Can anyone decipher my cholesterol results?

[Sally W]

serum cholesterol level - 6.00 mol
serum HDL cholesterol level - 1.8mmol
serum HDL ratio. - 3.3
serum non high density lipoprotein 4.2

Thanks!

 

[Sally W]

serum cholesterol level - 6.00 mol
serum HDL cholesterol level - 1.8mmol
serum HDL ratio. - 3.3
serum non high density lipoprotein 4.2

Thanks!

@mikeyB can you help please?

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

serum cholesterol level - 6.00 mol
serum HDL cholesterol level - 1.8mmol
serum HDL ratio. - 3.3
serum non high density lipoprotein 4.2

Thanks!

Hello Sally

I confess I've only read enough stuff around cholesterol/ratios and whether or not they can be used to reliably associate with CV risk for the subject to confuse me, rather than clarify!! Oh and of course - caveat caveat... no medical training... etc etc... but anyway here goes:

The UK average for TC is apparently 5.7mmol/L, so yours is a tiny bit higher than average. I gather that as women get older they tend to do rather better in all cause mortality and CVD with higher cholesterol levels but I forget where I read that, and I have no idea how old you are!

I think the official UK guidance is for everyone to be below 5.0 and people with diabetes below 4.0, but I'm not sure how helpful that is to suddenly classify 'average' as 'high'.

HDL looks good at 1.8 - the higher the better as far as I can make out. 1.3-1.5 mmol/L for women and is associated with average risk of heart disease

I believe the preferred TC/HDL ratio is below 3.5 (again the lower the better seems to be the idea) so you score well there at 3.3

Your results don't list Trigs (triglycerides) which seem to be though of by some as a proxy for the nasty sort of LDL particles rather than the benign, fluffly, brain-friendly LDL. With Trigs, again the lower the better.

So from what little I can work out, your results look pretty good to me, though there are many differing opinions on cholesterol, and for some the total might be a little higher than they would like.

 

[Robin]

serum cholesterol level - 6.00 mol
serum HDL cholesterol level - 1.8mmol
serum HDL ratio. - 3.3
serum non high density lipoprotein 4.2

Thanks!

I usually try plugging my results into this. My total cholesterol,was 5.9 last time, but my GP was relaxed about it because she said my ratios were good.
http://www.hughcalc.org/chol-si.php

 

[Sally W]

Hello Sally

I confess I've only read enough stuff around cholesterol/ratios and whether or not they can be used to reliably associate with CV risk for the subject to confuse me, rather than clarify!! Oh and of course - caveat caveat... no medical training... etc etc... but anyway here goes:

The UK average for TC is apparently 5.7mmol/L, so yours is a tiny bit higher than average. I gather that as women get older they tend to do rather better in all cause mortality and CVD with higher cholesterol levels but I forget where I read that, and I have no idea how old you are!

I think the official UK guidance is for everyone to be below 5.0 and people with diabetes below 4.0, but I'm not sure how helpful that is to suddenly classify 'average' as 'high'.

HDL looks good at 1.8 - the higher the better as far as I can make out. 1.3-1.5 mmol/L for women and is associated with average risk of heart disease

I believe the preferred TC/HDL ratio is below 3.5 (again the lower the better seems to be the idea) so you score well there at 3.3

Your results don't list Trigs (triglycerides) which seem to be though of by some as a proxy for the nasty sort of LDL particles rather than the benign, fluffly, brain-friendly LDL. With Trigs, again the lower the better.

So from what little I can work out, your results look pretty good to me, though there are many differing opinions on cholesterol, and for some the total might be a little higher than they would like.

Thanks Mike. Whilst giving me these results the doctor over the phone said that my cholesterol was 11 which she felt was almost at need for statins. I can’t see what that is looking at the print out though. I’m in my fifties. I’ve read several folk on her talk about cholesterol not being the risk it was due to current ideals. I really have no idea, although don’t have much faith in my surgery who told me not to change my eating much and just don’t have 8 pieces of toast! So I’m sceptical of their advice. It seems from what you’re saying that I don’t have too much to worry about at this point. Appreciate it. Thanks

 

[Sally W]

I usually try plugging my results into this. My total cholesterol,was 5.9 last time, but my GP was relaxed about it because she said my ratios were good.
http://www.hughcalc.org/chol-si.php

That looks great. Thanks Robin!

 

[mikeyB]

Sorry I’m late on this thread, I’m busy organising a new home. I agree with all of the above, your results are fine. Resist the statins. They would make your total cholesterol come down, but there’s no evidence that that will prolong your life, so why bother? Your ratios are near as dammit perfectly healthy, so keep up the good work🙂

 

[trophywench]

Perhaps the doc said 'elevated' rather than 'eleven' ?

 

[Sally W]

Sorry I’m late on this thread, I’m busy organising a new home. I agree with all of the above, your results are fine. Resist the statins. They would make your total cholesterol come down, but there’s no evidence that that will prolong your life, so why bother? Your ratios are near as dammit perfectly healthy, so keep up the good work🙂

@mikeyB Sorry been away for a few days. That’s reassuring to know thanks for your help. No idea why I was told verbally 11 as borderline for statins....? Hope you settle into new home quickly

 

[Sally W]

Perhaps the doc said 'elevated' rather than 'eleven' ?

No it was definitely 11 which is borderline for statins. Couldn’t understand that on the printout