Heart Healthy Eating

[Turbys_1700]

In central Texas all the restaurants insist on bombarding veggies with fat, either bacon, butter or oils. Which restaurants do you go to?

What about meat? Are you on any statins?

I eat fish usually broiled...
I eat some red meat but not a lot...
No statins...
My current medicines include Meloxicam for arthritis with an addition of Glucosamine...
I also take Mycardis for blood pressure but it is in small dosage along with the Meloxicam...
Everything was normal for my blood work...

 

[arrow]

I went to a healthy shrimp website and the only food they could compare it to to sound even a bit heart healthy was eggs. It made me laugh. So if you want to consume it in "MODERATION" you will probably will just get a moderate heart attack. I really need to change the title of this thread to "Heart Healthy Eating for Preventing and Reversing Heart Disease". Every animal product advertiser wants to say how healthy their product is compared to another animal product instead of comparing them to plants when it comes to heart health.

Advertisers have a sales stake. They do not care about the stake they put in your heart. Speaking of which. I looked up lobster for you because I know you like it. Its fat content is nil and its cholesterol is more of the hdl variety. You could probably have it 2 or 3 times a year without consequence even if you are food sensitive in this way.

I ate nuts like crazy. Almonds are supposed to increase your hdl and lower your ldl. In my case my hdl did go up to 68 but my ldl came along with it. My ratio was just under 4 to 1. I gave up the nuts and my hdl went to 51 but my ldl dropped only 30 points and now my ratio is even worse at 4.5 to 1. My next lipid test is going to be patterned because I refuse to be driven nuts by everyone who says things are good for you.

 

[txdon]

Don,
It would be interesting to know your TG/HDL ratio, your CRP after being off statins, and if you take daily aspirin?

I'm not off statins I'm on a low dose 20mg Simvistatin. When I wasn't on any, my LDL was 90, which is ok unless you have a cardiologist, then it has to be less than 70. My body is producing the cholesterol, I am not eating any, hence my heart disease. Some people when they eat a high fat/cholesterol meal their body compensates by producing less cholesterol, like my brother. I read an article a few days ago that said 30% of people have the gene like mine that food does not trigger a reduction in cholesterol production. That is why my cholesterol really spiked up to close to 400 after a DR. took my cholesterol 2 hours after I had a meal, this was 15 years ago. I did not understand what was going on then and blamed it on the McDonald's hamburger I had for lunch.


Egon, I know you are just mentioning the food you like but for those who look at the last page and see scallops with olive oil they may think it is heart healthy food from the title it is under. I just want to let them know not only that it is not but why it is not, and it's not my opinion but from a Dr. and studies.

Brin; hmmm, ignore the naysayers, your probably right, but it's hard when mis-information is given as fact and you know the fallacy, and you know others reading this thread may not catch the misinformation.

Arrow, Lobster was my last meat meal over a year ago, I did not enjoy it. Sometimes it's more of what you don't eat that can improve your health than what you eat. I did the almond thing too several months before my Heart attack.
The way HDL was explained to my by the Dr. is that HDL is the garbage truck that carries off the bad LDL. It makes sense that the HDL will go up and down with the LDL. My Cardiologist and Dr Esselstyn do not seem overly concerned about the HDL only the LDL and total cholesterol number that also includes the triglycerides calculation.

I want to thank everyone that has and is contributing to this thread. It is keeping me on my toes and encouraging continued research.

 

[pacerron]

I'm not off statins I'm on a low dose 20mg Simvistatin. When I wasn't on any, my LDL was 90, which is ok unless you have a cardiologist, then it has to be less than 70. My body is producing the cholesterol, I am not eating any, hence my heart disease. Some people when they eat a high fat/cholesterol meal their body compensates by producing less cholesterol, like my brother. QUOTE]
Don,
The only reason I inquired about your TG/HDL, your CRP, and aspirin regimen is that many of the variations in heart disease described by "Arrow" previously
can be analyzed this way. With the type of diet and exercise you have adopted your TG should be very low and the ratio to HDL should probably be less than one. Less than 2 is considered good. Chronic inflamation which can be another factor in heart disease, as well as many others, is often tested by C-reactive-protein and treated with Statins, aspirin, or both. Your devotion to research, analysis, and recovery are very commendable and your in depth sharing of your experience with others may help save someone's life.
Ron

