The Dr. Hyman Show - The Most Important Tests to Assess Your Risk of Heart Disease That Your Doctor Doesn’t Check with Dr. Ronald Krauss

Episode Date: August 23, 2023

This episode is brought to you by Rupa Health, BiOptimizers, LMNT, and Cozy Earth. Heart disease is still the number one killer in the world, yet most people don’t actually understand what markers put them most at risk.  The general consensus is there are two types of cholesterol—the good and the bad—the good is thought to be high-density lipoproteins or HDL, and the bad is low-density lipoproteins or LDL. But we now know from research that it's much more complicated than that—there are actually various sizes and densities of these lipoproteins.  Today on The Doctor’s Farmacy, I’m excited to talk to one of the leading lipidologists, Dr. Ronald Krauss, all about lipoproteins, what they do in the body, what they mean for heart disease risk, and why a typical lipid panel alone is insufficient. Dr. Krauss is a Senior Scientist at Children’s Hospital Oakland Research Institute, a Professor of Medicine at UCSF, and an Adjunct Professor of Nutritional Sciences at UC Berkeley. Dr. Krauss’s research aims to understand how to best prevent cardiovascular disease through early detection and management of its major risk factors: most notably, elevated levels of blood cholesterol and lipoproteins. He has published over 450 research articles and reviews on metabolic, genetic, dietary, and drug effects on plasma lipoproteins and the risk of coronary artery disease, with over 100,000 citations of this work. This episode is brought to you by Rupa Health, BiOptimizers, LMNT, and Cozy Earth. Access more than 3,000 specialty lab tests with Rupa Health. You can check out a free, live demo with a Q&A or create an account at RupaHealth.com today. This month only you can get a FREE bottle of BiOptimizers Magnesium Breakthrough. Just go to magbreakthrough.com/hymanfree and enter coupon code hyman10. Right now, LMNT is offering my listeners a free sample pack with any purchase. Head over to DrinkLMNT.com/hyman today. Right now, get 40% off your Cozy Earth sheets. Just head over to cozyearth.com and use code DRHYMAN. Here are more details from our interview (audio version / Apple Subscriber version): How Dr. Krauss came to understand how cholesterol actually impacts the risk of heart disease (5:00 / 2:44) What is cholesterol? (9:00 / 6:37)  Statins as heart disease treatment (13:36 / 11:29)  Combatting myths around saturated fat (14:42 / 12:37)  The assay Dr. Krauss developed to differentiate between the different sizes of lipoproteins and what they mean for heart disease risk (29:58 / 25:40) Testing beyond the standard lipid panel (39:51 / 35:31) Insulin resistance, prediabetes, and heart disease (46:35 / 41:50)  Personal variation in heart disease risk (52:52 / 48:34)  Dietary approaches to preventing heart disease (1:01:07 / 56:56)  Research mentioned in this episode

Coming up on this episode of The Doctor's Pharmacy. Really what we should be thinking about is the overall effects of foods in the diet, and they may not contain saturated fat, but there are a whole lot of other things to consider. Hi everyone, it's Dr. Mark. As a functional medicine doctor looking at hormones, organic acids, nutrient levels, inflammatory factors, gut bacteria, and so many other internal variables, it helps me find the most effective path to health and healing for my patients. But such extensive testing can be very complicated

and time-consuming for both the practitioner, somebody like me, and our patients. But lab ordering became very quick and painless since I started using Rupa Health. I can order, track, and get results from over 35 different lab companies within a few clicks in one lab portal. And this means one invoice for all labs paid online up front. Plus, patients get practitioner pricing and receive full patient support through easier personalized collection instructions, automated follow-up, super bills, and answers to testing questions, and so much more. And best of all, it's free for practitioners.

So sign up free today. You can find out more information by going to rupahealth.com. That's r-u-p-a-health.com. Magnesium has been a constant in my supplement routine for years, and that's because magnesium is involved in hundreds and hundreds of enzyme reactions in the body, facilitating all sorts of chemical reactions. You need it for better sleep, for cardiovascular health, joint bone health, healthy blood sugar, and lots more. And the problem is most of us don't get enough magnesium. I love to take magnesium breakthrough before bed. It's been critical for my sleep,

my energy levels, and my mood. Pretty much everything. If you've never tried magnesium breakthrough, it's actually the perfect time. This month, you can get a free bottle of this full-spectrum magnesium supplement that contains all seven forms of magnesium your body craves in exactly the right balance.

Right now, by Optimizers, the makers of magnesium breakthrough is offering a in exactly the right balance. Right now, Bioptimizers, the makers of Magnesium Breakthrough, is offering a 14-day sleep challenge. For my listeners who are offering a free 14-day supply, all you have to do is pay a nominal shipping fee. The challenge is simple. Try Magnesium Breakthrough for 14 days and see all the positive changes I just mentioned. If your sleep and energy are not absolutely improved, by the end of the 14 days, you've lost nothing. But when you think about the power of great sleep, you have a lot to gain. To get your free bottle, just go to magbreakthrough.com forward slash hymen free and enter the coupon code hymen10. That's it. To get your free 14-day supply right now and start the challenge, go to magbreakthrough.com

forward slash hymen free and use the coupon code hyman 10. Don't miss this opportunity. It's a limited time offer for this month only. And now let's get back to this week's episode of The Doctor's Pharmacy. Welcome to The Doctor's Pharmacy. I'm Dr. Hyman, and that is pharmacy with an F, a place for conversations that matter. And today we're going to talk about the number one killer in the world, heart disease and cholesterol, which you probably all heard about, have had tested. But today we're going to talk about why the test you're having may not be the right one. And what you really need to know about the real risk for heart disease, how to identify them and what you can do about it. So today we have as our guest, what a leading lipidologist in the world, Dr.

Ronald Krauss, who's a senior scientist at the Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute. He's a professor of medicine at UCSF and adjunct professor of nutritional sciences at UC Berkeley. So he's got it all covered, Oakland, Berkeley, and UCSF. His research aims to understand how to best prevent heart disease and cardiovascular disease through early detection and managing its major risk factors, particularly elevated levels of blood cholesterol and lipoproteins. You've probably heard of cholesterol, but you may not know what lipoproteins are. We're going to talk about that today. He's published over 450 research articles and reviews on metabolic, genetic, dietary, and

drug effects on plasma, lipoproteins, cholesterol, and the risks of heart disease with over 100 citations of his work. And he's really a giant in the field. And, you know, Dr. Krause was the first one to really identify the fact that our typical cholesterol profile is probably not the most accurate in predicting heart disease, and it's not what we actually want to be measuring. And he's been doing this work for over 40 years now, or maybe 50 years, I don't know how old you are, but a long time. And yet it's not really adopted in medical practice. The average medical discovery takes 17 years from the bench to the clinic. But unfortunately, this might be a little bit longer and still not what most people

