oil, but have there
been any studies about eating "extra" olive oil on top of the
regular diet. I mean, what if you just drank a tablespoon of olive
oil, by itself, a couple times a day? Do we know what the effect
would be on LDL and HDL?

Well, I guess I need to go from 1% milk to skim (a quart a day),
and maybe cut out that ounce of Dove dark chocolate that I eat with
the red wine (ouch!), but otherwise I don't know that there's all
that much saturated fat or cholesterol to cut out.

Your numbers are enviable. The individual raw numbers are not as
important as the pattern, and the LDL particle size. Your low TGL and
high HDL suggest that your LDL particles are the harmless, large fluffy
type. You may want to ask to have them directly measured. To even
speak of a statin in this context shows how bizarre our thinking has
become as a result of statin overselling.

I lowered my LDL 70 points with the use of panthethine, after having
lowered it once before by switching to a low starch/sugar diet. But I
don't think you have anything to worry about, from all I've read in the
literature.

This opinion (like any other on usenet) is worth what it cost you, BTW,
unless you research the information on your own and make your own
informed choices.

Susan

I couldn't agree more. My total is higher, Peabody, but my tris are
lower, and HDL the same as yours. I haven't had the breakdown done, but
I suspect I too might have the type of LDL particles Susan mentions. I
don't take a statin, but do modify diet toward high, complex carb. That
is not to say that I don't get a good quotient of protein too, from the
all the plant foods and fish, some lean organic meat and dairy, and the
occasional egg. The only 'supplement' I use consistently relevant to
cholesterol is fishoil.

And ditto on Susan's last comment.

Quote:

Susan

William Wagner
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:18 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

In article <oOs5f.2603$Ix3.1832@dukeread05>,
Peabody <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote:

Quote:

I got the following lab results yesterday:

TOT 222
HDL 71
LDL 136
TRI 71
TOT/HDL 3.1

I get a lot of exercise, have low bodyfat, eat a pretty good diet,
drink one glass of red wine every day, and have a flat stomach, so I
think I'm already doing the usual suggested lifestyle things.

My doc isn't ready to put me on a statin yet, I think mainly because
of the high HDL, and I'm not ready to start taking them yet, but I
wondered if there are other things I might do to lower LDL,
particularly with respect to diet, or supplements.

One thing I've wondered about is olive oil. I know that there are
benefits of replacing other fats/oils with olive oil, but have there
been any studies about eating "extra" olive oil on top of the
regular diet. I mean, what if you just drank a tablespoon of olive
oil, by itself, a couple times a day? Do we know what the effect
would be on LDL and HDL?

Well, I guess I need to go from 1% milk to skim (a quart a day),
and maybe cut out that ounce of Dove dark chocolate that I eat with
the red wine (ouch!), but otherwise I don't know that there's all
that much saturated fat or cholesterol to cut out.

Mar's candy claims LDL reduction of 10 %. I see you mentioned Dove dark
chocolate.

Cocoa flavanoids.

https://www.cocoavia.com/

Cost is not cheap about a dollar a day.

Olive oil as a supplement? I don't know.

Bill

--
Garden Shade Zone 5 S Jersey USA in a Japanese Jungle Manner.39.6376 -75.0208
This article is posted under fair use rules in accordance with
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and is strictly for the educational
and informative purposes. This material is distributed without profit.
Sam Adams-- "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds"

Peabody
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:44 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

Susan says...

Quote:

Your numbers look excellent, especially since not only
is your HDL high, but your TGL is low, and it's
considered a more predictive risk factor for CVD. Your
TG/HDL ratio is 1. You're probably gonna hafta find
something other than CVD to die of.

I'm afraid CVD is a bit more likely than the lipids would
suggest. Both of my 1st degree male relatives had heart
attacks at age 43. I've sailed into my 50's without that,
but there's no reason to believe I didn't get the same
genetics. And I have high blood pressure - reasonably well
controlled. And finally, for the first time the fasting
blood sugar reading came back high (114). Still trying to
figure that one out because my non-fasting levels are lower
than that, so it may mean nothing.

Anyway, I try to do what I can, within reason, to head off
the genetics.

Quote:

I lowered my LDL 70 points with the use of panthethine,
after having lowered it once before by switching to a
low starch/sugar diet. But I don't think you have
anything to worry about, from all I've read in the
literature.

I'll read up on that. Thanks.

Peabody
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:46 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive oi

fresh~horses says...

Quote:

The only 'supplement' I use consistently relevant to
cholesterol is fishoil.

I take Carlson's salmon oil, but only take one a day.
Should I take more? How much?

Peabody
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:50 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

William Wagner says...

Quote:

Mar's candy claims LDL reduction of 10 %. I see you
mentioned Dove dark chocolate.

Cocoa flavanoids.

https://www.cocoavia.com/

Cost is not cheap about a dollar a day.

