Connect
Crazy high calcium score
61 male with COPD which doesn't keep me from exercising regularly. No symptoms of anything unusual lately. Diet is not great, but not overweight in the least. Had a Stent put in for carotid artery 18 months ago. Been on atorvastin and ramipril for BP and high cholesterol for a few years now. Cholesterol numbers now look pretty good I think.
Just had a CT ordered for calcium score after "severe coronary calcifications" noted on routine lung CT scan. My score was just over 4000, though with 'accuracy comprised by motion detection or something', though I'm guessing it's at least somewhat roughly accurate. I was stunned by this number when I saw it today in my health app (I was prepared to freak if I saw 400!), and haven't heard back from my doctor yet. Found this group in the meantime, which made me slow my catastrophic thoughts somewhat as I imagined myself undergoing emgergency heart surgery this evening....
As I await further word, perhaps you folks can tell me what these numbers mean in the report, and what I can expect going forward?
LM: 0 LAD: 658 LCx: 329 RCA: 3062
Thank you,
Like
Helpful
HugInterested in more discussions like this? Go to the Heart & Blood Health Support Group.
Connect
heycal,
Are you sure about the HDL number? That is considered very high.
I have been on ststins for about 30 years. Currently on Rosuvastatin 20mg. My total cholestrol is 124, LDL 68, AND HDL 42. My cholesterol also dropped significantly once I went on the modified Esselstyn diet. I also lost 10 lbs without intending to do so, but am pleased with the outcome. I avoid all meat except some seafood, sugars, plant oils except olive oil.
@mayconnectuser1
Pretty sure, yes. I also remember an allergist I saw some 5 years back commenting on my high HDL -- I think it was around 95 at the time -- and saying I would live a long time. (Jury still out on that!)
In my cursory reading on this issue, I've read that higher is generally better, but you don't want to be TOO high...
Also, for what's it worth, almost all my cholesterol readings over recent years, perhaps a half dozen or more, were done as part of a standard blood test, with no fasting or anything before, which I thought one was supposed to do. (Though in practice, a few were done on nothing more than coffee with a dash of heavy cream on the morning of the test.)
heycal,
Perhaps an advanced lipid panel would be reasonable? Pretty common name from Quest Labs is "Cardio IQ." These are fasting with far more lipid detail. If have high CAC should be straightforward for your PCP to prescribe. Probably can do directly, as well.
Here's a citation on high HDL - https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/24395-hdl-cholesterol
What would I be trying to ascertin from this advanced testing? Presumably my GP or cardiologist will advise getting if they think it's valuable, or are you suggesting it's something they might overlook and that I need to be proactive about?
Yes. Standards of care treatment does not always support useful testing like this. Wait for a doctor to decide when thousands of others find the data useful? No, I try and be proactive.
The advanced lipids panel provide more detail re types of lipids - here's a better explanation than I can give - https://www.questdiagnostics.com/healthcare-professionals/about-our-tests/cardiovascular/advanced-lipid
It's quite true, there are numerous YouTube channels dealing with the problems with statins, some by medical doctors (Low Carb Down Under channel is an example, Dr. Stephen Phinney, MD. PhD, Dr. Eric Westman, Dr. Nadir Ali (cardiologist), Dr. Paul Mason, Dr. Jason Fung (nephrologist), Dr. Ken Berry, and Dr. Robert Cywes, to name a few who speak on their YouTube channels, not least of which is that in order to save a single life, 100 people must take a nominal dose for something like 10 years. It's the relative risk vs. absolute risk debate, which has a lot of merit. You can do a better job than statins by eating fewer seed oils and poly-unsaturated plant oils, controlling blood sugar by reducing carb intake to less than 120 gm/day, and you can still enjoy grapefruit juice as a result (just mind those carbs!).
Statistically, re your advice as eating differently better than statins?
Apparently, and I am just going by what the 99.9% of the medical community believes and supports - I really don't want to be the one ... again, I'm simply aligning with the 99.9% (clearly a made up number of my part).
Increasingly the latest findings are that PUFAs, especially the more rancid ones if consumed, lead to arachidonic acid production, which encourages inflammation. The science for years now has shown that chronic inflammation in the endothelium of the veins and arteries causes deposition of plaque and calcium. All statins do, and I am not prepared to say it isn't a salutary benefit for some...is to raise calcium levels in the blood, suppress LDL production, and help to calcify extant deposits, which renders them less likely to be dislodged and to travel. The problem is that the industry, itself, has fudge their own data, and we see time after time that statins do not save the numbers of lives, or increase the years lived, by anything meaningful, except for that one person who gets an extra 3 days or whatever it works out to.
Please take three minutes and listen to this considerably longer video by Dr. Rob Cywes (The Carb Addiction Doc). The first three minutes, only, will hopefully alert you to the fact that not all of the medical community is in love with statins, not by a long shot: (Lest you think he is biased and rigid in his anti-statin position, he's actually reversing his earlier position having learned something new last year. This takes integrity to do.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWw7xLlicPo&t=86s
Sure, again, there are youtube docs with different opinions from the 99.9 % of medical professionals.