 

[arrow]

I'm not off statins I'm on a low dose 20mg Simvistatin. When I wasn't on any, my LDL was 90, which is ok unless you have a cardiologist, then it has to be less than 70. My body is producing the cholesterol, I am not eating any, hence my heart disease. Some people when they eat a high fat/cholesterol meal their body compensates by producing less cholesterol, like my brother. QUOTE]
Don,
The only reason I inquired about your TG/HDL, your CRP, and aspirin regimen is that many of the variations in heart disease described by "Arrow" previously
can be analyzed this way. With the type of diet and exercise you have adopted your TG should be very low and the ratio to HDL should probably be less than one. Less than 2 is considered good. Chronic inflamation which can be another factor in heart disease, as well as many others, is often tested by C-reactive-protein and treated with Statins, aspirin, or both. Your devotion to research, analysis, and recovery are very commendable and your in depth sharing of your experience with others may help save someone's life.
Ron

I agree wholeheartedly Don. It is you we should thank for your broaching a very misunderstood subject. When I watch shows like Swamp Loggers ( I wonder where they went?) and I see how these folks body types are and how they eat, I cringe at the thought that this very nice and salt of the earth group of people are on the verge of having some real serious health issues. Hopefully your post will indeed contribute to the well being of some very nice people here on TBN as well.

 

[txdon]

With the type of diet and exercise you have adopted your TG should be very low and the ratio to HDL should probably be less than one. Less than 2 is considered good. Chronic inflamation which can be another factor in heart disease, as well as many others, is often tested by C-reactive-protein and treated with Statins, aspirin, or both. Your devotion to research, analysis, and recovery are very commendable and your in depth sharing of your experience with others may help save someone's life.
Ron

I'll ask about the C-reactive-protein. I don't think they normally test for it. Would the C-reactive protein be up from a knee injury?

Ron, I took a (fasting) drug store cholesterol test last week.
Total 152, HDL46, Trig.90, LDL 87, TC/HDL ratio 3.3, Glucose 96
My LDL was up 18 points at 87 ???? Since my eating is exactly the same it is something else, either:
1. The drugstore had a hard tome getting blood from the prick and had to use two plungers, and took a long time.
2. Inflammation, I injured my knee moving large rocks. Also doing less exercise because of knee.

The cardiologist is sending me to a lab tomorrow to rule out #1. If it is still over 70 I'll have to go back to the original statin dose till I figure this out.

 

[pacerron]

I'll ask about the C-reactive-protein. I don't think they normally test for it. Would the C-reactive protein be up from a knee injury?

Ron, I took a (fasting) drug store cholesterol test last week.
Total 152, HDL46, Trig.90, LDL 87, TC/HDL ratio 3.3, Glucose 96
My LDL was up 18 points at 87 ???? Since my eating is exactly the same it is something else, either:
1. The drugstore had a hard tome getting blood from the prick and had to use two plungers, and took a long time.
2. Inflammation, I injured my knee moving large rocks. Also doing less exercise because of knee.

The cardiologist is sending me to a lab tomorrow to rule out #1. If it is still over 70 I'll have to go back to the original statin dose till I figure this out.

Don,
I can't answer your questions; there are too many variables.
The ratio I was interested in Trig/HDL=1.95 is pretty good by the numbers.
Knowing what it was before your heart attack in comparison would tell a lot more. This is an indication of the small sticky stuff "Arrow" was talking about that cuts loose all at once and does the damage.
But... they are only numbers and ratios that researchers define and change from time to time based on historical records and events. What is safe and right for you may be far different than the normal ranges.
You know as your HDL ( the good guy) goes up it improves the ratios.
A drugstore stick test might be reason to get further tests but it is a different test, different equipment, and different quality controls and procedures from your line that is being tracked by your cardiologist, so it may be a worthless fluke that is causing you undo stress.