Well, but see, that's cheating. They mix regular chocolate
with plant sterols and then claim they're healthy. The
plant sterols taken separately will reduce the absorption of
cholesterols, but that doesn't mean the chocolate is good
for you at all.

William Wagner
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:01 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

In article <gXt5f.2608$Ix3.428@dukeread05>,
Peabody <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote:

Quote:

William Wagner says...

Mar's candy claims LDL reduction of 10 %. I see you
mentioned Dove dark chocolate.

Cocoa flavanoids.

https://www.cocoavia.com/

Cost is not cheap about a dollar a day.

Well, but see, that's cheating. They mix regular chocolate
with plant sterols and then claim they're healthy. The
plant sterols taken separately will reduce the absorption of
cholesterols, but that doesn't mean the chocolate is good
for you at all.

Perhaps of interest Peabody. Note the processing is of import.

Now I wonder if a large blind study will be done in time Wink

)

Bill

.........................

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-09/wsw-mbn091905.php

Public release date: 19-Sep-2005
[ Print Article | E-mail Article | Close Window ]

Contact: Rachel McMahon
rmcmahon@webershandwick.com
312-988-2462
Weber Shandwick Worldwide
Mars breaks new ground in heart health with Cocoavia
New cocoa-based snacks first to deliver real heart-health benefits,
premium chocolate taste

HACKETTSTOWN, NJ (Sept. 14, 2005) With heart disease remaining the
nation's number one killer, Americans increasingly are looking for
options to improve their heart health. Now there's a new product hitting
store shelves that will allow them to satisfy their passion for
chocolate while being good to their heart.
CocoaViaTM is a revolutionary new line of heart-healthy snacks that
combines real chocolate pleasure with ingredients formulated to promote
a healthy heart. Ingredients in CocoaViaTM can significantly reduce LDL
or "bad" cholesterol levels and promote healthy circulation to maintain
heart health.
Created after more than a decade of research, CocoaViaTM is the only
product that contains a patented blend of heart-healthy cocoa flavanols
and cholesterol-lowering plant sterols from soy. The new line of snacks
also is fortified with calcium and a mix of heart-healthy nutrients
including folic acid, vitamins B-6, B-12, C and E. CocoaViaTM is made by
Mars Nutrition for Health & Well-Being, a new division of Mars,
Incorporated, makers of some of the world's best-loved, great-tasting
chocolate brands. "CocoaViaTM is the vanguard of our efforts to
'reinvent' cocoa as an ingredient in healthful foods," said Dr. Harold
Schmitz, chief science officer at Mars. "It's a first-of-its-kind
product that was purposely designed to deliver heart-health benefits and
real chocolate pleasure in products that are less than 150 calories per
serving."
Mars first introduced CocoaViaTM granola-based snack bars nearly two
years ago and sold the product exclusively on the Internet. Now a full
line of CocoaViaTM products including new chocolate bars (original,
crispy and blueberry & almond) and chocolate-covered almonds will be
available at retail beginning in October. Pre-orders can be made online
at www.cocoavia.com until the product reaches national distribution.
Science-Based Benefits
Mars is the global leader in cocoa science, collaborating with
researchers at leading universities like Harvard and the University of
California-Davis to explore the health benefits of cocoa flavanols the
powerhouse compounds found naturally in cocoa beans that are similar to
those found in red wine and green tea. Scientists have been encouraged
by the growing number of independent studies that indicate cocoa
flavanols may help influence factors associated with clotting and
promote a healthy blood flow. Other studies suggest that cocoa flavanols
can improve the health of blood vessels and reduce the oxidation of LDL
cholesterol that can lead to clogged arteries.
"It is clear that cocoa flavanols represent an intriguing new area of
research with significant implications for nutrition and cardiovascular
health," said Dr. Carl L. Keen, a professor of nutrition and internal
medicine at the University of California-Davis, who has led multiple
studies on the health benefits of cocoa flavanols.
CocoaViaTM is the first product to be launched under the new business
unit, Mars Nutrition for Health & Well-Being. The new division is
charged with developing new foods, snacks, beverages and lifestyle
support to better serve the nutritional well-being needs of the consumer.
It's in the Flavanols
While flavanols are found naturally in cocoa beans, traditional cocoa
processing often destroys many of these potentially heart-healthy
compounds.
"Flavanols are essentially missing from much of the chocolate on store
shelves today," said Schmitz. "Research clearly shows that a high cocoa
or dark chocolate content cannot guarantee that a product can deliver
the same potential heart-health benefits as the Mars flavanol-rich cocoa.
After 15 years of scientific research on flavanols, Mars developed a
patented and proprietary process called Cocoapro that helps ensure the
heart-healthy flavanols remain active and are not destroyed. This
technology guarantees that CocoaViaTM contains a consistent level of
cocoa flavanols which is what really counts when you're talking about
cocoa and heart health, according to Schmitz.
"The very exciting potential heart-health benefits of cocoa flavanols is
not about simply adding more cocoa or consuming any dark chocolate," he
added. "In fact, the percentage of cocoa in a product is meaningless.
Research from several universities clearly shows that it's about
retaining the flavanols from the cocoa bean so you're confident of
enjoying a flavanol-rich, cocoa-based product."
Each serving of CocoaViaTM contains at least 100 milligrams of naturally
occurring cocoa flavanols. And since each serving is packed with the
heart-healthy flavanols, you can eat a relatively small portion and
still reap the benefits. That means less fat and fewer calories compared
to a regular, larger-sized chocolate bar. A 0.78-ounce CocoaViaTM
Original Chocolate Bar contains 100 calories, while a serving of the
CocoaViaTM Chocolate-Covered Almonds contains 140 calories.
Heart-Healthy Regimen
Research conducted at the University of California-Davis and reported at
the American Heart Association meeting this past November found that two
servings of CocoaViaTM snack bars significantly lowered total and LDL
cholesterol levels, without impacting HDL or "good" cholesterol. Each
snack bar contains 1.5 grams of natural plant sterols from soy.
"Natural plant sterols are a clinically proven ingredient that can lower
blood cholesterol," said Schmitz, who directs a multi-million dollar
research budget at Mars. "Many cardiologists and family physicians have
been recommending sterol-fortified products like margarines to their
at-risk patients as a way to help lower elevated cholesterol levels.
Now, there's a great-tasting option that naturally combines these
cholesterol-lowering benefits with the exciting potential cardiovascular
health benefits of cocoa flavanols." Including natural plant sterols
from soy in the diet has been recommended by the American Heart
Association and the National Cholesterol Education Program as one
lifestyle change that can lower cholesterol levels significantly. The
Food and Drug Administration approved a health claim based on the
evidence that natural plant sterols may help reduce heart disease risk
by lowering cholesterol.
"When eaten everyday, CocoaViaTM can help contribute to a heart-healthy
lifestyle," said Kristine Clark, PhD, RD, nutrition professor at
Pennsylvania State University. "Combined with daily exercise and a diet
low in saturated fat and cholesterol, CocoaViaTM can play a valuable
role in maintaining heart health."
Captures Your Passion for Chocolate Pleasure
"While the product provides real chocolate pleasure, you will only find
it in the healthy foods section, not the candy aisle" said Jim Cass,
vice president of sales and marketing at Mars Nutrition for Health &
Well-Being. "That's because it delivers real heart-health benefits
supported by sound science."
The brand name "CocoaViaTM" was derived from the vision that a new and
exciting way to good health is through flavanol-rich cocoa. Cass said
CocoaViaTM is the nexus of taste and health the only snack that
provides real chocolate pleasure and real heart-health benefits.
"Who knows more about capturing great chocolate taste than Mars, the
makers of some of the country's best-loved chocolate brands such as
M&M'S, Dove Chocolates and Snickers, " said Cass. "We've been able to
maximize the flavor and the health benefits in one unique cocoa-based
product."
CocoaViaTM will be sold in the healthy foods section of grocery stores,
drug stores and mass merchandisers such as Wal-Mart and Target. The new
line of CocoaViaTM products, which includes the tagline "Be Good to Your
Heart Every Day" on the label, can be pre-ordered before they are
available in stores at www.cocoavia.com.

