Can we be certain that elevated LDL (Low-density lipoprotein) particles have no meaning and can be completely ignored?

Certainly not.

Can we be certain that all LDL particles are deadly and need to be treated to microscopically low levels?

Certainly not.

So, what do we do?

I have seen countless second opinion consults and enrolled numerous clients in my Boundless Health Program who have this exact question.  What’s the deal with LDL? Do we worry or don’t we?

Life is much easier when it is black and white, good and bad. I, however, believe in looking for the nuance and trying to understand things a little deeper.

But first, let’s back up a little.

What is LDL and LDL-P?

Cholesterol can be a complex topic that we frequently oversimplify, which I am about to do. In brief, LDL is known as the “bad” cholesterol, the cholesterol that is found in plaque buildup in our hearts. But the truth is that LDL is not inherently bad. In fact, LDL has a purpose in our bodies as part of our immune response and as a fuel and vitamin delivery mechanism to name a few.  If vascular injury and inflammation are present, then modified LDL may invade vessel walls and participate in a cascade of events leading to plaque buildup and an eventual heart attack.

LDL-C is a measure of the total amount of cholesterol in our LDL lipoproteins. LDL-P is the total number of the LDL lipoproteins. Studies show that LDL-P is a much better marker for CVD risk than LDL-C. As an analogy, the number of cars on the road matter more than the number of people in the cars.

What are the risks of LDL-P?

On the one hand, trials in the general population show that elevated LDL-P is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD).  This includes a combination of observational trials, genetic mutation trials (mendelian randomization), and drug treatment trials.

All things being equal, based on these trials alone, we should want our LDL-P to be low.

But does LDL alone cause heart attacks and death? Or are there other factors involved?

Of course there are other factors involved in CVD. Vascular injury and inflammation being the two most prominent factors.

Can lowering our LDL-P have risks greater than the potential benefits for certain populations?

Absolutely.  Since primary prevention statin trials show we have to treat over 200 people for five years to prevent one heart attack with no difference in mortality, it seems reasonable that certain populations will experience more potential risk than reward.

The Low Carb High Fat Reality

How many LDL or statin trials have specifically looked at individuals on a healthy, real foods, LCHF diet?

None. Not a single one.

How many LDL or statin studies have looked specifically at red headed, left handed boys born the second week of March? 

None, at least to the best of my knowledge.

This seems glib but bear with me.

Is there any reason to think a red headed, left handed boy born the second week of March would behave any differently than everyone else in these LDL studies? Not really. Especially if they are eating a standard American diet or a low -fat diet as was almost exclusively studied in every cholesterol or statin trial.

Here’s the more important question. Is there reason to believe individuals on a healthy, real foods, LCHF diet would behave any differently than everyone else in the decades of lipid and statin studies?

There absolutely is reason to believe they may behave differently. There is not clear proof, but there is plenty of reason to suspect it.

Think about the benefits of a LCHF lifestyle.

• Lowers inflammation
• Reverses insulin resistance
• Naturally raises HDL and lowers TG
• Converts majority of LDL particles to larger, more buoyant particles
• Lowers blood pressure
• Reduces visceral adiposity

Could these create an environment where an elevated LDL is less of a concern?

It sure could.

To be clear, I openly acknowledge that we do not have definitive proof that we should have no concern with LDL in this situation. In my opinion, this is a specific scenario that the existing trials simply do not address one way or the other.

So, it seems we have two choices.

1. Since we don’t have any proof we can ignore LDL in this setting, we plug the numbers into the 10-year ASCVD calculator and start a statin if the risk is above 7.5%, or we ask the individual to change their lifestyle in hopes the LDL will come down.
2. If the individual is enjoying multiple health benefits from their lifestyle, and they are rightly concerned about the potential risks of statin therapy, then we can follow them for any sign of vascular injury or plaque formation, or any worsening of their inflammatory markers or insulin sensitivity. In the absence of any potentially deleterious changes, we can reason that the risk is low, and the benefits of living the healthy lifestyle may outweigh the risks.

The “problem” is that the second option requires a detailed discussion of the risks and benefits. It requires close monitoring and follow up. It requires us to think outside general guidelines and consider everyone as an individual with their own unique circumstance. These are qualities that our current healthcare system sorely lacks.  Yet that is the exact care that each individual deserves.

What do we do in the meantime?

