After regular dosing, my LDL decreased to 72, but my HDL decreased to 36… total cholesterol to HDL ratio increased from 2.6 to 3.5.
Usually my HDL has never budged from ~55.
Last month LDL was 109 and HDL 55 (this was after i took a break from this)
AnUser
#22
What’s wrong with a low HDL-c?
I believe that an HDL higher than your LDL is desirable as HDL tends to counteract the negative effects of LDL. If your LDL =< HDL then your atherosclerotic burden is greatly reduced.
The Cleveland Clinic
Why is HDL called “good cholesterol?”
HDL is the “good cholesterol” because it helps your body get rid of extra cholesterol. This process can lower your risk of cardiovascular disease.
Cholesterol normally travels from your liver to your bloodstream. From there, lipoproteins carry the cholesterol to different cells in your body to support important functions (like helping your body form cell membranes and produce hormones).
But sometimes, there’s too much cholesterol in your blood. It’s more than your body needs. That’s when reverse cholesterol transport helps.
Reverse cholesterol transport is a complex body process, and researchers continue to explore how and when HDL plays a role. What we know is that HDL particles can transport excess cholesterol from your bloodstream back to your liver. Your liver then breaks down this cholesterol and gets it out of your body through your poop.
This is a good thing because too much cholesterol in your blood raises your risk of plaque buildup in your artery walls (atherosclerosis).
Getting rid of extra cholesterol makes HDL the helpful cholesterol. But that’s not all it does. HDL cholesterol also works against inflammation and oxidants to keep your cells strong. And it plays a role in preventing blood clots.
From Poe AI:
Yes, generally, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol is considered “good” cholesterol, and it is desirable for HDL levels to be higher than low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, which is often referred to as “bad” cholesterol.
Recommended Levels:
-
HDL Cholesterol: Higher levels (typically above 60 mg/dL) are associated with a lower risk of heart disease.
-
LDL Cholesterol: Lower levels (typically below 100 mg/dL) are preferred to reduce the risk of cardiovascular issues.
Why It Matters:
-
HDL helps remove other forms of cholesterol from your bloodstream.
-
LDL can build up in the walls of your arteries, leading to atherosclerosis and increasing the risk of heart disease.
Maintaining a balance with higher HDL and lower LDL is important for cardiovascular health. Always consult a healthcare professional for personalized advice and assessment.
AnUser
#26
Do you have an original source for this claim and what do you mean with atherosclerotic burden is greatly reduced? How is that substantiated?
Just to chime in here, while I’ve read that HDL is the “good” cholesterol, in one of the Peter Attia podcasts I think they also said that drugs they’ve found that increase HDL don’t show any benefits, so its more complex than just HDL is good, it seems.
My HDL has also gone down to 50 now on my triple treatment protocol, while my LDL-C is now at 49, and my Triglicerides at 55. With my total cholesterol at 112, and my Total Cholesterol/HDL ratio at 2.2, it seems I’m generally of low risk. So I don’t worry too much about HDL by itself.
Am I wrong in my thinking? I’ve not seen a detailed analysis of the precise tradeoffs of slightly higher LDL-C/APO-B vs. slightly lower HDL.
1 Like
HDL doesn’t reduce plaque but helps reduce the bad cholesterol in your blood. That’s what I’ve gleaned. So, I aim to reduce my ApoB/LDL and keep my HDL above 40. My personal goal is to have an HDL higher than ApoB/LDL yet lower than 80. I’m not really actively trying to increase my HDL unless it falls below 40. Mine is currently 51 while my ApoB/LDL is at 48.
@RapAdmin Seems like we’re lipid-brothers! Same triple therapy, same results. 
1 Like
AnUser
#29
HDL-c is indeed useless for CVD risk, but I’m trying to make other people prove their own statements that way both they and I can learn something. After all it is not the person who is disproving a claim that has the burden of proof. People need to be stop being spoon fed information and take responsibility for their own statements.
1 Like
HDL is for surviving sepsis and endotoxic shock. Higher HDL confers greater survival rate in sepsis. It binds to the endotoxins. It is a simple marker, run in hospital during cases of sepsis, to see whether to book a spot in the morgue
2 Likes
AnUser
#31
Primary source for both of these statements?
HDL-c is indeed useless for CVD risk,
What I posted about HDL reducing CVD risk and arteriosclerosis is from the Cleveland Clinic which is the leading hospital for CVD in the USA and from AI. They both seem to disagree with your assessment that HDL is useless.
In regards to issues of the heart, I’ll trust the Cleveland Clinic and AI more, sorry.
AnUser
#33
I don’t care who you trust more, decisions shouldn’t be made based on trust, but evidence. Expert opinion can be safely placed in the trashbin, near lowest on the evidence hiearchy. If you feel comfortable with that you can believe it. I prefer studies.
No offense intended.
1 Like
You are right. Evidence is highly important. I agree with you and believe the evidence for HDL being useful is lacking but expert opinion does support it. Therefore, I am not prioritizing raising my HDL and am just trying to keep it within the defined optimal range.
No offense taken. It’s good to challenge your beliefs every now and then. 
AnUser
#35
That’s ok. Expert opinion doesn’t lead to anywhere, and historically it doesn’t have the best track record, and one person’s expert is another’s quack, it’s a dead end. I’ll be watching myself like a hawk to not fall into this trap anymore.
2 Likes
Davin8r
#36
So I learned a very important lesson today, after ordering Bemdac EZ (Zydus) to try since I seem to have minimal results from BrilloEZ (Sun Pharma). I was struck by the similarities in packaging and pill appearance, so I looked closely:
So as you can see, NEITHER drug is manufactured by Zydus or Sum Pharma, but rather just MARKETED by them. The drug in both cases is manufactured by the same company: Akums Drugs & Pharmaceuticals.
Has anyone even heard of Akums? How often are we being duped by Indian “brands” that are actually just window dressing?
3 Likes
Beth
#37
I just looked and indeed my Brillo ez says the same thing.
This is concerning because I was willing to go with Brillo EZ because it was being made by one of the largest generic manufacturers
I’m hoping someone with insight can shed some light
1 Like
The question is how often this is the case? How many Indian branded generic “manufacturers” are just marketing companies?
1 Like
My Brillo EZ gave me and my father the results we expected. I still use and trust the brand. Maybe it just doesn’t work well for your biochemistry?
2 Likes
That is certainly possible, but that’s why I paid for a different brand, only to find it’s the exact same manufacturer with a Zydus “brand” stamped on it…
3 Likes
