Posted on 03/29/2008 1:37:17 PM PDT by Mount Athos
A health study by Japanese researchers has found that people with low levels of LDL cholesterol -- often referred to as "bad cholesterol" -- are more likely to die than those with higher levels.
The finding comes as Japan prepares to introduce special health checkups from April, which list high LDL cholesterol as a factor in deciding whether a person has metabolic syndrome. It is likely the results of the survey will stir debate over the designation of LDL cholesterol as "bad."
The study was led by Tokai University professor Yoichi Ogushi, who surveyed roughly 26,000 people who had at least two health checkups between 1987 and 2006, following them for an average of 8.1 years. The subjects were divided into seven groups based on their LDL cholesterol readings, and the relationship between the readings and people's deaths was examined.
Researchers found that in terms of overall deaths, men and women in the group with the lowest LDL cholesterol level (79 milligrams per deciliter of blood or less) had the highest death rate.
For men, the yearly death rate worked out at about 3,400 deaths per 100,000 people - about 1.6 times higher than the group with the lowest death rate, whose LDL cholesterol level was between 140 and 159 milligrams. The figure for women stood at about 1,900 deaths per 100,000 people, or about 1.3 times more than the group with the lowest death rate, which covered people with LDL cholesterol levels between 120 and 139 milligrams per deciliter of blood.
When deaths were restricted to strokes and heart attacks -- ailments believed to be caused by high LDL cholesterol levels -- the death rate climbed for men with levels of 180 milligrams or more. For women, however, there appeared to be almost no relationship between their LDL cholesterol level and the death rate.
Deaths from cancer and respiratory ailments, on the other hand, increased among men and women with low LDL cholesterol levels, lifting the overall death rate.
Ogushi suggests that the appropriate LDL cholesterol level for men is between 100 and 180 milligrams per deciliter of blood. He suggests women should have a level of at least 120 milligrams.
In health checkups from April, people with readings of 120 milligrams or more will be advised to lower their LDL cholesterol levels, but Ogushi questions this advice.
"Excessively lowering an LDL level that is within an appropriate range is dangerous," he said. "Cholesterol is needed in the body and immune function drops when it is low, and it is possible that the death rate rises as a result."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_%28film%29
Dr. Melik: (listing items Miles had requested for breakfast) “... wheat germ, organic honey, and... Tiger’s Milk.”
Dr. Aragon: “Oh, yes. Those are the charmed substances that some years ago were thought to contain life-preserving properties.”
Dr. Melik: “You mean there was no deep fat? No steak or cream pies or... hot fudge?”
Dr. Aragon: “Those were thought to be unhealthy... precisely the opposite of what we now know to be true.”
Dr. Melik: “Incredible!”
********
Life imitating art.....
Well, we already know that if you don’t take care of your teeth, it can cause all sorts of things to go wrong. Kidney failure, clogged arteries, etc. So I would expect that inflamation is a biggie.
Sure but for all you know, they didn’t start until they were 60. So if they did start at 60, they should be dead from lung cancer in about 20 years. hehe
My grandfather lived to be 88 and the only vegetables he ate were potatoes...unless you count tapioca.
My Mom is almost 90. She comes from Polish stock and grew up on pierogi, kielbasa and stuffed cabbage. She’s as healthy as can be and still eats whatever she wants. Her brother is 92 and she has 2 sisters in their 80’s and one in her 70’s. All healthy.
That depends. If you’re expecting to live into your hundreds, your family history could be a problem. :)
I think they are useful but over prescribed....they are useful for extremely high levels of cholesterol but I think with more mildly elevated levels the patient should be told to watch their weight and diet and take a walk now and then!
Great Drug, but Does It Prolong Life?
This hasn't been the first study with either the cholesterol hypothesis or statin usage having been called into question. The mortality curves were called J or U shaped, just like ethanol consumption, i.e. teetotalers and heavy drinkers had higher death rates than "moderate" drinkers.
The information about very low LDL is not new, although the overall death rate numbers are. I've been reading articles at lef.org for at least a couple of years on the subject. The first research out on the subject had to do with strokes. Very low LDL puts you measurably more at risk for strokes than higher levels. The LEF folks have been recommending against pushing LDL levels way down for at least two or three years.
True. I see caravans of SUV's at the local Executive Shores Luxury Estates lined up waiting for the school bus, so the children do not have to walk 300 Yards, and wonder why no one is concerned about them as they pant and waddle from one vehicle to the other.
If only people would use stairs once in a while, rather than taking an elevator for a floor or two, or even get a dog to walk, so many of these problems could be avoided.
There are some people who simply synthesize a lot of cholesterols, and dieting is not enough, and maybe for them, some intervention is needed. I have a sister who is a health nut, runs road races, and essentially eats lettuce, and she has high cholesterol~220, so in some cases it has nothing to do with eating cheeseburgers.
But the wholesale mass prescriptions must have to be raising eyebrows, somewhere.
At first glance I agreed, but add the caution that if you are running a program to determine the contribution of a candidate drug, and your preliminary report concludes the drug is ineffective or dangerous, what do you think the probability of follow-on funding will be?
For evidence of Research Prostitution one need look no further than "Global Warming".
One can search databases like Medline, or even citations in the Prescribing Information, read the cited studies, and see who funded them.
I read that John D. Rockefeller started every day with oatmeal with butter and salt. He lived to be 97. It seems like the biggest change in the American diet over the past few decades is the increased use of sweeteners.
I’m a fitness trainer. It is not junk science.
Woohoo!
If you’re gonna have a bacon sandwich on white bread, everybody knows that the bread should be fried in the drippings first.
Read up on the side effects of statins including memory loss. IMO, the medical establishment is clueless about prescription drugs. Doctors have become nothing more than pill pushers. The side effects of these drugs are worse than the ailment.
Now, all you need to complete the sandwich is: Skippy Extra Crunchy Peanutbutter on both sides, with a tall glass of cold milk./Just Asking - seoul62........
Congratulations Ole Okie! Good for you! It gets so tiresome when every day or two “they” keep coming up with this and that research that makes what we were doing - eating, drinking - yesterday obsolete today. I’m confused and still sick a lot of the time despite jumping every time “they” say “frog”. My mother in law is going on 85 and gives the lie to all the diet and exercise rules. She eats butter and anything else she wants, not especially a “balanced” diet either, and the farthest she walks is from her bed to the bathroom and back to the easy chair - and this has been the norm for her all her life.
Keep up the good work, Okie!
Twinkie
Is there a doctor in the house..................
same here.
It is becoming common knowledge that INFLAMMATION is a bigger problem than cholesterol....or it SHOULD be....but, I’m not sure there’s enough money in the drugs for inflammation....
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.