I hope someday soon we will have definitive long-term evidence that a high number of large buoyant LDL particles along with elevated HDL, low TG and low inflammatory markers is perfectly safe.

Until that day, we will have to continue to talk to our patients. To see them as individuals. To weigh the lifestyle benefits with the possible risks. That includes seeing the risks in real numbers- not quoting a 30% benefit with statin therapy. Instead, having a real discussion that statins may reduce your risk a heart attack by 0.6% with an increased risk of muscle aches, an increased risk of diabetes, and a potential increased risk for cognitive and neurological dysfunction.

And we will have to understand that the answer won’t be the same for each person. And we can be OK with that.

So, do you have to worry about your LDL? I don’t know. But I welcome the opportunity to explore the question and reach the best answer for you.

Do you have questions about what your lipids may mean for you? What they mean when taken in the context of your lifestyle and overall health picture? If so, you may want to learn more about my Health Coaching Consult.

Thanks for reading,

Bret Scher, MD FACC

Here it is again. The term “healthy” connected as a descriptor.

We see it all the time. Healthy Whole Grains. It reminds me of the common use of “fruits and vegetables,” as if they are one in the same.

Are whole grains, by definition, “healthy?”

For a full, in depth description, see the Whole Grains Guide on Diet Doctor, where I was the medical editor and reviewer.

For the quick answer, let’s leave it as a “maybe.”

If you choose to eat refined grains, white flour, processed snack foods, in essence the Standard American Diet, then switching to whole grains will almost certainly improve your health. And that is where the majority evidence in favor of whole grains stops. Compared to refined grains, they are great.

Who should eat whole grains?

If you are insulin sensitive, live in a society where you are physically active for most the day, eat fewer calories than most industrialized nations, and maintain a healthy body weight, then whole grains can be a healthy part of your diet. Observation of the Blue Zone countries demonstrate that whole grains can be part of a healthy lifestyle in that setting.

We cannot, however, extrapolate those findings above to apply to all Americans, Europeans, Asians etc. and say whole grains are by definition “healthy.”

Who should not eat whole grains?

If you are metabolically unhealthy with diabetes, metabolic syndrome or insulin resistance (estimated to be 88% of all Americans), then whole grains are anything but “healthy.” Borrow a continuous glucose monitor for a day and see how your blood glucose responds to whole grains. If you aren’t perfectly metabolically healthy, it isn’t pretty.

Instead, if you eat a whole-foods, low carb diet without grains and sugars, then whole grains have no necessary role and no association with health.

Enjoy the more detailed guide from DietDoctor.

Thanks for reading,

Bret Scher, MD FACC

There’s a common assumption in the medical and nutrition world that a low carb, high fat diet, like a ketogenic diet, will automatically increase one’s risk for heart disease. However, it’s crucial for us to realize that this assumption is inaccurate and not supported by data.

In fact, it’s been well documented that low carb diets can help someone reverse type 2 diabetes and improve metabolic health, changes that dramatically lower one’s cardiac risk. Research and clinical experience supports that a properly formulated low-carb diet can help someone improve, rather than worsen, their heart health.

But many may wonder, how can this be true when I’ve heard that eating fat is bad for us and bad for our hearts?

A big problem comes from assuming that our bodies react the same way to a diet high in carbs + fat as we do to a diet LOW in carbs and high in fat. The truth is that our bodies react dramatically differently to those two versions of a high-fat diet.

How It Works

You see, when we eat lots of carbs, our body uses the carbs as fuel first. Therefore, we won’t burn the fat for energy, and we end up storing it as adipose or fat stores. But when we eat a very low carb diet, our bodies prefer to burn the fat for energy, and therefore there is much less left over to store as body fat. This is dramatically different from a high carb diet!

Studies also demonstrate that people eating a low carb, high fat diet naturally reduce their calories, thus eating less and losing weight seemingly without trying. But those eating high fat and high carb diets tend to eat more calories and gain weight.

So you can see how we can’t just refer to a “high fat diet” as if it is one thing. It makes a big difference if it is also a high carb or low carb diet.

The Main Contributors

Let’s review the main contributors to heart disease, and see how a low carb, high fat diet impacts them.

1- Blood pressure
One study demonstrated a ketogenic diet lowers blood pressure better than the DASH diet, the diet previously felt to be the best for blood pressure management. And others have shown safe and effective blood pressure lowering when starting a low carb, high fat diet that is similar to a low-fat diet.

