Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kenton

Kenton's Latest Blood Tests — December 2016

Recommended Posts

I'm a 50yo long-term CR'r (110lb, 5'9 tall, for 10yr) and short-term CE'r (lots of AC; no ice vests, for 3/4 yr).  Of the many differences between my Oct.2014 and Dec.2016 labs (attached), the below seem most relevant:

LDH         167 -> 220  (rf 121-224)

AST           14  -> 20    (rf 0-40)

ALT           12  -> 17     (rf 0-44)

GGT          11 -> 13      (rf 0-65)

Chol,Tot  248 -> 227  (rf 100-199)

Trig            69  -> 77      (rf 0-149)

HDL           99  -> 103     (rf >39)

LDL           135 -> 109     (r f0-99)

Free T        6.8 -> 5.9   (rf 7.2-24)

dhea-slf  126.2 -> 95.3 (rf 71.6-375.4)

Estradiol   <5.1  -> 23     (rf 7.6-42.6)

c-ReactPrt 0.07 -> 0.13  (rf .00-3.0)

I don't post much but am a Founding CR Society Member, consistently current & committed; that's my pitch for help ~any and all comments on the two sets of labs are welcome and highly, highly appreciated. 

TY, HNY, & Keep On Chillin' and Skinnyin' !!  =)

​Kenton

12-28-2016 KRM Labs.pdf

10-7-14 KRM labs.pdf

Edited by Kenton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kenton,

 

(This isn't evidently a science question nor CE-specific, so we might want to move this over into a separate thread in CR Practice).

 

You say this is a "pitch for help;" is there a problem here? Most of your changes look ostensibly favorable, with the exception of the jump in estradiol and LDH ... are you having worrisome symptoms, or is there something else concerning you about the pattern, or ...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the test results look good. Both attachments are for the latest tests. I am not alone in the high TSH result; it might be worth checking T4 and T3. Dean also had the LDH jump, I believe. I prefer lower calcium levels, to avoid buildup in arteries and most CRers seem to lean that way. HDL is remarkably high, but I would favor lower total cholesterol and LDL. That is as high as I recall anyone's specific gravity being. For overall great CR profile, the A1C seemed average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Kenton,

 

FWIW, when I downloaded both results, the 2014 and 2016 were the same. I'm also not sure if there's a "problem" as such, so the following are just observations - I AM NOT A DOCTOR SO TAKE WHAT I SAY WITH A BOULDER OF SALT - based on my imperfect experience/knowledge. While your AST and ALT are definitely within normal range, SPEAKING JUST FROM MY OWN PERSPECTIVE - I would find such a consistent elevation somewhat unnerving. My own AST - ALT numbers are roughly in-line with your 2014 results, but a few years ago I had some stomach pain issues and had a thorough checkup. They found I had some small gallstones, which were overall asymptomatic, but my AST and ALT numbers were as elevated (actually slightly less) than your 2016 numbers, something my physician noted while stressing that those numbers are absolutely fine and unequivocally not to worry about, just elevated VS MY OWN HISTORIC NUMBERS which might indicate mild liver stress. Your LDH is also bumping against the upper limit (while still technically within it). One thing to keep in mind, is that those values can range from lab to lab, and even within the same lab over different time periods. So don't take it as gospel that your numbers are really higher than 2014.

 

The other thing I noted is your LDL. I have similar cholesterol numbers to yours - high TC, high HDL and chronically high LDL no matter what I do diet-wise. However, your lipid profile improved drastically in 2016 - LDL number I can only envy - the lowest I've ever come was below 120, but nowhere near 109. That seems like good news, although your Trig number is a bit high (for a CRONie - again, for a normal ad lib person out there, it's perfectly within range). Now, if you have a particularly suspicious mind, there is precedent for various unwelcome health developments that come accompanied with a drastic change in cholesterol numbers if you have not altered your diet/lifestyle. If the drastic change (LDL 135 --> 109) is the result of diet/lifestyle changes, then no problem, but if it's a complete mystery, then there *might* be other issues happening. Given that your entire profile is better though, lower TC and higher HDL, I suspect it's perfectly fine and unalloyed good news (watch the trigs though - sugar/carb intake). Mind you, I'm saying "good news", because your 2014 numbers are even worse, not "good numbers" objectively, because I believe the latest thinking is that the LDL should be at childhood levels (not much above 70). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(1) pitch for "help" = request for "analysis assistance" (no connotation of distress, pain, illness, or symptom(s) of concern intended).

(2) The high chol #s are hereditary and have, despite efforts, persisted in both me and my identical MD twin for decades.

(3) AlPater and TomBAvoider, I fixed the attachments. ~Thanks.

Edited by Kenton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've been reading the standard lipid tests are quite limited/flawed when it comes to cholesterol.  LDL is typically not directly measured but calculated and the calculation can be inaccurate in some situations.  There are tests such as an NMR lipoprofile which can better measure LDL and give particle sizes and counts as LDL comes in multiple flavors with different risk profiles.  An LP(a) test might also be of value if you think you have a significant risk of cardiovascular disease.

 

Supposedly the most predictive aspect of the standard lipid test is the triglycerides / HDL ratio and yours is off the charts fabulous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Supposedly the most predictive aspect of the standard lipid test is the triglycerides / HDL ratio and yours is off the charts fabulous. 

 

Many people think HDL is "good cholesterol" and therefore the higher the better, but there are limits to this...  

When HDL cholesterol doesn’t protect against heart disease

AND

 

Very high levels of HDL are tied to an increased risk of a major coronary event

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general, it seems the numbers are improving for you from 2014 to 2016 - b. glucose (even if a1c is a beat higher) creatinine, homocysteine, and so on, though I guess some would quibble with the vit. D levels and they certainly have taken quite a jump (supplementation?). Some changes are big percentage-wise but still overwhelmingly good (C-rp). The only thing to watch is a persistently elevated TSH if T4 and T3 levels were to be normal - it's one of those biomarkers you can't watch in isolation if you want to know what's going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×