[doozio]

My Peertrainer team leader wrote this blog post. Of course lwer is better, but is this possible without drugs. Does anyone have experience doing anything like this without drugs?

Thanks.

[Cyborg]

Originally Posted by doozio

My Peertrainer team leader wrote this blog post. Of course lwer is better, but is this possible without drugs. Does anyone have experience doing anything like this without drugs?

Thanks.

lol... My LDL was 110 last time it was checked and I was striving to bring it down to under 100, which is the older target according to the article you cited. I did not know they lowered the LDL to a target of 70 for diabetics.

[jrcskb]

70 is possible without drugs - but I myself needed Zocor to achieve it. My endo recently put me on Z to get it below the regs, which apparently became more strict as to cholesterol. Zocor apparently doesn't have many side effects.

[Cyborg]

Well, if it costs me 50$/month, then I'm with doozio in trying to do it without the drugs.

[jrcskb]

Yes. If there is a sizeable cost, then you probably could hold off. Although, I can't speak for how important it is to get below that number. Luckily, my copay is very reasonable ($10/month).

[Funnygrl]

According to Quest Labs, people with diabetes and coronary artery disease should be below 70, people with just diabetes should be below 100, and people with no risk factors can be below 130. My last LDL was 95.

[Sharps]

Originally Posted by Funnygrl

According to Quest Labs, people with diabetes and coronary artery disease should be below 70, people with just diabetes should be below 100, and people with no risk factors can be below 130. My last LDL was 95.

Both my Cardio and Endo told me that they treated diabetics as if they have already had a heart attack -- so the 70 LDL <-- if you believe the current standard -- 10 years from now they will probobly be telling us the exact opposite

[jen_slc]

70 is possible without drugs, yes. My LDL was 72 last time, it's always been on the lower end despite my (sometimes) high-fat diet. I do not take and have not ever taken any cholesterol drugs.

[Cyborg]

Originally Posted by Cyborg

lol... My LDL was 110 last time it was checked and I was striving to bring it down to under 100, which is the older target according to the article you cited. I did not know they lowered the LDL to a target of 70 for diabetics.

Sorry, I meant total cholesterol...

[Cinnabon]

what happens with our triglycerides? I trhink these play a very important role.

[BriOnH]

With correlation to heart disease and diabetes:
Isn't it the obese type 2's (who comprise of >80% of T2 diabetics) that are at the greater risk? It's always stated that "diabetics are 2 to 4 times more likely to suffer a heart attack or stroke", but which diabetics, or does it matter?

[Cyborg]

Originally Posted by BriOnH

With correlation to heart disease and diabetes:
Isn't it the obese type 2's (who comprise of >80% of T2 diabetics) that are at the greater risk? It's always stated that "diabetics are 2 to 4 times more likely to suffer a heart attack or stroke", but which diabetics, or does it matter?

Try 6 times more likely...

[Harold]

Originally Posted by BriOnH

With correlation to heart disease and diabetes:
Isn't it the obese type 2's (who comprise of >80% of T2 diabetics) that are at the greater risk? It's always stated that "diabetics are 2 to 4 times more likely to suffer a heart attack or stroke", but which diabetics, or does it matter?

From what I have read cardio risks are greatly increased for type 2's. It really does not appear to be different for obese or non obese type 2's. Call it a side effect of the type 2 mechanism or Syndrome X.

For a laymans explanation Diabetes and Syndrome X

[BriOnH]

Originally Posted by Harold

From what I have read cardio risks are greatly increased for type 2's. It really does not appear to be different for obese or non obese type 2's. Call it a side effect of the type 2 mechanism or Syndrome X.

For a laymans explanation Diabetes and Syndrome X

Thank you Harold. I never heard of Syndrome X before that interesting read. It states:

Originally Posted by SyndromeXarticle
Some of the resulting fingers of blame point to our ever-expanding waistlines[which cause syndrome x

.

AND

More than 90 percent of people with type 2 diabetes have Syndrome X

The article also states that they are not aware of what the correlation is between diabetes and Syndrome X, but I wonder if it mainly lies on this recently discovered gene:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117...1-1243,00.html

if Syndrome X were to lie on this gene though it would mean that type 2's that did not experience Syndrome X (the 10%) did not have type 2.

[Harold]

Another contributing gene.

Have to say that up till two years after my dx my lipids and blood pressure were great. Then they started up and in a year my total cholesterol was over 200 and my blood pressure went from 110/60 to 120/80. Evidently it is either a conincidence that they climbed with age or they increased as a result of Syndome X.