###
Mars Nutrition for Health & Well-Being, a new division of Mars North
America, will develop and launch new foods, snacks, beverages and
lifestyle support to better serve the nutritional and well-being needs
of the consumer. The mission of the division is to be a trusted partner
in healthy lifestyles, enabling consumers to look, perform and feel
their best every day. Mars Nutrition for Health & Well-Being, launched
in June 2004, is based in Hackettstown, NJ.

--
Garden Shade Zone 5 S Jersey USA in a Japanese Jungle Manner.39.6376 -75.0208
This article is posted under fair use rules in accordance with
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and is strictly for the educational
and informative purposes. This material is distributed without profit.
Sam Adams-- "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds"

Jason
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:08 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

In article <oOs5f.2603$Ix3.1832@dukeread05>, Peabody
<waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote:

Quote:

Hello,
I am not a doctor but it's my opinion that your numbers are great.
I would love to have a HDL level of 71. Keep up the great work.
I suggest that you read the following book since various
alternatives to statins are mentioned.
WHAT YOU MUST KNOW ABOUT STATIN DRUGS AND THEIR NATURAL ALTERNATIVES
by Jay S.Cohen, M.D.

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

fresh~horses
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:24 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive oi

Peabody wrote:

Quote:

fresh~horses says...

The only 'supplement' I use consistently relevant to
cholesterol is fishoil.

I take Carlson's salmon oil, but only take one a day.
Should I take more? How much?

