German trying to use PT to lower Lp(a) without success

[Frodo]

[johnjackson]

Ive always wondered why particle size matters?
What does a person do different depending on size?

HDL Levels and Particle Size: Does Size Matter at Both Ends of the Scale?
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/559351_3
Relationship Between HDL Particle Size and Coronary Artery Disease Risk

One of the effects of CETP inhibition is an increase in HDL particle size, and because the adverse effects of torcetrapib became apparent, it has been hypothesized that the increase in size induced by CETP inhibition might affect the antiatherogenic capacity of the HDL particles, resulting in less functional or even dysfunctional HDL. In another analysis presented at the 2007 EAS meeting, it was suggested that, after adjustment for apoA-I and apoB levels, very large HDL particles would be associated with an increased risk for coronary artery disease. This observation may have consequences for the development of novel compounds targeting HDL, Dr. van der Steeg predicted.[6]

He and his colleagues carried out a case-control study of participants in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Norfolk. EPIC-Norfolk was a prospective population study of 25,663 men and women aged 45-79 years residing in

[ofonorow]

According to Lp(a) experts, the smaller Lp(a) molecules are, the more dangerous they are & the more likely a large build-up of atherosclerosis.

So you get a mass reading that sounds like high Lp(a). But if the Lp(a) particles are large, it is misleading, because a smaller "mass" of smaller Lp(a) particles is potentially more dangerous.

This is the problem that led to the change from mg/dl to nmol/l - as the latter is a measure of particles.

[Frodo]

[Frodo]

Is it better not to eat (and drink) before the lpa-check?

[ofonorow]

I do not know the answer. Cholesterol varies depending on drink/diet, but I don't see how/why that should affect a blood Lp(a) reading. When do you get the results, Lp(a) measured, we hope

[Frodo]

[ofonorow]

I was speaking with a man today who has mixed his own Pauling therapy for years, and while I am not sure of the units, his lp(a) was very high (over 200) , but went down (he thought to less than 10 on his own formula.

He said that the last few visits, his Lp(a) had "risen" to around 200 - and was constant the readings after that. He didn't believe it, and neither to do I. In the USA, the FDA allows labs to compute, rather than measurer Lp(a). These computations rarely make sense.

I suspect, but cannot know, that an accurate Lp(a) measurement would tell a different story in your case.

[Frodo]

[Frodo]

[ofonorow]

Most people have zero? Odd. That's like saying most people don't have heart disease.

[Frodo]

[ofonorow]

And we must have already gone over the fact that if for some reason, you aren't responding to the Pauling/Rath invention, and your Lp(a) really is elevated, then there is nothing more important to do than keep taking high doses of their invention, Lp(a) Binding Inhibitors.

[Frodo]

[ofonorow]

At one time, there were "home cholesterol tests" something like a glucose finger prick test. Forum members experimented (I think the test strips were about $1 each) and we learned that cholesterol varied considerably based on the diet. Sweet wine created a higher level than a dry wine, etc. This variation is the reason why you are usually required to fast prior to blood tests.