are doing. And I kind of want to kind of go into this with you all so you understand what you should really be looking at, how to really predict your risk, and why much of what's going on under the hood may be missed by the typical annual checkup and your regular cholesterol profile. So welcome, Ron, and great to have you again. Thank you, Mark. It's great to see you as well. So you're really pioneering so much of the research around kind of a reimagination of cholesterol and blood cholesterol and what all the different types of cholesterol are, how we need to have a more nuanced view of this, and even, you know, challenging some of our basic assumptions about heart disease and saturated fat and the role of carbohydrates. So I love to sort of hear how you first kind of came upon this theory that maybe our typical cholesterol analytes,

our total LDL, HDL cholesterol, weren't really giving us the full picture in the whole story. Mark, the story does go way back, not quite as long as you had indicated. But when I joined the laboratory in Berkeley, which is the laboratory that originally developed all the techniques for separating and identifying lipoproteins in the 1940s, I inherited some interesting opportunities. And one of which was to see whether we might be able to examine LVL, low-density lipoproteins, in detail to see whether there might be different forms. And sure enough, we discovered that there are several different forms of LVL in the blood, differing in size from larger to smaller. And we then showed that there was a relationship between the small form of LDL and low levels of HDL. And by that time, most people had come to accept that

low HDL was a risk factor. But what we then began to test is the idea that it's really the small LDL that's the risk factor in that profile. And then we went on to develop tools to measure small LDL using more simplified methods, including what we're now currently using in the clinic. And as we got more and more data, we were able to confirm that idea and show that it really was an important predictor of heart disease itself. Although it was associated with low HDL, it's also associated with high levels of another blood fat called triglyceride. And so those three things together we discovered really represent the triad

of risk that many people have because we now know that obesity, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, all of these things promote that triad, that lipid triad, which is part of something which we also have called the metabolic syndrome. So this is a whole collection of abnormalities, but the small LDL component of it, we and others have shown really is a bad guy all by itself. This kind of challenges the orthodoxy, which is that it's all about LDL cholesterol. And I think we're talking about it, and the belief was that saturated fat was bad, that it raises LDL cholesterol, and therefore it increases the risk of heart disease.

But it's a much more nuanced story where it turns out that it's this, what we call atherogenic dyslipidemia, this collection of patterns of high triglycerides, low HDL, small LDL particles that is actually the real risk factor. And that's not caused by so much saturated fat as it is by carbohydrates, basically refined sugars and starches, which is sort of the opposite of what we thought. Because we were all told to eat a low-fat diet, cut out saturated fat. And then we all started eating tons of carbs, six to 11 servings of bread, rice, and pasta a day, according to the food pyramid in 1992. And then our weight blew up,

and our risk of diabetes is escalating. And now we see, you know, 93% of Americans in poor metabolic health, you know, and one in two have prediabetes or type two diabetes. So, you know, the pattern that you're talking about is the most prevalent lipid pattern today in America. And yet it's something that most people are not that tuned to because most of the drugs are really focused on lowering LDL, which is a statin. And so we've kind of got this sort of LDL-centric hypothesis, and particularly just general LDL numbers, not the subtypes. So it's kind of taken us down the wrong path.

I wonder, Ron, if you could just break down a little bit, what is the difference between a cholesterol and a lipoprotein? Because that's what we're talking about is sort of language, and I don't think most people know what the difference is. So help us sort of start with the basics, and then we'll get into what they all mean. Sure. Well, cholesterol is a waxy substance that is present in the blood attached to a particle. And so cholesterol is also called the lipid. So this is a fatty, waxy substance that is in all our tissues in the body. It's an important component of the structure of our cells. It has a lot of important functions in our tissues.

But in the blood, when it's attached to lipoproteins, and depending on which lipoprotein it's attached to, it can either be associated with higher risk or lower risk. And so the lipoprotein is a particle. It's actually a little round tiny ball containing fat, including cholesterol, but other lipids as well, containing triglycerides, which we could talk about as well, in a package surrounded by some proteins.

And so it's this lipid-protein complex that gives it the name lipoprotein. That's where the name comes from. And cholesterol is an important part of it, but it's not the only part. And one thing I would just go back to from the earlier discussion is that levels of blood cholesterol do not distinguish individual lipoprotein particles. We measure cholesterol in the blood. It's the sum of all of the cholesterol in all these individual particles. And even in the case of LDL, we talk about LDL cholesterol as the bad cholesterol. That's the amount of cholesterol on this little LDL particle. But even that doesn't necessarily reflect the amount of those particles in the blood.

And in fact, individuals who have this very, very prevalent metabolic trait, this atherogenic dyslipidemia that you mentioned, very often have normal levels of cholesterol, normal levels of LDL. And that's because the lipoprotein particles that constitute that triad, surprisingly, we discovered, do not have a super large amount of cholesterol. They do have cholesterol as part of the structure of these particles. But there are other features of these small particles, these small LDL in particular, that render them more toxic to the arteries.

There are several things that these particles have on them that cause them to bind to the artery wall more tightly, to be cleared less effectively and removed from the body so they tend to hang around longer. They're oxidized more rapidly than larger LDLs so they can become more toxic because oxidation of lipids can lead to inflammatory processes which are very important in heart disease. So all of these properties of small ODL are quite different and quite distinct from the cholesterol content. And that's why the cholesterol measurement, while it's a reasonable thing

to include in a lipid panel, it does not provide necessarily meaningful information about these particular components. Yeah, the components that really are much more prevalent in the population than even high cholesterol. Yeah, I mean, I read a study once where I think 75% of people who were admitted to the hospital with a heart attack had normal cholesterol levels. And that's kind of shocking when you think about it. Now, I mean, is it because they're on a statin? I don't know. But I think, I think it sort of speaks to the fact that you can have a horrible profile, but actually, you know, you look okay. So I remember, you know, a patient whose cholesterol was like 150, right? But their

triglycerides were 300 and the HDL was 30. And they have, you know, this terrible profile with small particles. I'm much more worried about someone like that than someone with an LDL, you know, or a cholesterol of 300, but an HDL of 80 or 90 and triglycerides of 50, right? So you kind of don't get the true story. And then doctors just see the LDL being higher, the total being high, and they go, you need statin instead of actually asking the real question, which is what's causing the abnormal profile in the first place. Right. In terms of treatment, since you brought up statins, what I'll mention is that even though

the small LDL trait is associated with high triglycerides and low HDL, there's really very little evidence, if any, that lowering triglyceride or raising HDL itself has a benefit, whereas lowering of the LDL particles clearly is the central goal of our treatment algorithm. And we certainly use statins when these particles are elevated. They can work. They're not quite as effective in lowering the small LDL compared with the large LDL, but they can be effective. And so statins still represent something that's relevant if there are high levels of these small particles. And in terms of diet, as you mentioned briefly, one of our other eye-openers was when I started to do dietary studies, I was very interested in nutritional effects and heart disease risk. And I inherited the old paradigm of low fat is good for you, right?

