There are now 32 NHANES participants with lipids & mortality data who have lived to at least age 100 (age + followup > 100yr.), thus earning the designation of "centenarian"
What was mean avg #LDL-C for this group from their bloodwork 15-20yrs prior?
2/4 What was the mean average #HDL#Cholesterol (#HDL-C) for this group from their bloodwork 15-20yrs prior?
3/4 What was the mean average #Triglyceride (TG) levels for this group from their bloodwork 15-20yrs prior?
4/4 BONUS -- while not a complete set, there are 19 of these 32 who also had fasting insulin levels taken.
What was the mean average fasting insulin levels for this group from their bloodwork 15-20yrs prior?
(I know I'll have @BenBikmanPhD attention for this one 😂)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
As usual, I'll give my caveats this is back-of-the-envelope on data I wrangled via CDC on this expansive dataset -- and it's associational, ofc (observational)
So what are the lipids like for those who live to 100yr in NHANES?
2/ Remember, these aren't the lipid levels taken *at* age 100+, it's what their levels where at the time of examination 15-20 years prior.
This is very relevant when considering reverse causality given this extreme gap in time for all who were reaching centenarian status.
2/ CCTA gives a scan of both calcified and non-calcified plaque in the arteries of the heart.
There's an extremely small risk of adverse effects from the contrast dye, and a low exposure to radiation with the latest machines.
However, CCTA scans can be pricy (ie $500-1000)
3/ CAC is just the calcification of the coronary arteries, but it is surprisingly correlative to soft plaque AND is very predictive of future events. Check out @khurramn1's work on this for more info.
It also requires no contrast dye, is lower radiation, and typically $99-300.
2/ "Adiposity-related hypertriglyceridemia is mainly driven by increased numbers of triglyceride-rich VLDLs (which carry the largest proportion of triglycerides in blood). Concurrently, the cholesterol in these lipoproteins also seem to be higher at higher adiposity levels."
3/ And these next sentences are key -- take special note of the underlined text...
I think you make valid points with regard to a diet community having bad actors that can reflect on it, @jerryteixeira -- but I'd push back that one has to tow the party line on high fat and/or high meat in #keto or get hammered.
2/ I myself have brought up #PlantBasedKeto many times over to raise awareness, even though I try to avoid the diet debates. But I've not suffered any repercussions from the keto community.
3/ DietDoctor.com is arguably the largest resource for #LowCarb diet, and in the last couple years have put out a great deal more material on higher protein with lower fat as a diet direction option. Many low carbers prefer this emphasis over higher fat as a %
For one, this editorial is the first of its kind to gather MDs and PhDs together to help develop a clinical position on the #LMHR phenotype and importance of expanding research around this phenomenon.
That's hard to understate!
3/ Typically, there have been just two positions on the topic of high LDL on keto, particularly LMHRs.
- Conventional: LMHR *must* lower LDL/ApoB
- LH skeptic: LMHR can ignore LDL/ApoB
This editorial concludes those with high LDL-c/ApoB from keto "should consider" lowering.
I was originally shooting for a few weeks away, but it stretched into two months.
Honestly, I have to really credit @MichaelMindrum for inspiring me to really commit to this. It was easier than I assumed given the ongoing research efforts.
3/ The #LMHRstudy is nearing recruitment completion!
That said - we still have some participants to go to put us over the top!
So again, *please* visit LMHRstudy.com to see if you or someone you know is eligible for the study.