ofonorow wrote:Trying to figure out where this changed from LDL cholesterol to infectious disease? Will probably split
This thread inquired about ox-LDL, with responses that this test (which gives a approximation of oxidation/antioxidant capacity, for example by supplementing vitamin C) wouldn't be really useful. I somehow disagreed with this sediment, though not in isolation, but by viewing it in relation to other laboratory marker, diet and health status associations might become obvious and adjustment possible to be made. To be adjusted with newer findings again. - Simply because there are too many possible preconditions or nutritional deficiencies in individuals than Lp(a) or any lab marker alone possibly affecting calcification and the progression of this disease.
One of this precondition could be chronic inflammation due to infectious disease. However, that has only been one suggestion among others by John, and splitting this thread at this point - where infectious disease is only a theory - would be a bid premature, the relation to the whole lost again. Would be a different case if it would have been verified by the numerous test in this direction I already had.
Anyway, the way you see it: LDL OR infections, should be really LDL AND in infections, because LDL usually goes up with infections. And if it doesn't, like in one experience by me, that could tell someone knowledgeable something additional again. Never in isolation.