Yeah, we all do. I chaired the American Heart Association Nutrition Committee for a few years bearing that burden, that mantra. And at the same time I was doing research in my lab, it showed that when we put people on this low-fat, high-carb diet, we started to induce levels of small-I O. We actually can raise about 25% of the population, the levels went up. And so that was, to me, a complete paradigm changer. And I started to try to talk about this. It was not exactly accepted with open arms by our colleagues in nutrition. Putting it mildly.

It was heresy. And it took a while. As you say, there's a lag time between discovery and implementation. It took quite a while for the nutrition community and I-Trade guidelines to start recognizing it, although there still is an inordinate focus on carbohydrate can be okay, saturated fat is bad. And in terms of saturated fat, I think as you also touched on, we did a number of studies that showed that when you put somebody on a high saturated fat diet, this is fat from dairy and or meat, you did raise the LDL cholesterol level.

This has been well established for many years, that the cholesterol level in LDL does go up when you put them on this high-saturated fat diet. But we found that it was almost exclusively in the larger LDL particles, not small particles, which are much less related to risk. So there was kind of a mismatch between the cholesterol reading and the impact on the bad guys. Whereas, as you also mentioned, turning it around and putting people on a high carbohydrate diet raised the small LDL. And when we started studying therapies, we

showed, fortunately, that if you take people who have a high level of small LDL, it's a very prevalent trait, and put them on a low-carbohydrate diet and or had them lose weight. Both of those things are extremely effective in lowering small LDL. There is a genetic component to all of this, which unfortunately some people are struggling with. And diet doesn't always work. Statins don't always do the job. We sometimes have to go to something, you know, more intensive treatments. Yeah. Well, it's interesting. I mean, sort of, you know, the way I think about it may be very simplistic, but, you know, I think about, you know, different, you know, when you get your cholesterol number, it's measuring the weight of the cholesterol, like milligrams per deciliter. When you're looking at particles, you're looking at the

number of the particles and the size of the particles, which is more qualitative than a quantitative view. And, and so the way I think about it is that, you know, you could have a cholesterol of like 200, but it could be made up of 2,000 little BBs or 100 little beach balls. Basically, the beach balls are the big particles that bounce off your arteries, and the BBs are like the small LDL particles that go in and cause heart disease.

I think it is very surprising to think about the advice we've been getting for decades about cutting saturated fat, increasing carbohydrate. Even today, there's still a big group of professional societies and dietary recommendations that haven't progressed. I want to go back to what you said about saturated fat because you've published a lot of reviews and papers on the roles of saturated fat and lipids. And in a way, you're a bit of a kind of a black sheep in the cardiology community because you're saying, wait a minute, the saturated fat may not be as bad as we thought it was. I mean, combining with carbohydrates is bad. Combining it with starches and sugars is bad. But when you sort of butter on your bread may not be good, but butter on your broccoli may be okay. And, and so, you know, when you think about it that way,

the, you know, the, the, the question is, do we want to eat saturated fats to raise our size of our LDL, or is it better just to kind of stick with more monounsaturated and just cut the carbohydrates? Like what, what's the current thinking about this? Cause it's constantly changing. And I also think there's a lot of variation in the population. I don't, I want to talk about, but for most people,

you know, we see suffering from poor metabolic health, which is, is in part genetic predisposition, but not genetic predestiny. I mean, in other words, you might be having a family history of diabetes,

but it doesn't mean you're going to get it if you follow a healthy lifestyle. Right. Yeah. Let me just touch on that last point and then i'll go back to yeah that question uh we've done a number of studies in which we varied the carbohydrate content of diets and also achieved weight loss in various studies and various combinations. And what we showed when we published this is that even though there's this very high prevalence of this atherogenic small LDL trait, the lipid triad, if you will, the prevalence of that could be reduced

down to maybe 5% in the population if you follow a low-carb diet and lose weight. So it's 95% reversible with diet alone. Now, most people don't get that far. And sometimes we can talk about low-carb diets. There's a whole discussion about that. But at least the notion is as you were saying that this is uh not not destiny it's it's highly manageable uh with lifestyle now regarding

the saturated fat issue um uh yes i have been uh sort of how should i say uh uh kind of poking the bear if you will and have generated quite a bit of backlash for some of the things that we published and reported but there's a fair amount of science behind this and this is the idea first of all saturated fat is a nutrient it's a chemical category consisting of many different types of fats. The other way of describing it is saturated fatty acids. These are chemicals that have a certain chemical quality that makes them fit into this category of saturated fat. But there's 30 different types of saturated fatty acids and so when we consume we're talking about saturated fat it's already uh incorrect uh

to kind of lump them all together number one number two is saturated fat is not consumed as a substance in itself and butter may be one of the closest things, but it still is not pure saturated fat. Most of the saturated fat we consume, in fact, just about all of it, is in the context of foods. And so I've been a strong advocate for moving away from this kind of microbe precision focus on saturated fat to say, well, really what we should be thinking about is the overall effects of foods in the diet, and they may or may not contain saturated fat, but there are a whole lot of other things to consider when it comes to the nutritional and metabolic and health effects of foods. So there's two major, actually three major categories of foods that contain relatively high concentrations of saturated fat.

There's meat, red meat, white meat for that matter. There is dairy, whole fat dairy products. And there are tropical oils. Now, these are all different foods. And it's a mistake, I believe, in many of my, some of my, I believe, and a growing number of my colleagues, I think, are beginning to believe that it's a mistake to focus on the saturated fat rather than on the food. evidence now that whole fat dairy, maybe not all whole fat dairy, but at least some whole fat dairy products such as yogurt, fermented foods, even cheese, can be associated with heart health benefits that have nothing to do with the saturated fat. There may be an increase in blood cholesterol, but as I said, it's these larger particles which we're less concerned about.

And it's these other qualities which we're trying to effect that may have significant health benefits. Meats are a bit more complicated. I'm not sure we can say the same thing about meats as having in themselves healthy effects other than the nutrients they contain. Certain nutrients are present in beef that are not present. Doesn't meat have more stearic acid, which doesn't have that great of an impact on blood cholesterol? Yeah, yes, but there are other saturated fats that can raise.

I mean, red meat can raise cholesterol. White meat can raise cholesterol. Again, it's a larger part of this. We published that. But the other question that you raised, I just want to touch on, is should we be trying to increase the size of LDL or make them larger? And I'd have to say that there's really no case to be made for that. Larger LDL particles are less dangerous than the smaller particles, but if you have a whole bunch of them, they can still add up. They're not completely harmless by any means.