There have been changes in your lifestyle/activity due to the knee injury.
You say you are eating exactly the same. Were you at a constant weight before moderating the exercise; have you gained weight recently; are you still drinking as much water now as you did before you moderated your activities? You are probably sweating less, so you may be drinking less without realizing it.
The main thing is to have a cardiologist that has experience and that you are confident in following his/her recommendations. In this information era of the internet you can diagnose yourself with anything and everything that all the other folks that are looking for answers to their problems have expounded upon on various forums.
You know that your problems are primarily related to cholesterol. Just as many folks with perfectly fine cholesterol numbers have heart attacks from other causes as "Arrow" alluded to before. A big one being stress both physical and mental.
I am not a doctor. Please continue following the direction of your doctors there on the front line. I do feel it is ok to question your doctors prognosis and draw them out a little bit. The doctors that spend 5 minutes with you for $1k and only know you by what they glance at on your chart a minute before opening the door are not following their oath.

 

[houstonscott]

Anyone see or read the recent study that determined that eating fried foods had no correlation to heart health. Can someone explain what their definition of healthy is?

HS

 

[arrow]

I'll ask about the C-reactive-protein. I don't think they normally test for it. Would the C-reactive protein be up from a knee injury?

Ron, I took a (fasting) drug store cholesterol test last week.
Total 152, HDL46, Trig.90, LDL 87, TC/HDL ratio 3.3, Glucose 96
My LDL was up 18 points at 87 ???? Since my eating is exactly the same it is something else, either:
1. The drugstore had a hard tome getting blood from the prick and had to use two plungers, and took a long time.
2. Inflammation, I injured my knee moving large rocks. Also doing less exercise because of knee.

The cardiologist is sending me to a lab tomorrow to rule out #1. If it is still over 70 I'll have to go back to the original statin dose till I figure this out.

Depends on when you got the injury. CPR comes and leaves very quickly unless of course you have a steady point of bodily inflammation such as arthritis.

 

[arrow]

Anyone see or read the recent study that determined that eating fried foods had no correlation to heart health. Can someone explain what their definition of healthy is?

HS

I for one have not seen it. Health to me is to be either free of or minimally affected by ailments that would undermine soundness and longevity of body and mind. Breaking your wrist for example is a minimal affectation of good health. Throat cancer is otherwise.

 

[arrow]

Anyone see or read the recent study that determined that eating fried foods had no correlation to heart health. Can someone explain what their definition of healthy is?

HS

Ok I looked this up. First, if its the same one, its a European-Meditarranian study. 1. They used olive or sunflower oil and not lard or vegetable oil. 2. Most of the frying was of fish and not chicken or french fries. 3. they did not reuse any of the oils which looms large. The study was culminated in 2004 which means other studies since then could effect this study. Basically it was not a study that parallels the American way of the fried food eating habits so your heading sentence can be misleading and misinterpreted if indeed you are referring to this European study..

 

[dmccarty]

Anyone see or read the recent study that determined that eating fried foods had no correlation to heart health. Can someone explain what their definition of healthy is?

HS

What works for you.

I have a family member who is very morbidly obese. They are married to a person that is thin as a rail yet they eat the same foods. The thinner person certainly gets a bit of more exercise compared to the other spouse but not enough to justify the size difference. These two used to get up every morning and get a Big Gulp for breakfast. They would have multiple Big Gulps during the day and I am not talking sugar free. I figured out once that they got much more than their daily calorie requirement just in the sugar in the soda. Then of course they ate junk food all day. One is fat and the other is not. Genetics.

There was a story in the WSJ in the last week or so about MD's needing to pay more attention to a patient's family history regarding heart attacks. Genetics matter. The study they mention could give one the odds of having a heart attack at a given age depending on family history. My family, on both sides, live into their 80's and 90's, going back to my great grand parents. The study said that if your close family did not have a heart attack before the age of 60 you do not have to worry about having one. My family has other health issues but heart attack is not an issue.

I don't take the family genetics to mean I can drink a half dozen Big Gulps a day though. Makes me sick thinking about it. I am loosing weight, modifying my diet to be what I think is healthier, and getting even more exercise. But if tomorrow the cafe has that Cinnamon bun I have wanted all week, I might eat it without feeling much guilt.

Later,
Dan

 

[pacerron]

What works for you.

