Great annual physical and lab results!

macchiatto
macchiatto Posts: 2,890 Member
edited November 17 in Social Groups
I started with a new PCP a few months ago and today it was time for my annual physical and going over lab results. For one thing, I found out she started eating LCHF herself recently! :) So of course she was supportive.

And now for the numbers. I admit, it makes me a little nervous to watch TC and LDL climb higher but I know from you all there's something about fluffy particles so it may not be as bad as it looks. ;) (And at any rate, she still thought my numbers were great.) I was especially thrilled with the drop in A1C! (For reference, both parents are diabetic and I had prediabetes and high triglycerides about 5 yrs ago, which I reversed on the Dukan Diet. Still though, it had seemed like A1C had been inching higher for several years.)

Numbers for comparison:
10/30/14 (eating low to moderate carb/low fat/higher protein)
Weight: approx 137 lbs
Fasted labs:
Total cholesterol: 144
Triglycerides: 80
HDL: 59
VLDL: 16
LDL: 69
LDL/HDL ratio: 1.2
Glucose: 81
A1c: 5.4


3/22/16 (after 4 months of eating keto and losing 23 lbs I'd gained from Aug '14 to Aug '15)
Weight: approx 131
Fasted labs:
Total cholesterol: 174
Triglycerides: 68
HDL: 75
VLDL: 13
LDL: 85
LDL/HDL ratio: 0.882
Glucose: 80
A1C: 5.5

3/20/17 (after 15 months of eating LCHF, often keto)
Weight: 133
Fasted labs:
Total cholesterol: 187
Triglycerides: 60
HDL: 73
VLDL:12
LDL: 102
LDL/HDL ratio: 1.4
Glucose: 91
A1C: 4.9!!!

Replies

  • Sunny_Bunny_
    Sunny_Bunny_ Posts: 7,140 Member
    Gotta love that A1c!!!
    Congrats!
  • macchiatto
    macchiatto Posts: 2,890 Member
    Thanks, @Sunny_Bunny_ ! :)
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    Great labs.

    Last year my Total cholesterol was like 270 and I mentioned it was on the high side and the Dr said it is fine because now we do not even consider treatment until you hit 290. The Triglyceride/HDL seems to be the ratio that most are watching today.
  • macchiatto
    macchiatto Posts: 2,890 Member
    Great labs.

    Last year my Total cholesterol was like 270 and I mentioned it was on the high side and the Dr said it is fine because now we do not even consider treatment until you hit 290. The Triglyceride/HDL seems to be the ratio that most are watching today.

    Interesting! Good to know! My tri/HDL ratio seems good.
  • macchiatto
    macchiatto Posts: 2,890 Member
    I used an online calculator and found this:

    Your Total Cholesterol of 187 is DESIRABLE
    Your LDL of 102 is NEAR OPTIMAL
    Your HDL of 73 is OPTIMAL
    Your Triglyceride level of 60 is NORMAL

    RATIOS:

    Your Total Cholesterol/HDL ratio is: 2.56 - (preferably under 5.0, ideally under 3.5) IDEAL
    Your HDL/LDL ratio is: 0.716 - (preferably over 0.3, ideally over 0.4) IDEAL
    Your triglycerides/HDL ratio is: 0.822 - (preferably under 4, ideally under 2) IDEAL

  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    Lovely numbers there! :) Congratulations!
  • macchiatto
    macchiatto Posts: 2,890 Member
    One thing that did surprise me, esp since my A1C had dropped, is that fasting glucose was 91. It's been consistently right around 80 over the past several years, including several tests over the past year by various drs. I had a virus when I got my blood work done last week; could that have caused my FBG to be up a little? (There was also a result under A1C said that said my estimated average glucose was 94.)
  • cstehansen
    cstehansen Posts: 1,984 Member
    macchiatto wrote: »
    One thing that did surprise me, esp since my A1C had dropped, is that fasting glucose was 91. It's been consistently right around 80 over the past several years, including several tests over the past year by various drs. I had a virus when I got my blood work done last week; could that have caused my FBG to be up a little? (There was also a result under A1C said that said my estimated average glucose was 94.)

    Yes the virus could affect the A1c.

    Also, here is great link if you want to see risk:

    http://www.reynoldsriskscore.org/default.aspx

    This has been tested and shown to be 30-50% more accurate than the Framingham score that is so frequently used. I don't see your hsCRP score. Hopefully, they did check it. This is a score showing inflammation which typically goes down with this WOE.

    The hsCRP score has also been shown to be a better marker for risk than any of the cholesterol scores. In fact, the big Jupiter trial that supposedly showed that everyone could benefit from statins (paid for by big pharma) only tested people who had hsCRP scores above 2.0. The reduced risk came from reducing inflammation, not from lowering cholesterol.
  • KnitOrMiss
    KnitOrMiss Posts: 10,103 Member
    Remember, too, that the calculations on cholesterol are skewed when Trigs are under 100. Your numbers might actually be even better than this! My LDL was off by 30-40 points (much higher than yours) due to the calculations...

    Excellent numbers!
  • macchiatto
    macchiatto Posts: 2,890 Member
    KnitOrMiss wrote: »
    Remember, too, that the calculations on cholesterol are skewed when Trigs are under 100. Your numbers might actually be even better than this! My LDL was off by 30-40 points (much higher than yours) due to the calculations...

    Excellent numbers!

    I didn't know that! Thank you!
This discussion has been closed.