And so trying to increase the size of LDL, certainly by taking more, let's say red meat, for example, is not something that I would advocate. So are you saying that meat is a concern when it comes to… Well, it's a more… No, not so much the lipid effects. There's a lot of controversy around this, and we could spend a long time talking about the pluses and minuses that are out in the literature. Are there other adverse effects? Does it increase the risk of type 2 diabetes? Does it increase the risk of cancer? Are we talking about environmental effects that

we should be concerned about with the beef industry? I mean there's all kinds of debate about this and so it's not, there's from a health standpoint we're often unfortunately relying on what we call nutritional epidemiology, that is looking at populations and asking them what they eat and then finding out whether they get disease or not. That's a very difficult category of research because you will have a lot of potential for error in making assumptions. But unfortunately, for most of our dietary recommendations, this approach represents the major source, major basis for making those recommendations. And in the case of red meat, there is a reasonable amount of evidence

from these observational studies that raise some concerns. I'm not saying that I'm convinced they're true, but they're out there. Yeah, I mean, it's like, you know, I always say, you know, like, you know, observational studies are like, you know, for example, saying, well, just women over 60 never get pregnant. And women who have sex over 60 never get pregnant, and women who have sex over 60 never get pregnant. So that means having sex doesn't cause pregnancy. It's like this is kind of essentially how we come up with these observational studies. There's a correlation, but it does improve causation.

So there's a lot of other factors, and with meat, it's like that. A lot of people who are eating meat were in the studies were during times where we thought meat was bad. And so everybody who was eating meat didn't take care of their health. And they actually had way worse confounding factors. They smoked more. They drank more. They ate more. They weighed more.

They ate fruits and vegetables. They ate more sugar, processed food, didn't take their vitamins, didn't exercise. So yeah, of course, they had more cancer, heart disease, and everything else. And when you look at meat eaters and vegetarians who shopped at health food stores, meaning their overall diet quality was better, there was a reduction in risk of death by half in both the groups, just whether they're eating meat or not. So I think it's complicated, you're right. Hey everyone, Dr. Mark here. Scientists have long known that electrolytes are important in the body. So many daily ailments like headaches, cramps, and fatigue can be caused by electrolyte imbalances. Sports drink companies know this,

and they've responded by peddling electrolyte drinks that are full of sugar, food coloring, and other junk that should not be eaten or drinking. But this is what makes LMNT, or element, different. Their tasty electrolyte drink mix has everything you need and nothing you don't. It contains a science-backed ratio of sodium, potassium, and magnesium to keep your electrolytes balanced, and there's no sugar, coloring, artificial ingredients, gluten, or fillers. Element is used by everyone from NBA players and Navy SEALs to busy moms and exercise enthusiasts, including me. It's also perfectly suited to anyone following a keto, low-carb, or paleo diet. Right now, Element is offering my listeners a free sample pack with any purchase. That's eight single-serving packs free with any Element order.

It's a great way to try all eight flavors or share Element with a friend. Get yours at drinklmnt.com forward slash hyman. That's drinklmnt.com forward slash Hyman and get it today. We're right in the middle of the hot summer months. And if you're like me, trying to stay cool in your bed can be a real challenge. I already run hot at night. So you can imagine how badly I sleep in August. Thankfully, I found an incredible solution.

I want to share with you today. Cozy Earth Sheets. Let me tell you, they're simply amazing. They feel like heaven to the touch and their premium fabric regulates your body temperature no matter the season, making them perfect for the hot summer months. Cozy Earth offers a variety of luxury pillows, sheets, and blankets and more backed by a lengthy warranty. All their products are made from responsibly sourced viscose from bamboo so you can feel good about your purchase knowing you're supporting a truly ethical company. Right now, Cozy Earth is providing an exclusive offer for my listeners. You can get 40% off site-wide when you use the code DrHyman. Just go to

CozyEarth.com and use the code DrHyman. That's just D-R-H-Y-M-A-N. And now let's get back to this week's episode of The Doctor's Pharmacy. I want to get back to this test because, you know, you developed this strategy, this test a long, long time ago. And I personally have been using it for 25 plus years. And now it's more available in Quest and LabCorp. There's different techniques that are used in each lab. But, you know, can you talk about this assay and actually what it's doing and how it works? And, you know, why is it different than the typical cholesterol panel and why isn't that good enough? You know?

Okay. So, so first of all, there, there are a couple of assays available and I'll discuss each of them. And as you mentioned a few minutes ago, this assay, these assays measure the number of particles in the blood, not just LDL, but all the different particles. There's HDL particles and very low-density particles. So the entire spectrum of lipoprotein particles are measured, and the units, as you said, are not in milligrams.

They are in what we call nanomoles. They're actually a chemical way of defining the number of these particles. And both of these methods allow analysis of these particle concentrations as a function of their size. So the size of lipoproteins is an important feature of their overall effects, both metabolic and pathologic, and that spectrum goes from the smallest particles, which are the small HDL, through LDL, the next largest particle, and then BLDL. And within each of those, it separates the different subspecies so we can measure small LDL as part of that spectrum. So that's the overall picture.

Now, the two methods I'll describe, the one that I'm partial to because we invented it. And so that's a disclosure. And part of that disclosure is that the actual, the test was actually patented over 20 years ago and licensed to Quest Diagnostics. And so Quest offers it as part of what it calls the Cardio IQ panel. There's other tests that can include in that, but this is called lipoprotein fractionation.

And the name of the test is Ion Mobility, I-O-N Mobility. So it's lipoprotein fractionation by ion mobility. The short name is CardioIQ. So that test actually is remarkable. I think it's still quite remarkable it takes tiny amounts of blood and squirts it out through a little capillary and the instrumentation winds up separating each of those particles one by one and spitting them out at the end and and then they're counted so each individual particle is counted and the speed at which it goes through the time it takes to go through and then they're counted. So each individual particle is counted,

and the speed at which it goes through, the time it takes to go through is a function of their size. So it goes from the smallest to the largest particles as you go through the system. So you get this readout, which is really quite detailed. There's more information there than we can actually interpret in the clinic, but there are some key clinical measures that we extract from that, and that is measures of small LDL. We also measure something called medium LDL, which is associated with this.

So those two categories together are the major LDL-related risk factors. We measure large HDL particles. So there's information, and sometimes I think one of the reasons we can talk about why it hasn't been taken up more widely is in some sense, there might be too much information for people to try to digest. And I think trying to explain, educate has been part of my mission for all these years. And we've been- I mean, listen, doctors are smart. That's their job. Yeah, right, right. But for completeness, I'll just mention the other method, which uses a completely different technique called nuclear magnetic

resonance spectroscopy, or NMR. And that test was developed by a company that is now part of LabCorp. And this offers a similar type of readout, although it measures these particles in a very different way. It doesn't actually separate and count them. It creates a signal that is then analyzed, and within that signal, each of these components is identified. And that's also a widely used test. Well, neither of them are actually widely used, but they're both been taken up, I think, by an increasing number of physicians who are beginning to understand. But it's still a very small minority.