2- Type 2 Diabetes
Numerous studies demonstrate the efficacy of low carb diets for treating and even reversing type 2 diabetes. Since diabetes is a major contributor to heart disease, reversing it will significantly improve one’s heart health.

3- Inflammation
Ketogenic diets have been shown to reduce many markers of inflammation, including the commonly used CRP.

4- Triglycerides and HDL cholesterol
Having low triglycerides and normal to mildly elevated HDL cholesterol levels are predictive markers of better heart health, likely because they occur with good metabolic health. Numerous studies demonstrate that ketogenic diets reliably help lower triglycerides and raise HDL, thus improving overall cardiac risk.

5- LDL cholesterol
Many assume that high fat diets raise LDL cholesterol. But again, that is not the case. Multiple studies demonstrate no net change in LDL on a ketogenic diet compared to a low fat diet. In fact, one analysis of multiple studies found a net reduction in LDL particles for those following a ketogenic diet.

Important to Note

However, there is a subset of individuals who can see a dramatic rise in their LDL cholesterol when following a ketogenic diet. These so-called Lean Mass Hyper Responders, have unique physiology that predisposes them to an increase in LDL. But it’s important to realize that these individuals are the minority, not the majority. And there’s even emerging evidence suggesting that elevated LDL may not place these individuals at a higher risk, although with much still to learn.

In Summary

The data does not support the assumption that low carb, high fat diets increase heart disease risk. In fact, many studies demonstrate overall improvement in most, if not all, cardiac risk factors. We need to stop assuming all high fat diets are the same, and realize the unique heart health-improving impact of low carb/high fat diets.

If you would like to learn more about the misperception and misunderstanding about ketosis and heart disease risk, please see the video links listed here:

Does Keto Cause Heart Disease?

Debunking a study claiming low carb diets cause heart disease

Analysis of a study demonstrating lowering of cardiac risk with low
carb diets

Thanks for reading,

Bret Scher MD FACC

Do we have to avoid meat if we have high homocysteine levels? Not really.

What our body does with homocysteine is more important than our food intake. I thought this was easier to explain in video form, so you can see my 4 minute explanation here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYx4qvYy6_4&ab_channel=LowCarbCardiologist

The bottom line is we need to know our methylation status, make sure we have adequate levels of folate, B12 and B6, and make sure we have adequate choline (found in egg yolks).  If all those are perfect, and we still have elevated homocysteine, then we may want to experiment with a diet low in methionine to see if it makes a difference.

As always, however, we have to evaluate our overall health picture and not get too hung up on one blood marker. The more important questions to ask are how does homocysteine affect my overall health, and how will altering my supplements or diet change the big picture?

Hopefully this helps! Let me know if you have any comments or questions.

Thanks for reading (and watching!)

Bret Scher MD FACC

45 million Americans “should” take statins. Are you one of them?

 It may surprise you to find out that you might be. When your doctor plugs your information into a cardiac risk calculator, he or she may tell you that you should to take a statin.

You may not feel bad. You may not have many other cardiovascular risk factors. Yet you may be labelled with the “disease” of elevated cholesterol.

“New” Guidelines- Questionable Sources, Questionable Guidelines

Why are so many more previously healthy Americans now being treated for high cholesterol? We can thank the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines, which increased the intensity with which physicians prescribe statins.

Interestingly, these were not based on any new data. Instead, they were based on new interpretations of old data, much of which has not been made available for third party reviewers. None the less, it is now recommended that physicians consider prescribing a statin to anyone with a 5% 10-year risk of cardiac disease (increased from a previous 20% risk).

To me it seems that a recommendation to dramatically increase the use of these drugs should save lives left and right and have almost no down side.  Unfortunately, that is not the case.

Don’t get me wrong. Statins are not useless. They can reduce the incidence of heart attacks and strokes. For someone who has never had a heart attack (referred to as primary prevention) we need to treat between 60 and 104 people for 5 years to prevent one heart attack without any significant difference in the risk of dying.

That’s a little underwhelming, is it not? That seems like a “shotgun” approach where you send a hundred bullets out knowing that one will hit the right person (in this case getting hit by a bullet is a good thing). It doesn’t have to be this way.

In addition, statins are not perfect drugs. For every 50 people treated over five years there will be one new case of diabetes. There will also be at least 10% risk of muscle aches and pains with potential damage to the mitochondria (the energy producing part of the cell), and may even be linked to onset of dementia and memory dysfunction.

