New Hypolipemiting Association.

Well, as you know the objectives in LDL cholesterol values ​​in diabetics are increasingly low (I believe that in some cases too ... an objective below 100 seems appropriate to me).

As you also know, we have statins for this (simvastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin, atorvastatin, rosuvastatin ...) and in cases of intolerance to statins we have ezetimiba (which is also used associated in statins in patients who do not achieve the objectives ofldl cholesterol).

Well, if some of you are taking Simvastatina and Ezetimiba, a commercial brand has come out that has both in the same pill (it is called Inegy, and it has 10mg of Ezetimiba - commercial marca Ezetrol - and 20 or 40 of simvastatin).

Anyway, it is a possibility of taking two pills in one.

All the best

Hello Pedro:
You could tell me your opinion about everything that is written lately in various fields (journalistic, medical, etc.), about statins.
There are those who point out that it is the fashion medication and that it does not really avoid cardinal risks.
In addition to the adverse effects that are attributed to them.

Well, I have to give you two opinions, one as a doctor and one as a person:

As a doctor there are studies that points out that the reduction of LDL cholesterol is beneficial in terms of cardiovascular risk.The beneficial thing is the reduction, not the use of statins itself, and I think there are other ways to lower cholesterol such as a correct aerobic exercise and some foods such as soy lecithin and linen (in case of the LINO LOW also triglycerides) also triglycerides).Also in diabetes the beneficial is the metabolic control and not the hehco itself of taking an antidiabetic (in fact I insist a lot on the performance for this aspect).But returning to the theme of cholesterol, it is more than evident that cholesterol plates (calloma calls) exist in the coronary of subjects who have infarmed.The question is where and what means are we willing to use the cholesterol?LDL objectives below 140 in non -diabetics and 100 in diabetics can become reasonable (Anque less than 100 is difficult to achieve).The important thing is not to go crazy with a figure, since this experience is relatively recent.A few years ago some experts already proposed to lower the LDL of 70 in diabetics, do we leave the diabetic without cholesterol?What I mean is that you have to assume acts whose relationship benefit predicted for the future is acceptable, and today we have no data on the effects of lowering so much cholesterol to so much term (I remember that cholesterol is a natural component of thecell membranes).In summary, an objective of LDL 100 seems appropriate as long as I do not lose my head (110 is also fine) and I always prefer to use natural means (sport or functional foods such as soy lecithin and linen, and when I say natural I do not meanto concentrated tablets).However, I speak of this new commercial brand because surely some of you take both active ingredients and you can take them and a only one.

As a person and linking with not losing my head I think that you have to keep in mind that all data are manipulated in a degree that we cannot evaluate and we are all part of that lie.That is why I insist a lot about being cautious and reasonable and not to give ourselves with a certain number or drugs.Around all this there are generated economic and political interests that has a lot of weight (I know, it is a shame but it is so).I also insist as a person again to always use hygienicodietic measures (as well -made sport) correct food and use of functional foods (I did not write it before, a functional food is one that has a property in addition to the purely nutritiouscholesterol) and if it is necessary to resort to drugs within reasonable limits.Anyway, "Mess healthy in corpore health

By the way, I forgot ... In general, the side effects of the statins are not important (you already know that a few years ago a statin was withdrawn that did produce them).The problem usually comes with polymedication (we have elderly with a diabetes type2 of short evolution taking 20 pills, and there if there is a risk of serious interactions ...) and with the misuse of the drugs (it serves as an example the American culture: I enter theMcDonald, like my bigmac and at the exit I took my atorvastatin and Aquñi has not happened).In general, with the drugs I usually use the attitude of not being the first or the last to use new drugs, and leave the very new for very selected cases (for example I am now using two new drugs that have nothing to do with diabetes (they areFor chest angina and forcardiac arrhythmias), and I do it because they are giving me very good results in patients who had no choice.
I hope the answer will serve you, little else and I will write to you the Quijote ...
All the best

Hello Pedro.
Just these days the results of Angel cholesterol have been: LDL cholesterol (calculated) 75, HDL 35 cholesterol and cholesterol (I suppose total :? :) 125. The endocrine said it was a guarantee not to have heart attacks, spills ...Is it possible that this lower type of cholesterol is also genetic?In the analytics of my husband (non -diabetic) he always called me to attention that his cholesterol was below the minimum and is not a person we say he takes care of how for those levels.Now Angel has it too.I guess it's a point in your favor: D
Greetings.