So your typical cholesterol test is like a total cholesterol, your LDL, your triglycerides and HDL. That's pretty much it. And we'll talk about some other things that doctors may measure like ApoB and A1. But, you know, the test you're talking about measures that, but it also measures, you know, whether you have small, medium or large LDL, it measures the size of the HDL, because that also matters. It's not just the size of the LDL, right? It measures the size of the triglycerides as well. Yeah, yeah. Those have less direct impact on heart disease risk. Again, this goes back to the idea that there are three traits that tend to cluster as part of this atherogenic leucopidemia that we talked about. One is high

levels of small LDL. The other is high levels of VLDL, large VLDL particles, which are measured by this technique. And that's more related to triglycerides, right? That's right. You're right. That's where triglyceride is transported primarily. And then there are low levels of the larger HDL particles, which we call HDL2 or HDL2b more technically. And that is a readout of this test as well. So it can sometimes help to show all three components of that. But the money, if you will, in terms of clinical payoff is mostly related to the small LDL particles. And it measures two things, right? Whether you have small and how many there are and how many total particles you have, which also matters, right? Right. So it's both a total number and also the size

that matters. Right. Can you explain that? A little bit, yeah. Let's back up and talk about the test you just mentioned, the APOB test, A-P-O-B, capital B. That's a protein that is present in LDL, and it's also present in VLDL. And there's one molecule of ApoB in each of these particles. So it turns out conveniently that if one measures ApoB in the lab, and this is an easy test to do, it's not expensive, it's widely available. Not widely done, but widely available. It's widely available, right. It's well standardized, despite some claims to the contrary.

It measures the total number of those particles, the LDL and the VLDL, and also some particles in between called intermediate density lipoproteins. And so all of that together is a pretty good measure of heart disease risk problems if that test is elevated elevated because it's usually associated with high levels of small LDL. That's often the major reason that one has high levels of ApoB. And as I say, there are other particles that may be concerning. Even in the large LDL, there may be some that are not so good and the BLDLs are not so good. So the total ApoB measuring turns out to be a pretty powerful tool for assessing risk,

but it doesn't zone in on where that elevation is coming from, as you just mentioned. So from my standpoint, from the standpoint of both evaluation and then treatment, I think it helps me a great deal, and I do this in my practice pretty routinely, is measuring these sub-fractions, including the small LDL and these others. So I know what we're dealing with in a more specific way that we can then target and monitor and see if we can lower, because there are people that show up in my clinic who have high levels of ApoB but they have high levels of large LDL that are accounting for that. They do their profiles and I look at

their overall risk there's nothing else wrong. So treating the ApoB I feel those patients does not necessarily have the rationale that I would use to treat the small LDL, because these patients do not seem to carry that same degree of risk, even though the ApoB level is high. There's some debate about this. There's some people that feel ApoB really is the transcendent measurement, and these subfractions are less important. But I think, at least from the standpoint of management, I'd like to know what I'm treating. Well, yeah, you want to know as much as you can.

Why just pick one, right? I mean, you want a full picture. And heart disease is very complex. I mean, it's not just reducible down to elevated LDL levels. It's inflammation. It's oxidative stress. It's metabolic health. It's ApoB.

It's lipoprotein A. It's a lot of things that are being looked at holistically. This is a slice of the pie. It's a big slice of the pie, but it's not the whole pie. Yeah. Interesting. So basically right now we have commercially available tests that really, I think, engendered and created because of your pioneering research. So people in the industry, this is the guy who knows the deal on this.

He kind of invented it. And essentially, it's not being used. So what are the statistics on, you know, what percentage of physicians use this versus the total, like the regular cholesterol profile that people are getting? You know, I wish I could answer that. I've been told by my friends at Quest, for example, that they do not provide information on their test volume. So I've been quite curious about this. They won't tell you? No, no, no. It's apparently something they feel should not be widely advertised.

So I don't know the answer to that other than it's, you know, it's probably, you know, I would just have to say it's a small minority of the testing. For example, you know, I think there's, you know, 100 plus million lipid panels that are run in these major clinical labs. Just based on the amount of instrumentation that's available for the test, the Quest test at least, I can't imagine that it's more than 1% of that. I just think it's a tiny percent. Yeah, I would probably agree with you.

I mean, I don't know the stats. It'd be interesting to find out. But as a clinician, seeing patients on a regular basis from all over who bring their data from other doctors and from top executive physical programs, from leading physicians. And I can say, I mean, maybe there's been a couple, but I don't remember ever seeing a lipoprotein fractionation on a regular. It's just sort of amazing to me. And again, I've been doing this for almost three decades, using your test. I don't know how we would treat patients without it because you can't really interpret what's really going on unless you actually have the right information. And you might be mistakenly treating someone for something that maybe they don't have a risk for. It seems obvious to me and to you, fortunately. And I just hope

that eventually maybe programs like this, one reason I'm happy to have these discussions is maybe help people understand the rationale here. I think just to touch on one other test, I don't think we should leave out. It's not part of the fractionation analysis, but it's another important risk factor that's often overlooked, and that's like a protein small a or LP small a, which is an important independent risk factor for heart disease. It looks like an LDL, but it has an additional feature that makes it even more toxic.

So it's another bad guy that can be tested using a different technique that's part of the overall lipid risk assessment that's very important and very common to have high elevations. Even though they're genetic and very hard to treat, it's important, I think, to recognize the people who are at high risk. Yeah. Yeah. Again, I mean, it seems like the, you know, the typical panel is not what people should be getting. They should be getting the lipoprotein fractionation. They should be measuring ApoB and A1. They should look at lipoprotein little a,

they should be measuring inflammation level with CRP. These are things that are not, you know, right. Fringe ideas. These are mainstream ideas that are research and evidence-based, but are not really in clinical practice much. And so often I think, you know, doctors are just laser focused on LDL and statins, and that's what the pharma industry has been pushing. But, you know, the truth is, you know,

there isn't like a magic pill for fixing atherogenic dyslipidemia, right? It's mostly diet related. Yeah, diet. Yeah, and of course, you know, medication plays into it as well. I mean, the PCKS9 inhibitors seem to be better at it, at correcting some of the lipid abnormalities in the particle size that I've seen, but I don't know, it's a small sample size I have. Yeah. It's probably just a result of the magnitude of the LDL reduction because with PCSK9 inhibitors, particularly on top of statins, you can get these very low levels of

LDL. And by that time, there's just not enough to go around. There's a small LDL or it can be reduced, but it's not a selective effect. It's just sort of a hammering the whole thing down, eventually gets the small LDL down. And that's true for high doses, for statins as well. If you get the LDL low enough, the small LDL concentration, even though people still may have a tilt towards small alveolar size. The amount of those particles is low enough that there's much less concern about risk. I just mentioned one thing going back to the testing. I'm not sure we need to advocate, at least I don't, routine fractionation in the entire population as a routine test. Even though the tests these days are not that expensive.

No, it's like $40, I think. Yeah. Considering our gene number one killer, it's like. Yeah, yeah. Regular cholesterol is maybe $20. I don't know. I must say my opinion about that has evolved as the price went down. If the test cost a nickel, everybody should have it, right?