Hmmm. I'm now at 4-6, 1,000 mg wild Salmon oil capsules per day. I may
go up to 10 depending on Beluga Burps*. That scintillating feature is
almost non-existent if you take the capsules mid-meal. It's those
espresso only mornings that'll get ya.

Do some research and talk to your physician.

Google: SBHarris* + fishoil.

Robert
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:25 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

"Peabody" <waybackKILLSPAM44@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:gRt5f.2605$Ix3.450@dukeread05...

Quote:

Susan says...

Your numbers look excellent, especially since not only
is your HDL high, but your TGL is low, and it's
considered a more predictive risk factor for CVD. Your
TG/HDL ratio is 1. You're probably gonna hafta find
something other than CVD to die of.

I'm afraid CVD is a bit more likely than the lipids would
suggest. Both of my 1st degree male relatives had heart
attacks at age 43. I've sailed into my 50's without that,
but there's no reason to believe I didn't get the same
genetics. And I have high blood pressure - reasonably well
controlled. And finally, for the first time the fasting
blood sugar reading came back high (114). Still trying to
figure that one out because my non-fasting levels are lower
than that, so it may mean nothing.

Anyway, I try to do what I can, within reason, to head off
the genetics.

The target LDL goals are dependent on all the risk factors and then add them
up.
Suggest to your doctor to do a VAP test to see the subfractions.
It is cheap and compares to the regular lipid panel in cost.
The fasting BS, although diagnostic of diabetes is relatively the last
abnormality that takes place. A postprandial after meal glucose can
determine glucose intolerance earlier. They become abnormal before the
fasting does.

Susan
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:44 pm Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

x-no-archive: yes

Peabody wrote:

Quote:

Did they have lipid profiles like yours?

Quote:

Uh, NO! Your fbg is the one number you've mentioned here that is of
great concern. Most diabetics are diabetic long before their fbg ever
goes into what's the alleged diabetic range. I'm diabetic, and I've yet
to have a fbg above 111, even when badly controlled. It's never
nothing. But what's much more important is to get a free (or almost
free with rebates, etc) bg meter and to start testing your 1 hr and 2 hr
post meal bg. Anything above 105 doesn't happen in those with intact
pancreatic function. These numbers are reliable, whereas everytime it's
been studied, fbg has failed to detect most diabetes til it's well advanced.

Quote:

Anyway, I try to do what I can, within reason, to head off
the genetics.

I'll see your gentics and raise you a few CVD related deaths by that
age, where your relatives had heart attacks. My lipids are about like
yours, except for higher TGL, and my doc and I are happy.

Quote:

Here are some abstracts:

Quote:

1: Minerva Med. 1990 Jun;81(6):475-9. Related Articles, Links

[Evaluation of the cholesterol-lowering effectiveness of pantethine in women in perimenopausal age]

[Article in Italian]

Binaghi P, Cellina G, Lo Cicero G, Bruschi F, Porcaro E, Penotti M.

Servizio di Cardiologia, Istitut Clinici di Perfezionamento, Milano.

Cardiovascular diseases are the main cause of death also in women. Their incidence, rapidly growing in the peri-menopausal period, is related to serum levels of total cholesterol and its LDL fraction. It was also shown that the peroxidation of LDL is an additional factor in the genesis of atherosclerotic vascular disease. As long-term treatments with synthetic lipid-lowering drugs may cause undesirable side effects, while pantethine is known to be well tolerated, we treated 24 hypercholesterolemic women (total serum cholesterol greater than or equal to 240 mg/dl), in perimenopausal age (range: 45-55 years, mean +/- SD = 51.6 +/- 2.4) with 900 mg/day of pantethine. This is a precursor of coenzyme A, with an antiperoxidation effect in vivo, and our aim was to confirm its lipid lowering activity in this particular type of patients. After 16 weeks of treatment, significant reductions of total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and LDL-C/HDL-C ratio could be observed. No remarkable c
hanges of the main laboratory parameters (fasting blood sugar, B.U.N., creatinine, uric acid) were seen. Efficacy percentages of the treatment were about 80%. None of the patients complained of adverse reactions due to the treatment with pantethine. In conclusion, we suggest that pantethine should be considered in the long-term treatment of lipid derangements occurring in the perimenopausal age.

PMID: 2359503 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
1: Acta Biomed Ateneo Parmense. 1984;55(1):25-42. Related Articles, Links

[Hyperlipidemia, diabetes and atherosclerosis: efficacy of treatment with pantethine]

[Article in Italian]

Arsenio L, Caronna S, Lateana M, Magnati G, Strata A, Zammarchi G.