. These two used to get up every morning and get a Big Gulp for breakfast. They would have multiple Big Gulps during the day and I am not talking sugar free. I figured out once that they got much more than their daily calorie requirement just in the sugar in the soda.
Later,
Dan

Soda, soda, soda.... My wife was plagued by extremely high Cholesterol values for many years. Taking statins didn't help much. She always had 1 can of soda for lunch and some fruit juice for supper. She hated WATER and rarely
drank any, so the water her system acquired was from just what was in the food and the 2 drinks, one of which was carbonated, and both loaded with sugar. I finally convinced her to drink no pop or juice and drink water as a replacement plus at least 3 glasses of water per day for a month before her cholesterol test a couple years ago. Also no mayonaise for a week before. Her numbers were in the good normal range and have been ever since.
She has grown to like good, cold, untreated, water from our well and drinks jugs of it while enjoying her flower and garden work as well as at every meal.

So as the saying goes, "you are what you eat" plus "what you drink."

 

[houstonscott]

I for one have not seen it. Health to me is to be either free of or minimally affected by ailments that would undermine soundness and longevity of body and mind. Breaking your wrist for example is a minimal affectation of good health. Throat cancer is otherwise.

Most people I ask can't really answer. Your right though the only way to answer in the reverse. Healthy means not sick or injured. What I don't buy into is that eating some food that is labeled healthy over something else can't really be true. No food you eat can guarantee you will not get sick or injured. And converse of that eating fried foods is not a guarantee you will get sick. I don't believe they are connected at all.

HS

 

[txdon]

Houston Scott, I can answer your question after glancing at the article of the study. I'll be back on this evening with the answer. Till then don't eat fried foods. The way I read the story the title of the article should have been just the opposite. Media does that sometimes. Later.

 

[arrow]

Most people I ask can't really answer. Your right though the only way to answer in the reverse. Healthy means not sick or injured. What I don't buy into is that eating some food that is labeled healthy over something else can't really be true. No food you eat can guarantee you will not get sick or injured. And converse of that eating fried foods is not a guarantee you will get sick. I don't believe they are connected at all.

HS

You raise a pertinent point Houston. First there is the labeling of food by manufacturers that state "healthy" but are really not. Certainly one must take their pronouncement with a grain of salt as with the example you gave. Secondly there is genetics. What effects one may not undermine another at all. Thirdly health experts speak in generalities. They make statement based on a consortium and not the individual. Your last sentence however can be dangerous as food can most certainly effect many individuals health. Personally, I do not think there is a thing on this earth that can make a person live longer. I do think there are plenty of things however that can shorten a persons natural life expectancy. Eating an abundance of fried fatty food and smoking and having a high stress life are examples of longevity stoppers for some if not most. A had a brother inlaw who smoked since he was 16, had a cholesterol count of almost 400 (genetics), ate fast food every day and his job entailed fixing giant printing presses all over the world. He died at 33 years of age from a massive coronary. Had he not smoked, been aware of his genetic problem of over production of cholesterol, ate a better diet and perhaps, he could of kept his job and still be alive today.

 

[beppington]

Anyone see or read the recent study that determined that eating fried foods had no correlation to heart health. Can someone explain what their definition of healthy is?

HS

I think my definition of healthy would be something like:

Feeling "good" (7 or higher on a 1 to 10 scale) with the expectation of living relatively pain free (pain on the order of 3 or lower on a 1 to 10 scale) now & for the foreseeable future (no apparent end in sight for this state of being).

OK, now I'm going to go look up others' definitions of "healthy"

 

[dmccarty]

I think my definition of healthy would be something like:

Feeling "good" (7 or higher on a 1 to 10 scale) with the expectation of living relatively pain free (pain on the order of 3 or lower on a 1 to 10 scale) now & for the foreseeable future (no apparent end in sight for this state of being).

You must have a bad back, or had a bad back, to come up with that definition.

That is a good definition. :thumbsup:

Later,
Dan

 

[beppington]

You must have a bad back, or had a bad back, to come up with that definition.

No, no, not at all. I've always been very healthy. Just that, at 43, I'm trying to be reasonable :thumbsup: IOW prepared for some variance, some reduction in the 9+ I've lived with most of my life so far ... IOOW not keep my hopes up too high

 

[pacerron]

No, no, not at all. I've always been very healthy. Just that, at 43, I'm trying to be reasonable :thumbsup: IOW prepared for some variance, some reduction in the 9+ I've lived with most of my life so far ... IOOW not keep my hopes up too high

By the time your 70 your definition and/or numbers will have to adjust