Low Carber Daily Forum

Join

Out of range Cholesterol/HDL Ratio...

ShootingStar72
ShootingStar72 Posts: 183 Member
edited November 2024 in Social Groups
I just got my labs back and my cholesterol/HDL ratio was 2.62, which they flagged L, out of range. The reference range is 3.27 to 7.04. I really don’t know what this means and if I should try to make any dietary changes...? Thought I would check with you folks and see if anyone has any insight. All other results in the Chemistry Panel were within range, just stumped by the one out of range flag.

Cholesterol/HDL Ratio 2.62 (L)
Cholesterol 178
HDL 68
LDL calculated 89
Triglycerides 103

Thanks!

Replies

  • wabmester
    wabmester Posts: 2,748 Member
    edited February 2016
    That ratio is called the Castelli Risk Index. Higher levels are associated with plaque formation. I've never heard of any risk associated with a low ratio. Yours should be considered optimal, I'd think.
  • Dragonwolf
    Dragonwolf Posts: 5,600 Member
    Eat more coconut oil! :lol:

    But seriously, it just means that nearly half your cholesterol is HDL, which isn't known to be an issue unless you HDL is really super high (which yours isn't). It is interesting that you have a lower bound in the reference range. I haven't seen that before.

    (The joke about coconut oil is that it increases both HDL and the particle size of LDL, which can show up as a net increase in total cholesterol, which would bring your total/HDL ratio more in line with the lab reference ranges, without actually incurring any known risk, and possibly actually improving it. It's gaming the system, basically.)
  • ShootingStar72
    ShootingStar72 Posts: 183 Member
    Thanks for your responses!

    I thought it strange that there was a lower bound in the reference range as well... Other values only had a higher bound. The only information I have found is that low cholesterol (though lower than I have) can lead to a compromised immune system.

    Agree with the suggestion for more coconut oil :)

  • wabmester
    wabmester Posts: 2,748 Member
    They would have flagged your cholesterol if your problem was low cholesterol. Or your HDL if it were too high. It makes no sense to flag it in a ratio that was designed specifically to identify plaque formation.

    BTW, it's always fun to look at the actual studies that support these markers. Here's one:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19301687

    Individuals with an elevated TC/HDL-C ratio [>=4] vs those without had a higher prevalence of proximal plaque (62% vs 48%, P = .04) and significant CAD (19% vs 9%, P = .009).

    So there's a pretty significant increased risk with the ratio >= 4. But 48% had plaque and a ratio < 4!
  • DorkothyParker
    DorkothyParker Posts: 618 Member
    You should be great. I too have a below range ratio. I do know that if your triglycerides are exceptionally low, that could be indicative of larger issues, but yours looks fine.

    I got my levels measured through a work physical last August. It would be interesting to actually sit with a doctor and discuss numbers, I think. More than just the generic "Low vs medium vs high."
  • ShootingStar72
    ShootingStar72 Posts: 183 Member
    Oh, that makes sense, the ratio was flagged not the cholesterol numbers.

    Thanks for the link to the study. I read the abstract and... I think I would need a dictionary to understand at least half of it, very technical! I appreciate the breakdown above!
  • ShootingStar72
    ShootingStar72 Posts: 183 Member
    @DorkothyParker - Mine was thorugh a work physical too. I plan to bring the labs to my next regular doctors appt just to see if he/she has any insight. I will be changing doctors this year so we'll see how it goes.

    If you have a chance to discuss with a dr at some point I would like to know what you find out!
  • macchiatto
    macchiatto Posts: 2,898 Member
    Those are similar to my numbers; I thought they were good!
  • ShootingStar72
    ShootingStar72 Posts: 183 Member
    Nice, I definately think they are good! Just the whole range/flag thing was weird.

    I worked as a chemist in an environmental lab (non-medical) for a few years, and we flagged data whenever it was warranted. But the reports included definitions and explainations for each item. This was just a lonely L.

    Everyones input has been very helpful, thanks for your responses!
  • wabmester
    wabmester Posts: 2,748 Member
    macchiatto wrote: »
    Those are similar to my numbers; I thought they were good!

    They are good!

    If you want, you can do the same thing your doctor does with this info. Calculate your Framingham Risk Score:
    http://cvdrisk.nhlbi.nih.gov/
  • camtosh
    camtosh Posts: 898 Member
    And this cholesterol calculator: http://www.hughcalc.org/chol.php
  • Phrick
    Phrick Posts: 2,765 Member
    edited February 2016
    camtosh wrote: »
    And this cholesterol calculator: http://www.hughcalc.org/chol.php

    Thanks for this, my total cholesterol just came back slightly above normal (204 with range of normal being 125-200 - so BARELY above normal) and I was curious if it really meant anything since my other #s were all ideal. The calculator was helpful :)
This discussion has been closed.

Categories