The hypolipidemizing effects of Pantethine were investigated by the Authors in 37 hypercholesterolemic and/or hypertriglyceridemic patients. Of these, 21 were also diabetic, in a satisfying glucidic compensation, in order to verify the action of this drug also in this metabolic condition. The study was carried out for three months and during this period the patients were given Pantethine at the dose of 600 mg/die orally. At the 30th, the 60th, the 90th day of treatment the following parameters were controlled: cholesterolemia, HDL cholesterol, apolipoproteins A and B, triglyceridemia, systolic and diastolic arterial pressure, uricemia, body weight. Thirty days after suspending the treatment, the parameters were controlled again to detect a possible "rebound" effect. The results were analyzed on the whole case-record, subdividing the patients in dislipidemic and diabetic-dislipidemic, and on the basis of the Fredrickson's classification. Pantethine induced in all groups a q
uick and progressive decrease of cholesterolemia, triglyceridemia, LDL cholesterol and Apolipoproteins B with increased HDL cholesterol and Apolipoproteins A. After suspending the treatment, there is a clear inversion of the state of these parameters. The Authors conclude that the present work shows that Pantethine, a natural and atoxic substance, an important component of Coenzyme A, is efficacious in determining a clear tendency towards normalization of the lipidic values.

PMID: 6232801 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
1: Atherosclerosis. 1984 Jan;50(1):73-83. Related Articles, Links

Controlled evaluation of pantethine, a natural hypolipidemic compound, in patients with different forms of hyperlipoproteinemia.

Gaddi A, Descovich GC, Noseda G, Fragiacomo C, Colombo L, Craveri A, Montanari G, Sirtori CR.

Pantethine (P), the stable disulphate form of pantetheine, major component and precursor of coenzyme A, was evaluated within a double-blind protocol (8 weeks for P or for a corresponding placebo) in 29 patients, 11 with type IIB hyperlipoproteinemia, 15 with type IV, and 3 with an isolated reduction of high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels. In type IIB patients, P (300 mg t.i.d.) determined a highly significant lowering of plasma total and low density lipoprotein (LDL) associated cholesterol (-13.5% for both parameters). In the same patients, HDL-C levels increased about 10% at the end of treatment. Switching from P to placebo was associated with a rapid return to the baseline cholesterolemia. Both in type IIB and type IV patients, plasma triglyceride levels were reduced around 30%, when P was given as the first treatment; when it was preceded by placebo, reductions were less striking (respectively, -17.8% for type IIB and -13.0% for type IV, at the end of P
treatment). HDL-C levels were not increased by P, either in type IV, and in the patients with low HDL cholesterolemia. In type IV, LDL cholesterol levels showed a variable response to P: they tended to increase when below 132 mg/dl, prior to treatment, and to be reduced when above this level. This study provides evidence for a significant hypocholesterolemic effect of P, a natural compound free of overt side effects. It also indicates that P may raise HDL-C levels in type IIB patients, while moderately reducing triglyceridemia.

Publication Types:
• Clinical Trial
• Controlled Clinical Trial

PMID: 6365107 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
1: Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1986 Nov;24(11):630-7. Related Articles, Links

Lipoprotein changes induced by pantethine in hyperlipoproteinemic patients: adults and children.

Bertolini S, Donati C, Elicio N, Daga A, Cuzzolaro S, Marcenaro A, Saturnino M, Balestreri R.

Following a brief outline of current knowledge concerning atherosclerosis and its treatment, the authors describe the results obtained by treating with pantethine (900-1200 mg daily for 3 to 6 months) a series of 7 children and 65 adults suffering from hypercholesterolemia alone or associated with hypertriglyceridemia (types IIa and IIb of Fredrickson's classification). Pantethine treatment produced significant reduction of the better known risk factors (total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, triglycerides, and apo-B) and a significant increase of HDL-cholesterol (signally HDL2) and apolipoprotein A-I. The authors conclude with a discussion of these results and of the possible role of pantethine in the treatment of hyperlipoproteinemia, in view of its perfect tolerability and demonstrated therapeutic effectiveness.

PMID: 3098691 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
: Atherosclerosis. 1984 Dec;53(3):255-64. Related Articles, Links

Pantethine reduces plasma cholesterol and the severity of arterial lesions in experimental hypercholesterolemic rabbits.

Carrara P, Matturri L, Galbussera M, Lovati MR, Franceschini G, Sirtori CR.

Pantethine (P), a coenzyme A precursor, was administered to cholesterol-fed rabbits (0.5% cholesterol diet + 1% pantethine) for 90 days. At the end of treatment, plasma total cholesterol levels were reduced 64.7% and the HDL/total cholesterol ratio increased in P-treated animals; a significant rise of the apo A-I/A-II ratio was detected in HDL. VLDL lipid and protein levels were, on the other hand, reduced by P. The cholesterol-ester content of both liver and aortic tissues was not significantly affected by P.. Although the total aortic area with evident plaques was reduced only 18.2%, the microscopical examination of sections from the major vessels of P-treated animals, showed a reduction in the severity of lesions, both in the aorta and in the coronary arteries. These findings suggest that P, in addition to significantly lowering plasma cholesterol levels in rabbits on an experimental diet, may modify lipid deposition in major arteries, possibly by affecting lipoprotein c
omposition and/or exerting an arterial protective effect.