Yes, genetics greatly influences cholesterol metabolism and it is shown that high levels of LDL and even more low levels of HDL worsen thistle health.Those figures are great ... I don't know if you will be using any drug for it.

All the best

Thank you Pedro, above all it has helped me to reaffirm what I think and it is basically that first of any health problem, you have to act with natural media, diet, exercise, relaxation, etc.
That to make us we are always on time.

The brand you mean for soy and linen lecithin and that another way is to take it without pills.
Thank you.

No, neither my son (diabetic) nor my husband (non -diabetic) take any medication to have it low.It is more or do not care what they eat: shock: ... on the contraryObesa, I am not up to sugar, I do not have the tension ... I recommended the drinks those who help reduce cholesterol and I began to consume soybeans, the last analysis the LDL had it in the normal andThe total 240. I think my problem is that I do not metabolize the fats well, I have the very low triglycerides.
Antoni, I think you could drink those drinks, there is also butter that reduces cholesterol ... but Pedro will tell you.
All the best.

hello,

The LDL cholesterol "the bad" always have below 100 (over 70), instead the HDL cholesterol "the good" I have very high, in the last analytical it had 72 (almost within the ranges that marks 40-60) but the previous one had more than 100 and the sum of the two cholesterols gave me over normal (having the normal ranges) the endocrine told me that I would not worry, but in the work analytics that the work that the resultsIt does a computer told me to control fat intake.What do you think?

The soy lecithin is sold in granulated boats, and the linen can be taken in granos or in bran (in any case they are natural and unconciated products of natural products in tablets).When some nature is processed and compressed, it is already manipulated, and therefore natural NIES is neither at the dose of the original food.

Regarding cholesterol there are two bad situations, high LDL and low HDL.The opposite situations are considered cardioprotective, although the global cholesterol figures are high.Therefore, and regardless of the total cholesterol figures a high HDL and a low LDL is a magnificent situation.

Regarding food (butter, yogues ...) that cholesterol lowers are based on mono and polyunsaturated fatty acids (this is a chemical quality that makes these fats improve the lipid profile, that is, lower LDL and increase HDL).These fats are present in our olive oil, blue fish ... two aspects must be taken into account: first the amount, and second the population in which they are used:

Regarding the quantity, a little olive oil per day is good (the fats that you eat are good in a moderate amount).What is not good is to have a glass of oil a day as some do (although the fats are of quality, if you take a lot are not good).So be careful with those "foods that lower cholesterol" not to take them in a lot.

On the other hand, populations are genetically selected for foods included in their culture, so I doubt that olive oil is equally effective in for example the Chinese population.In this regard, the Mediterranean diet is ideal if you eat moderately.It is being seen that now that people tend to eat more than the account is no longer so good.

I hope you solve the doubt: good food for cholesterol (olive oil, butter with omega 3 and 6 ...) fatty acids ...): yes, but in moderate quantities ...

All the best

My doctor has told me that I have the bad '' '' 'cholesterol especially low, I think I read a figure about 62-64.
Without taking a single pill :?and taking care of what just depending on my diabetes.

Reflot the subject ;-)
After 40 years of type 1 diabetes with optimal control.In the last analysis I get the following data related to cholesterol:
LDL (bad cholesterol): 117
HDL (good cholesterol): 62
Total cholesterol: 197
Triglycerides: 91
The endocrine tells me that having so much diabetic time my cardiovascular risk is high by what sends me simvastatin of 40 mg (one a day).I am really reluctant to it (I already take a pill to control the 10mg enalapril tension).I lean this post in search of "natural" alternatives and talk about soy lecithin.Said all this I wanted to ask you:
1) Does someone take a lecithin to control cholesterol and if it were quantities?
2) Obviously an endocrine will know more than us, but do you really see the simvastatin?(In other places more than global values ​​there is talk of quotient and ratios between total / hdl cholesterol that in my case would be 3.1 value this optimal according to Leo)
Anyway, I appreciate your experiences and opinions about it.
Greetings and thanks in advance

I would look for more opinions, or make me a ca-score or other analysis type lipid profile but take stains with those values ​​....