Yeah. I mean, it used to be like $300, and now it's like very cheap. Yeah. So that actually does present the reason that I'm a little bit more open to more widespread testing now. But if someone starts off with a younger person with a low level of cholesterol, the standard test, triglycerides, H2O are normal, they're healthy. I think that might be sufficient, at least at that stage in life. Maybe later in life, as somebody starts to develop a belly, they start screening for it. But I'm not sure everybody absolutely needs to have this test. But I think, unfortunately, it's a large percentage of the

population that really should have this kind of evaluation. I mean, you just said something that I think I don't want to skip over, which is if you have a belly, because the key kind of indicator, you can see it from across the room to look. And I do this trick. It's like a party trick. I can look at someone and kind of guess their cholesterol levels. It's like a party trick. And I can guess their triglyceride levels, and I can guess their HDL levels because I've seen so many thousands of patients and I'm like, oh, you're going to have high triglycerides, low HDL, small particles. And, you know, and it's like as their belly grows, the worse it gets. And it's because of insulin resistance, which is really driving this whole phenomenon. So that's really all driven by like pre-diabetes, diabetes. And that's why

people with diabetes have such a high risk of heart disease because they have this particular profile. But now it's like one in two Americans have either pre or type two diabetes. And that's like a lot of us. And so, you know, when you think about the prevalence of it, it's such a critical biomarker that often is being missed and really guides therapy. Because, you know, can you talk about, you know, the therapeutic implications? Because, you know, when you just say, okay, take a statin, you're fine. You still may take, and I've seen this, people take statins and they're fine, but their triglycerides are still high, their HDL is low, they have these small particles. It doesn't always work for that.

And so how would you approach someone with this triad, this, you know, atherogenic dyslipidemia where the characteristics are of these small particles, the low HDL, high triglycerides? Yeah. Well, first of all, I would rely on statins as the first line and trying to use the maximum amount of statins that the patient can tolerate. Sometimes patients will not tolerate the statin. But to try to get as much reduction of those particles as I can, the statin alone.

And that would follow the general guidelines out there for LDL lowering because, again, they can eventually hit the small particles. Adding a second category of drug, which I might mention, it's called ezetimibe or Zetia, that acts by a different mechanism than statins and statins that can control the lower cholesterol. We sometimes consider PCSK9 inhibitors if that's the LDL sign. So the initial attack is really on the cholesterol side of things because those drugs that lower cholesterol sufficiently will eventually have some benefit. But if there still is a small LDL trait, and the kind of patient you mentioned I see a lot of, I actually turn to an even older medication called nicotinic acid or niacin vitamin. And we can spend a lot of time talking about niacin.

It's had a very good reputation for a number of years, particularly when it was the only lipid-lowering drug that was out there, quite effective in lowering cholesterol, but it was supplanted by the statins and newer drugs in this category and there's been a lot of backlash on using niacin first of all it can be difficult to use some patients can develop some adverse reactions many people get flushing and get uncomfortable so it's not necessarily an easy drug to use. But despite some of the studies that have failed to show a benefit of niacin, it's been usually in patients whose LDL is already very low.

And those patients, niacin isn't going to do much. It can raise HDL. That's one of the reasons it's been advocated. But it turns out raising HDL doesn't do the job. It's not effective in that regard, but it can lower those small LDL particles. We've published that. And so I do use niacin. It takes high doses.

It's not something you go to the drug store. 1,500 milligrams a day, yeah. You've got to use up to 2,000 milligrams a day. That has to be done under medical supervision because there can be adverse effects that need to be monitored. But when the risk is high enough and the trade is there and we're not getting what we want from the standard cholesterol-lowering drugs, niacin can be extremely effective and should not be thrown out, as many people are advocating for that reason. And what you're saying is the reason is that it may actually work on the small LDL particles. Yes, it does.

It can lower the small LDL particles. And, you know, that's an effect on top of statins. I would still consider the standard approach starting with statins to begin with, but this in combination with statins can be quite effective. And there's been some studies to support that. It's been hugely controversial because of the recent trials, as I mentioned, that there weren't patients who had really low cholesterol. But most patients, unfortunately, they were talking about, you know, they may have normal cholesterol, they don't tend to have very low cholesterol. And so those patients are not the kind that have been studied.

Yeah. Yeah. I think, you know, you know, one of the things also I wanted to talk to you about was the sort of heterogeneity in the population in response to diet and also even, you know, medication. And, you know, I just And, and, uh, you know, I just have a couple of patients that I always sort of think back to one, one was a woman who was overweight, struggled to lose weight, uh, very insulin resistant. Her triglycerides were like 300 or total cholesterol was 300 or HDL was like 30 something, which is a terrible profile. She had a lot of small particles. She had very high total particle number. And I said, listen, I asked her an experiment. We've tried a lot of stuff. Why

don't you go on a ketogenic diet and eat butter and coconut oil, basically. And she did. And she came back and she lost 20 pounds, which she'd not been able to lose before. Her triglycerides dropped 200 points down to 100. Her total dropped 100 points. Her small particles went way down. Her total particles went way down. And she was so happy. And I was like, wow, this is amazing. And then I had another guy. And this is basically the opposite of what we're told to do, right? Don't feed people saturated fat butter and coconut oil, which is saturated fat. But for her, it worked. There was another guy who was about 50 something, who was thin, kind of like me. He was thin, older athlete, mid fifties, biked like 50 miles a day, super athletic. He's like, I want to trade a ketogenic diet. I'm like,

okay, but like, let's make sure we track your lipids and see what's going on. And he did it. And the exact opposite happened he got his his total cholesterol went up his particle number went up his small particles went way up i'm like you got to stop this it's not good for you so can you explain that and and this whole concept of this lean mass hyper responder versus the poor metabolic health and how we sort of maybe segment populations to figure out which group should have which therapy and which diet? Well, I'll respond to that, but I'll tell you right at the beginning, the answer is going to be we don't know. But I'll tell you a little bit about what we've been thinking.

It's like Einstein saying, I don't know, I don't have trouble with math. I think't know. I don't have trouble with math. I think you know. Because we've looked at this a little bit, and it's mostly my clinical experience rather than any of the published studies. But patients who start off with this waste, this lipidemic problem, or prediabetes in particular, they're the ones who show the benefit on the lipid profile. They can lower their triglycerides, they can lower their small LDL, as you mentioned. It's partly related to weight loss, it's partly related to low-carb diet. The LDL cholesterol can sometimes rise, but it's the larger part of it. So that's the kind of thing that, in the end, gives an overall benefit,

despite not lowering the standard LDL cholesterol test. And so that's a good thing in many of those patients. Weight loss is a big part of it. Low carb is a big part of it. Now the subgroup of people you described, I see those as well. They come to me exactly the kind of person you described. A lot of people are just health conscious and fit.