PMID: 6442152 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Clin Ther. 1986;8(5):537-45. Related Articles, Links

Effectiveness of long-term treatment with pantethine in patients with dyslipidemia.

Arsenio L, Bodria P, Magnati G, Strata A, Trovato R.

A one-year clinical trial with pantethine was conducted in 24 patients with established dyslipidemia of Fredrickson's types II A, II B, and IV, alone or associated with diabetes mellitus. The treatment was well tolerated by all patients with no subjective complaints or detectable side effects. Blood lipid assays repeated after 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment revealed consistent and statistically significant reductions of all atherogenic lipid fractions (total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B) with parallel increases of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein A. The results were equally good in patients with uncomplicated dyslipidemia and in those with associated diabetes mellitus. The authors conclude that pantethine (a drug entity related to the natural compound, pantetheine) represents a valid therapeutic support for patients with dyslipidemia not amenable to satisfactory correction of blood lipids by diet alon
e.

PMID: 3094958 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Acta Biomed Ateneo Parmense. 1987;58(5-6):143-52. Related Articles, Links

[Clinical use of pantethine by parenteral route in the treatment of hyperlipidemia]

[Article in Italian]

Arsenio L, Bodria P, Bossi S, Lateana M, Strata A.

Servizio di Malattie del Ricambio e Diabetologia, Ospedali Riuniti, Parma.

Recent investigations have confirmed the effectiveness and the excellent tolerability of pantethine, a derivative of pantetheine, an essential part of the acetylation coenzyme CoA, administered P.O., in normalizing the blood lipid concentrations of patients with hyperlipidemias. A group of 18 patients with hyperlipidemias (9 M, 9 F), with an average age of 52.6 years, was submitted to pantethine parenteral treatment. After a 20 days wash-out, pantethine (400 mg/day; BID) was administered intramuscularly, for 20 days. Total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, apo A-1 and B lipoprotein, uric acid in serum, glycemia, CBC, B.U.N., creatininemia, E.S.R., SGOT, SGPT, bilirubinemia, cardiac frequency, blood pressure and body weight were controlled before and after treatment. The drug showed to have a therapeutic effectiveness by a rapid and significant improvement in the blood lipid pattern with reduction of total cholesterol, triglycerides and apo-B lipoprotein and incr
ease of HDL-cholesterol and apo A-1 lipoprotein. The tolerability of pantethine at the stated dosage and mode of administration was invariably excellent, with non complaints or visible side effects imputable to the test drug. BUN, creatininemia, glycemia, SGOT, SGPT, bilirubinemia, E.S.R., CBC, cardiac frequency and blood pressure readings showed no noteworthy changes throughout the study.

PMID: 2970754 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

: Acta Biomed Ateneo Parmense. 1987;58(5-6):143-52. Related Articles, Links

[Clinical use of pantethine by parenteral route in the treatment of hyperlipidemia]

[Article in Italian]

Arsenio L, Bodria P, Bossi S, Lateana M, Strata A.

Servizio di Malattie del Ricambio e Diabetologia, Ospedali Riuniti, Parma.

Recent investigations have confirmed the effectiveness and the excellent tolerability of pantethine, a derivative of pantetheine, an essential part of the acetylation coenzyme CoA, administered P.O., in normalizing the blood lipid concentrations of patients with hyperlipidemias. A group of 18 patients with hyperlipidemias (9 M, 9 F), with an average age of 52.6 years, was submitted to pantethine parenteral treatment. After a 20 days wash-out, pantethine (400 mg/day; BID) was administered intramuscularly, for 20 days. Total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, apo A-1 and B lipoprotein, uric acid in serum, glycemia, CBC, B.U.N., creatininemia, E.S.R., SGOT, SGPT, bilirubinemia, cardiac frequency, blood pressure and body weight were controlled before and after treatment. The drug showed to have a therapeutic effectiveness by a rapid and significant improvement in the blood lipid pattern with reduction of total cholesterol, triglycerides and apo-B lipoprotein and incr
ease of HDL-cholesterol and apo A-1 lipoprotein. The tolerability of pantethine at the stated dosage and mode of administration was invariably excellent, with non complaints or visible side effects imputable to the test drug. BUN, creatininemia, glycemia, SGOT, SGPT, bilirubinemia, E.S.R., CBC, cardiac frequency and blood pressure readings showed no noteworthy changes throughout the study.

PMID: 2970754 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Susan

Peabody
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:03 am Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

Susan says...

Quote:

Did they have lipid profiles like yours?

Don't know about my father's. My brother's HDL and LDL
were both lower than mine.