Thanks Aerr for answering.He told me that in a person without diabetes they were optimal values ​​but in a diabetic to prevent more that LDL cholesterol.I don't know what to do the truth.All the best

Bufff, because as you see mine with 230 total cholesterol .... my endocrine is not the most advanced but in that I found it quite updated, that with the HDL in 90 and the TG in 51 and with my tension, without problem.I am not sure that diabetes generates greater vascular risk, or is the effect of high levels of glucose and excess insulin and liponeogenesis that increases risk.Luck

Thanks again.I think I'm going to try soy lecithin, do you know where to buy it and be 100% natural?Thank you

Pedro Jiménez said:
Well, I have to give you two opinions, one as a doctor and one as a person:

As a doctor there are studies that points out that the reduction of LDL cholesterol is beneficial in terms of cardiovascular risk.The beneficial thing is the reduction, not the use of statins itself, and I think there are other ways to lower cholesterol such as a correct aerobic exercise and some foods such as soy lecithin and linen (in case of the LINO LOW also triglycerides) also triglycerides).Also in diabetes the beneficial is the metabolic control and not the hehco itself of taking an antidiabetic (in fact I insist a lot on the performance for this aspect).But returning to the theme of cholesterol, it is more than evident that cholesterol plates (calloma calls) exist in the coronary of subjects who have infarmed.The question is where and what means are we willing to use the cholesterol?LDL objectives below 140 in non -diabetics and 100 in diabetics can become reasonable (Anque less than 100 is difficult to achieve).The important thing is not to go crazy with a figure, since this experience is relatively recent.A few years ago some experts already proposed to lower the LDL of 70 in diabetics, do we leave the diabetic without cholesterol?What I mean is that you have to assume acts whose relationship benefit predicted for the future is acceptable, and today we have no data on the effects of lowering so much cholesterol to so much term (I remember that cholesterol is a natural component of thecell membranes).In summary, an objective of LDL 100 seems appropriate as long as I do not lose my head (110 is also fine) and I always prefer to use natural means (sport or functional foods such as soy lecithin and linen, and when I say natural I do not meanto concentrated tablets).However, I speak of this new commercial brand because surely some of you take both active ingredients and you can take them and a only one.

As a person and linking with not losing my head I think that you have to keep in mind that all data are manipulated in a degree that we cannot evaluate and we are all part of that lie.That is why I insist a lot about being cautious and reasonable and not to give ourselves with a certain number or drugs.Around all this there are generated economic and political interests that has a lot of weight (I know, it is a shame but it is so).I also insist as a person again to always use hygienicodietic measures (as well -made sport) correct food and use of functional foods (I did not write it before, a functional food is one that has a property in addition to the purely nutritiouscholesterol) and if it is necessary to resort to drugs within reasonable limits.Anyway, "Mess healthy in corpore health

By the way, I forgot ... In general, the side effects of the statins are not important (you already know that a few years ago a statin was withdrawn that did produce them).The problem usually comes with polymedication (we have elderly with a diabetes type2 of short evolution taking 20 pills, and there if there is a risk of serious interactions ...) and with the misuse of the drugs (it serves as an example the American culture: I enter theMcDonald, like my bigmac and at the exit I took my atorvastatin and Aquñi has not happened).In general, with the drugs I usually use the attitude of not being the first or the last to use new drugs, and leave the very new for very selected cases (for example I am now using two new drugs that have nothingWhat to do with diabetes (they are for chest angina and for cardiac arrhythmias), and I do it because they are very good results in patients who had no choice.

I hope the answer will serve you, little else and I will write to you the Quijote ...

GREETING

Use statins as a non -alternative temporary alternative for life since they are associated with myopathies so very careful to use them constantly
greetings!

I think that what you just said is an authentic foggy, and that you have changed your strategy instead of spaming directly comment on my little success and continue announcing your channel and your page
Greetings ... and without acrimony