Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 11/29/2025 6:35:16 PM PST by ConservativeMind
Researchers report that lower plasma LDL cholesterol is associated with a higher risk of incident type 2 diabetes in adults followed in primary care, independent of statin use.
In the study, investigators asked whether plasma LDL-C predicted incident type 2 diabetes during long follow-up and examined whether statin therapy altered that relationship.
A cooperative of 140 general practitioners provided the data collection. Each doctor contributes to a shared electronic medical record that follows patients across visits.
More than 200,000 adults appear in the system, with age and geographic distributions that naturally mirror the city of Naples. Slightly more than half the cohort received statin therapy at baseline.
During follow-up (median 71.6 months), 1,819 participants (13%) developed incident type 2 diabetes, 1,424 (20%) statin-treated participants compared with 395 (6%) nonusers.
Each 10 mg/dl higher LDL-C was associated with a 10% lower hazard of diabetes (adjusted HR 0.90), so that lower LDL-C corresponded to higher risk. Incidence rates across LDL-C quartiles were 27.6, 17.4, 13.5, and 8.4 cases per 1,000 person-years in the low (<84 mg/dl), medium (84–<107 mg/dl), high (107–<131 mg/dl), and very high (≥131 mg/dl) groups.
Statin therapy was associated with greater diabetes risk in every LDL-C category (1.75 in the low group, 1.63 in the medium group, 1.54 in the high group). The largest relative increase was seen in those starting at very high, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 2.41.
Researchers conclude that statin use increases diabetes risk within every LDL category and shows its greatest relative impact among individuals starting from very high LDL-C levels.
Still, the overall picture links low LDL values to greater diabetes risk, with lower LDL-C levels coinciding with higher diabetes incidence, largely independent of statin use, while LDL-C at or above 131 mg/dl coincided with the lowest observed risk.
(Excerpt) Read more at medicalxpress.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
“LDL-C at or above 131 mg/dl coincided with the lowest observed risk.”
Shoot for 131 mg/dl.
Also of note, for those taking statins:
“1,424 (20%) statin-treated participants compared with 395 (6%) nonusers.”
My latest test last week showed LDL 118 and said it was ‘high’...............
My LDL-C is 207...but I am more concerned about A1C (5.6) and CRP (.71) and glucose tolerance...inflammation markers. I will get another CIMT in January...it measures actual soft and hard plaque.
207!?!?!
My doc would faint!..................
Ping
“Lower LDL cholesterol linked to higher type 2 diabetes risk independent of statin use”
Kind of funny title in that using statins will give lower LDL, so is it really ‘independent’? In other words, if one drops off of statins, LDL goes up (as it will), then, per the headline, the risk of diabetes should drop...so is it really independent?
And, by the way, diabetes is a known side effect of statins...perhaps because statins lower LDL?
Check out Drs Nick Norwitz, Dave Feldman and Ford Brewer. They have interesting podcasts/info. My doc did not faint, altho he is concerned...but triglycerides are 57, my HDL is 100. My hub and I use docs as “advisors”...most docs are still trying to get people on statins (our doc knows it is a no go for us.) I went extreme keto last several months...So it appears I am probably what is called “ lean mass hyper responder”...meaning low triglycerides, hi hdl, and ldl @200 or more.
My LDL is also that high, 200+mg/dL. But my triglycerides are in the double digits (70-78mg/dL) and my HDL is higher than the recommended 50mg/dL. Triglycerides:HDL is usually about 1 (1.00-1.09). However, LDL is always in the 200-210mg/dL. I’ve had all the tests you mentioned. I had a fasting insulin test (26), a high sensitivity CRP, a CAC (54), a CIMT and an NMR cholesterol, a test that measures the number and size of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles in the blood. I have a very high no. of LDL particles. That’s the bad news, but the no. of atherogenic particles is not high. Everything else looks good. So, I’m going to just live calmly with my high LDL, which in older populations, has been shown to be protective against infections.
Wow! Your triglycerides are enviably low. I have pretty good nos., but yours are something else. Might I ask about your diet?
KETO for last several months....tried keeping to 20 grams carbs or less....high protein...higher fat. Little to no sugar. Also, quit drinking one glass of wine a day this past year...now maybe 1-2 alcohol drinks a week (champagne or prosecco). Yeah....not in the keto diet. Did they give you a LDL Size....large Pattern A or Small Pattern B That seems to matter, too. My nbrs there are great, too. But, my Insulin resistance is very low, too. I still think, insulin resistance, A1C, and CRP have a lot to do with it all. Oh, and I’m old....If you have time, look at the Docs podcasts I posted about to Red Badger above....they don’t subscribe to the typical doc when it comes to LDL, etc.
PING statins and LDL diabetes risk.
Bookmark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.