Quote:

And I have high blood pressure - reasonably well
controlled. And finally, for the first time the
fasting blood sugar reading came back high (114).
Still trying to figure that one out because my
non-fasting levels are lower than that, so it may mean
nothing.

Uh, NO! Your fbg is the one number you've mentioned
here that is of great concern. Most diabetics are
diabetic long before their fbg ever goes into what's the
alleged diabetic range. I'm diabetic, and I've yet to
have a fbg above 111, even when badly controlled. It's
never nothing. But what's much more important is to get
a free (or almost free with rebates, etc) bg meter and
to start testing your 1 hr and 2 hr post meal bg.
Anything above 105 doesn't happen in those with intact
pancreatic function. These numbers are reliable,
whereas everytime it's been studied, fbg has failed to
detect most diabetes til it's well advanced.

I'm curious how/why you were diagnosed as diabetic if you
never had fbg above 110. Also, in reading up about this
after you scared me half to death, a two-hour reading on the
glucose tolerance test of 140 or below is considered normal.
140-200 is pre-diabetes. Is the glucose tolerance test
similar to a meal, or a stronger challenge?

What's puzzling to me is that looking back at annual tests
over the last 10 years, if anything my non-fasting bg levels
are lower than my fasting levels, but they've all been in
the range 97-110 until this latest one. Well, I had
a non-fasting level of 105 a month ago. We'll retest in a
few weeks and see what it looks like.

Meanwhile, where would I get a cheap meter?

Quote:

I'll see your gentics and raise you a few CVD related
deaths by that age, where your relatives had heart
attacks.

Well, actually, one attack was fatal.

Quote:

Here are some abstracts:

Thanks very much.

Susan
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:02 am Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

x-no-archive: yes

Peabody wrote:

Quote:

I'm curious how/why you were diagnosed as diabetic if you
never had fbg above 110.

I knew I had severe insulin resistance when I developed ovarian cysts at
40. Then I developed severe peripheral neuropathies in addition to my
severe dyslipidemia and labile hypertension. All conditions reversed on
a low carb diet. I got a bg meter and began testing; my post prandials
were very well into the diabetic range. I was medically diagnosed when
I presented these numbers to my doc. I'd never had an fbg above 109, or
lower than 109 for 10 years.

Quote:

Also, in reading up about this
after you scared me half to death, a two-hour reading on the
glucose tolerance test of 140 or below is considered normal.
140-200 is pre-diabetes.

Those targets and diagnostic levels were developed to prevent diagnosis
of type 2 diabetes back when no treatments were available. The concern
was that it caused folks to be discriminated against in employment and
for health insurance. In fact, folks who are non-diabetic stay in a
tight range of about 80-105, no matter what they eat. Sustained bg of
120 or spikes of 140 lead to cellular damage. I had severely advanced
neuropathies without ever having had an fbg above 109. I feel awful
when I go as high as 150.

Quote:

Is the glucose tolerance test
similar to a meal, or a stronger challenge?

Not stronger than post prandials, but certainly more informative than
fbg, which is useless. Even within the alleged normal ranges of fbg,
CVD risk worsens from the low end to the high end of normal, dramatically:

Ann Intern Med 1998 Apr 1;128(7):524-33

Metabolic risk factors worsen continuously across the spectrum of
nondiabetic glucose tolerance. The Framingham Offspring Study.

Meigs JB, Nathan DM, Wilson PW, Cupples LA, Singer DE
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
University School of Public Health, 02114, USA. jmeigs@sol.mgh.harvard.edu

BACKGROUND: Categorical definitions for glucose intolerance imply that
risk thresholds exist, but metabolic risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus
or cardiovascular disease may increase continuously as glucose
intolerance increases. OBJECTIVE: To examine the distributions of the
following metabolic risk factors across the spectrum of glucose
tolerance: overall and central obesity, hypertension, low levels of
high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and increased triglyceride and
insulin levels. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: The
community-based Framingham Offspring Study. PARTICIPANTS: 2583 adults
without previously diagnosed diabetes. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical data;
fasting glucose, insulin, and lipid levels; and glucose and insulin
levels taken 2 hours after oral challenge were collected from 1991 to
1993. Glucose tolerance was determined by 1980 World Health Organization
criteria. Patients with normal glucose tolerance were categorized into
quintiles of fasting glucose. The distributions of each metabolic risk
factor and the metabolic sum of the six risk factors were assessed
across seven categories from the lowest quintile of normal fasting
glucose level through impaired glucose tolerance and previously
undiagnosed diabetes. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 54 years
(range, 26 to 82 years); 52.7% of patients were women. Glucose tolerance
testing found that 12.7% of patients had impaired glucose tolerance and
4.8% had previously undiagnosed diabetes. Multivariable-adjusted mean
measures of risk factors and odds ratios for obesity, elevated
waist-to-hip ratio, hypertension, low levels of high-density lipoprotein
cholesterol, elevated triglyceride levels, and hyperinsulinemia showed
continuous increases across the spectrum of nondiabetic glucose
tolerance. Although a threshold effect near the upper range of
nondiabetic glucose tolerance could not be ruled out for triglyceride
levels in men and for insulin levels 2 hours after oral challenge in men
and women, no other metabolic risk factors showed clear evidence of
thresholds for increased risk. CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic risk factors for
type 2 diabetes mellitus and for cardiovascular disease worsen
continuously across the spectrum of glucose tolerance categories,
beginning in the lowest quintiles of normal fasting glucose level.