A system that potentially harms more people than it helps doesn’t seem like a viable solution to me. We can do better.

Better Define Your Risk

The problem is that our medical culture emphasizes prescribing drugs more than further defining your risk, and more than exploring alternatives to reducing your risk.

The current cardiac risk calculator uses:

• Age
• Gender
• Race
• Total cholesterol
• HDL
• Blood pressure or previous diagnosis of hypertension
• Diagnosis of diabetes
• Smoking status

Those are all reasonable initial risk factors to evaluate. But doesn’t it make sense that if we are using a drug that will only benefit one in 100, maybe we should try to further define those at high risk? To me that is a no-brainer.

For instance, one study showed that by measuring a coronary calcium score on statin eligible individuals, we could reclassify 50% of them so that they no longer “qualify” for statin treatment. We can avoid an enormous number of statin prescriptions with one simple test. A test that is readily available now. A test that has minimal risk (very low radiation dose, and a small chance of incidental findings), and is relatively low cost (about $100).

And we don’t have to stop there.

The Scripps Research Institute has developed an app to allow people to use their genetic information to better define their risks. This could potentially be used to define those who are not at high genetic risk for heart disease and therefore would likely not benefit from statin therapy.

Now we are starting to get somewhere. What if we could better define cardiac risk so that one in 5 people benefit from a statin, as opposed to the current 1 in 100? That is an admirable goal.

Even Better Than A Statin

Once we better define our risk, let’s not forget all the alternative to statins.

One recent study demonstrated that even those at the highest genetic risk for heart disease can cut their risk in half with healthy lifestyle habits (eating healthy, getting regular physical activity, not smoking and not being overweight). And that was the highest risk group! That’s likely just as good as, if not better than, a statin could do.

So why don’t we write prescriptions for intensive healthy lifestyle education programs instead of drugs?

Lifestyle changes are “harder.” Lifestyle changes take longer to see results. Lifestyle changes require more education, encouragement and follow up.

Do you know what else is associated with healthy lifestyle changes? Decreased risk of heart attack, strokes and death. Decreased risk of diabetes, high blood pressure and depression. And the only side effects are feeling better, having more energy, and being in control of your health.

That sounds like something that is well worth the extra work, the needed patience, and the more vigorous follow-up. Don’t you agree?

Start Asking Questions

So, what should you do if your doctor recommends a statin? Start asking questions. Lots of them.

• How high is your calculated cardiovascular risk?
• How much will a statin reduce that risk?
• What else can be done to better define your risk (i.e. coronary calcium score)?
• What else can be done to lower your risk (i.e. intensive lifestyle modifications)?

Ask yourself questions as well.

• How can I improve my nutrition to focus on a vegetable based, real food, Mediterranean style eating that focuses on healthy fats and appropriate proportions of high quality animal products?
• How can I improve my daily physical activities in addition to increasing my weekly exercise?
• How can I improve my stress management and sleep habits?

Remember, the benefits of statins are small. Not zero, but small.

Also, remember that statins have not been directly compared to healthy lifestyle habits. We don’t know if they add anything to a comprehensive lifestyle modification program. In fact, I would wager that if you have healthy eating habits, you get regular physical activity, you exercise regularly, and you practice regular stress management, then statins will not reduce your cardiovascular risk at all.

It may seem like a bold prediction, but to me it seems obvious.

Unfortunately we will likely never see a head-to-head study between statins and healthy lifestyle interventions (I discuss the specifics of the study I would like to see in my prior blog post here).

We can do better than a drug

In the end, remember that we can do better than drugs. We can be in control of our health. We can achieve real health that is not dependent on blood tests or medications.

So, don’t blindly accept a prescription for a statin (or any drug for that matter) without further defining your risk, and without further exploring your alternatives. You and your health deserve at least that much.

Thanks for reading.

Bret Scher, MD FACC

Cardiologist, author, founder of Boundless Health

www.DrBretScher.com

Action Item:

If you are on a statin, or any drug for that matter, make sure you ask your doctor why you are on it, exactly what benefit you should expect, and what the potential short- and long-term side effects are. Also, ask what the alternatives are, specifically regarding your lifestyle and healthy habits. If you aren’t getting adequate answers, ask me! info@drbretscher.com. I welcome your emails.