They're embarrassed because they're fitter than i am i think my goodness here i am trying to tell them what to do they're already doing it yeah um and so um but but they've gone on this diet and their ldl is going to be really scarily high levels i mean not just elevated but through the roof um and i i have to say first of all in those patients from a clinical standpoint and i've written on this i've actually wrote a editorial about this to one of the lipid journals, stating that people should not assume that just because these individuals are healthy and their metabolic state appears to be normal, when they have an LDL in the range we're talking about, it's in the same range as we see in patients who get heart attacks in their 30s and 40s because they have genetic defects. They need to be treated. And they should either go off the diet or if they're consistent, staying on the diet, they should be on the drug to lower the LTL.

So I think that's an important clinical message. Why that happens is really an interesting question. And we're launching a study. I'll tell you right now that we're trying to raise money for this study because it's not the sort of thing that the standard funding agencies tend to be interested in.

So we've got a program in collaboration with some colleagues in other institutions where we're gathering these so-called lean mass hyper-responders. I'm one of them, by the way. I'm definitely one of them. Oh, are you? Well, maybe we'll get your blood. So we're taking your blood sample. Because what we think is mass hyper responders across the country. I'm one of them, by the way. I'm definitely one of them. Oh, are you?

Well, maybe we'll get your blood. So we're taking blood samples. Because what we think is that this subset of people, because we haven't found the genes yet, but we think there's some genetic underpinning to this. And so we're looking to see if we can identify this metabolically from looking at their blood cells. So that's the, as I said, the end of it is we don't

know yet, but we're working on it. It's really an important question to answer because it's such an enormous change in our perspective on what regulates LDL levels. So this kind of a response conveys the LDL that we need to learn why. And so we really are focused on trying to find that. Yeah, I mean, I actually, you know, had a family history of heart disease in my family, and I was very curious about this. And I actually, you know, Michael Davidson from University of Chicago, I'm sure.

He's a great lipidologist. And he recommended a series of genetic tests specifically looking at lipid genetics. And, you know, I was able to identify patterns that I wasn't aware I had that were really interesting that kind of predisposed me to higher absorption or higher LDL production and, you know, more susceptibility to sort of changes. So I think, you know, people should not be guessing.

You know, I actually co-founded a company and I'm the chief medical officer for a company called Function Health. And it's really about empowering people with this information. If 1% of your doctors are ordering this test, you're not getting what you really need. And you're not looking at the lipoprotein fractionation. You're not actually even maybe looking at the other things that matter that we talked about, like lipoprotein little a or ApoB, which are also part of the story. So you're not even measuring insulin or blood sugar. So we actually provide all these at a very low price for people to be able to get, you know, for $500, a whole panel of 106-pound markers and includes a lot of these things that

we're talking about today that are often missed. And it allows you to give a much more personalized view. And then you can track your stuff over time. I mean, if you change your diet, you don't just want to do that and not look, right? You got to see what happens, right? I started to change my diet and eat more saturated fat. I'm like, oh, well, this is not good for me. I can't do that. But it's great for, you know, my patient Sally or Jenny, who's like very overweight and has really poor metabolic health. Yeah, really interesting. It's really interesting. And I think, you know, the question is, you know, you know, you know, should this test be done every year? Like how often should, should, should it be done? And what do you,

what do you think should be the sort of perfect, like if you were, you're seeing your, your cardiology patients, you're looking at their lipids, what does your panel look like? What are the things that you want to have to, that are, have to see for you? That's interesting. Well, I order a limited number of tests. I'm not necessarily one of these guys that orders, you know, dozens of tests to start with.

Because when I see a patient, it's usually because of a lipid problem to start with or a lipid question. And so it is focused on that axis. a patient it's usually because of a lipid problem to start with or a lipid question and so it is focused on that axis. So I order a standard chemistry profile looking at things like fasting blood sugar, liver function tests. I should mention just briefly that the kind of belly fat patient you were talking about also tends to have fat in the liver. And that fatty liver is becoming an increasing problem in the population,

leading to cirrhosis in many patients. And that's part of the syndrome as well. Yeah, it's connected to the poor metabolic health, right? So it's all one problem. Right. And the highest people with that kind of liver disease tend to die of heart disease because it's part of the soul syndrome. Anyway, I just wanted to throw that in because liver is a big part of it and so we measure liver tests

sometimes the treatments that we use the medication can raise the function test so i get that as a baseline um and then of course i measure the lipoprotein profile i do our i our ion mobility I do that routinely. We measure LP little a. We measure hemoglobin A1C, which I feel is a good screen for the insulin resistance, at least to start with. I don't necessarily insist on people having a more extensive glucose testing, but hemoglobin A1C works for me. And then every so often if there are other concerns, particularly if somebody has already had some evidence of asthma disease, that's a big inflection point. If somebody comes in healthy, I usually stop there. If they have any previous history of heart disease,

I would often order inflammatory tests, CRP, as you mentioned. And that's actually about it. That, to me, is sort of a core set of tests that captures really most of what I feel like. You check lipoprotein A or apob? I do measure lipoprotein A. I don't routinely measure aprotein B, not because it's not a useful test, but because the particle counts that we do essentially replace that. All the particles together make an A or B, so I don't usually learn anything. Sometimes I do it to just sort of double-check to corroborate the results. But I do sometimes measure that as well. Yeah, amazing.

And, you know, in terms of the treatment, you mentioned, you know, statin, you mentioned the niacin, you mentioned maybe the PCSK9 inhibitors. In terms of dietary approaches, you know, what are you telling your patients? As we discussed, I've done a lot of work over the years with varying carbohydrate intake.

And my focus has been sort of moderate. I have not been an advocate of the extremely low carbohydrate intake that characterizes the ketogenic diet, except perhaps in patients with diabetes where we've been involved with some studies that have shown considerable benefit in reversing diabetes with this diet. But for the- For the ounce of prevention, pound of cure thing, right? Yeah, right. So the majority of the people that I give advice to on diet is based on the benefit of going to about half of what they're usually eating.

So the average carbohydrate intake in the population is about 50-ish percent in total calories or higher. Or more. And so we've studied down to 24%, 25%. So just taking half the carbs away can have a very dramatic benefit on the small LDL profile. That's the kind of diet I mentioned earlier that we tended to study the most. And that's considered pretty low. It's not super low, but it's well below the current population recommendations. And so it makes it a little less acceptable to our colleagues in the world of dietetics and nutrition. But it's not difficult to achieve that by certainly taking as much added sugar as you can, if not all added sugars out of the diet. That's the first place

to start. And refined starches too, right? Right, and refined starches. That you can do an awful lot of good in replacing white starches with brown starches, replacing white rice with brown rice, replacing kind of standard breads with whole kernel grain breads, dark wheat breads. A German rye bread or something, right? Yeah, exactly. Using high-fiber cereal with no sugar.