PMID: 9518396, UI: 98175274

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

What's puzzling to me is that looking back at annual tests
over the last 10 years, if anything my non-fasting bg levels
are lower than my fasting levels, but they've all been in
the range 97-110 until this latest one. Well, I had
a non-fasting level of 105 a month ago. We'll retest in a
few weeks and see what it looks like.

Your fasting may be the result of dawn phenomenon, where your bg goes
low at night, so your liver dumps glucose into your bloodstream. Your
casual, or non-fasting may be the result of insulin release after
eating, or of activity burning off bg.

Quote:

Meanwhile, where would I get a cheap meter?

You can get all of them cheaply (free from the doc, rebates at the
store) because the companies make their money on the test strips.
Walmart's Relion is the cheapest, and more importantly, the test strips
are the cheapest to purchase.

Here's a great piece about learning about your own bg and control by a
diabetes ng contributor named Jennifer:

Sounds like you're planning a move to take control of your diabetes... good
for you.

There is so much to absorb... you don't have to rush into anything. Begin
by using your best weapon in this war, your meter. The most important
thing you can do to learn about yourself and diabetes is test test test.

What you are looking to discover is how different foods affect you. As I'm
sure you've read, carbohydrates (sugars, wheat, rice... the things our
Grandmas called "starches") raise blood sugars the most rapidly. Protein
and fat do raise them, but not as high and much more slowly... so if you're
a T2, generally the insulin your body still makes may take care of the rise.

You might want to try some experiments.

First: Day one: eat whatever you've been
currently eating... but write it down.
Test yourself at the following times:

Upon waking (fasting)
1 hour after each meal
2 hours after each meal
At bedtime

That means 8 x for that day. What you will discover by this is how long
after a meal your highest reading comes... and how fast you return to
"normal". Also, you may see that a meal that included bread, fruit or
other carbs gives you a higher reading.

Next: Day two: try to curb your carbs. For a few days eliminate breads,
cereals, rices, beans, any wheat products, potato, corn, fruit... get all
your carbs from veggies. Test at the same schedule above.

If you try this for a few days, you may find some pretty damn good
readings. It's worth a few days to discover.

That's the thing about this disease... we share much in common... we need to
follow certain guidelines... but in the end, our bodies dictate our
treatment and our success.

The closer we get to non-diabetic numbers, the greater chance we have of
avoiding horrible complications. The key here is AIM... I know that
everyone is at a different point in their disease... and it is progressive.
But, if we aim for the best numbers and do our best, that's all we can do.

Here's my opinion on what numbers to aim for, they are non-diabetic numbers.

FBG 60 - 110
One hour after meals under 140
Two hours after meals under 120

Recent studies have indicated that the most important numbers are your
"after meal" numbers. They may be the most indicative of future
complications, especially heart problems.

Listen to your doctor, but you are the leader of your diabetic
care team. While his /her advice is learned, it is not absolute. You
will end up knowing much more about your body and how it's handling
diabetes than your doctor will. The meter is our best weapon.

Just remember, we're not in a race or a competition with anyone but
ourselves... Play around with your food plan... TEST TEST TEST. Learn what
foods cause spikes, what foods cause cravings... Use your body as a science
experiment.

Best of luck!
Jennifer
******
Here's a very informative site, with info about bg levels and damage,
by a diabetic who does her homework:

http://www.geocities.com/lottadata4u/

Quote:

Well, actually, one attack was fatal.

Oh, I'm sorry. :-/

Quote:

Here are some abstracts:

Thanks very much.

You're welcome.

Susan

Susan
Guest

Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:14 am Post subject: Re: Advice on cholesterol? Effect of taking "extra" olive o

x-no-archive: yes http://tinyurl.com/bgys9 The link above will take you to the Joslin Diabetes Center's diagnostic and treatment targets. Note that they are lower than those of the ADA. Knowledgable diabetics determined to avoid neuropathies, retinopathies, CVD and nephropathy stick to even stricter targets; never above 140 at 1 hr. post prandial, never above the 90s for fasting, no carbs if a pre-meal test is 110 or above, etc... It's not about living longer, it's about keeping everything working as long as we live. Susan

Display posts from previous:

	Health Care Forums Forum Index -> Cardiology	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 1 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Active Topics - Most Replies - Most Views - Terms of Service - Archive