These are the kinds of things I tell my patients to do, and it's not difficult for most of them to follow that kind of diet. And they lose weight with that diet. Yeah, it's true because the hidden dark side of this abnormal lipid profile is it's, it's kind of a indirect measure of your metabolic health, right? It's indirect measure of insulin resistance and your prediabetes. And so when you have that, your insulin levels typically are high and that makes it very hard to lose weight. And so insulin is a fat storage hormone, makes you store fat and, and actually blocks

this process called lipolysis, which is the breaking down of fat. So you can't actually burn fat. You store fat. It's like a one-way turnstile on the subway. You can get through, but you can't get out. And so this is really the problem. So if you look down and you see right now you have a little bit of belly fat, you're at risk. And it's important to check that. And even if you're not, it's important to check, you know, I think you're surprising this whole category of healthy athletes who, you know, are kind of walking around with things that they might not know they,

they have as an issue. We used to say, we used to say a pinch an inch. That's about it. Maybe an inch is too much, I don't know. There's some skin in there. And I think, you know, it's also, this highlights this sort of, you know, the reality that we're still learning. You know, we're still learning about heart disease, even though it's the number one killer. And, you know, I had a patient the other day that just kind of totally was an outlier. He was, you know, a 63 year old guy who exercised all the time, no body fat, you know,

eats super low, uh, starch sugar diet, lots of good fats, some saturated fat, but not like overabundance. And, uh, you know, but his lipid particle number was really high and his, his, a small idea was really high, even though his HDL and triglycerides were perfect, his CRP was perfect, his blood sugar, metabolic health was perfect. So I'm like, wow, we need to do a test to see, like, do you have any heart disease? And so we did a newer type of coronary angiogram that uses CT technology, but with AI interpretation that allows you to look at soft plaque. And I was sort of shocked. I thought he was going to have, like, a heart disease filled, you know, look at soft plaque. And I was sort of shocked. I thought he was going to have like a heart disease filled, you know, arteries filled with plaque. And they

were basically clean, even though his lipids were terrible. And I was like, well, this guy would go to a normal heart doctor or cardiologist and he would be immediately put on statins. Like, how do you, how do you think about somebody like that? Well, I do exactly the same thing you've just described. When I see patients who seem to be overall healthy and we're trying to decide because of the lipids, should they be on a statin? A coronary calcium test or one of the calcium related imaging tests is extremely useful. And in a patient like yours, and I see these patients as well, I think there's a perfectly legitimate argument, and I present this usually to the patient to help us decide,

should they just take kind of hedge their bets on potentially in the future developing some vascular disease because we may not be seeing it now, but by the time we do another test to see if it's progressed, it may be too late. And so are we going to just play the odds and treat anyway? But there is a perfectly legitimate alternate approach, and that is to consider this person somebody that might be protected for reasons that we would like to understand from these bad effects of these lipids in their blood. I'd like to know about their family history.

If they happen to have relatives who developed heart disease, I'd be a little more concerned. If not, it's not necessarily, it doesn't rule out the problem, but I'd be a little more concerned. If not, it's not necessarily it doesn't rule out the problem, but I'd be less concerned. I'd be willing and I offer this as an option to those patients. Let's check you again in a couple of years. Maybe you're one of those people that are genetically free. On the other hand, is it that bad to just take a statin, like I call it like a dietary supplement.

You just sort of pop a statin. Yeah, I'm not sure about that. I'm not sure about that. I mean, I don't know. They're dietary supplements. Well, I know you're a dietary supplement. But I should say there's some supplements that may be more harmful. That's fair.

That's fair. But, you know, the thing that concerns me about the statin is that, you know, it has mitochondrial effects and it's such an important part of healthy aging. And I worry about that. You know, I think, I don't know, I saw a paper once where they did muscle biopsies on everybody taking statins and basically universally everybody had, even if they had no muscle pain or elevated CPKs, which are muscle enzymes, they would, they would have some mitochondrial damage from the statin. And I worry about that. Yeah, I'm concerned about it as

well. Let me just mention one thing in relation to that, that even though we've been talking mostly clinical experience, I spend 95% of my time running a research lab. That's what I mostly do. And one of the projects that we're currently doing, which we've just written up and actually it's actually been published, is a study showing some of these mitochondrial effects of statin. It's actually in the literature. You can find it. Oh. Yeah. We'll put those in the show notes for anybody listening.

Maybe, Ron, you can share that with us. But I'd like to keep those. Because I share that concern. And I am concerned about somebody taking statin for 40 years and eventually developing muscle wasting that is worsened because of the statin. I'm perfectly, I'm very concerned about that. However, if the risk is there, I tend to have that, you know, kind of be the overriding issue. Yeah, for sure. And if patients are asymptomatic and staying physically active,

I mean, I have many patients taking statins in their 70s and 80s still. In fact, we keep asking, do you still need to take statins at that age, who are just exercising? And so, again, it's very individual, as we talked about, in terms of the LDL response to diet. I mean, people vary a lot in that. So a lot of it is just based on careful clinical monitoring and judicious use of statins when they're needed this is where

medicine is an art and not always a science so uh ron i i just want to thank you so much for your pioneering work for helping us for helping me with my patients because i i don't know what i've done what i've done for the last 25 years without without your work and actually be able to look at the data so granularly and understand people's real risks. You know, and I think I'm excited to see what comes next out of your lab. And also for people listening, as I mentioned, full transparency, I'm the co-founder and chief medical officer of this company, Function Health. And we do provide access to this for people without having to go to their doctor. You can just sign up online at functionhealth.com, get on the waiting list, and you can look at your lipoprotein fractionation with a cardio IQ test, lipoprotein little a, the ApoB, and many other biomarkers

that are really important in getting a full spectrum picture of your risk. So if you want to check it out, functionhealth.com. And Ron, thank you so much for your work and what you've been doing for all these years. I'm going to keep keeping up with you. It's hard to do because you're still going strong. And for those of you who are concerned about their cholesterol, who have people with high cholesterol or lipid issues in their family, please share this podcast with them. I think they're going to learn a lot. Share your comments about what you've learned about your own health and dietary habits and maybe what you've learned about your own cholesterol. We'd love to hear from you. and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. And we'll see you next week on The Doctor's Pharmacy. Thank you, Mark.

Hey, everybody. It's Dr. Hyman. Thanks for tuning into The Doctor's Pharmacy. I hope you're loving this podcast. It's one of my favorite things to do and introducing you to all the experts that I know and I love and that I've learned so much from. And I want to tell you about something else I'm doing, which is called Mark's Picks. It's my weekly newsletter. And in it, I share my favorite stuff from foods to supplements, to gadgets, to tools to enhance your health. It's all the cool stuff that I use and that my team uses to optimize and enhance our health. And I'd love you to sign up for the weekly newsletter. I'll only send it to you once a week on Fridays, nothing else, I promise. And all you do is go to drhyman.com forward slash pics to sign up. That's drhyman.com forward slash pics, P-I-C-K-S, and sign up for the newsletter and I'll share with you

my favorite stuff that I use to enhance my health and get healthier and better and live younger longer. Hi, everyone. I hope you enjoyed this week's episode. Just a reminder that this podcast is for educational purposes only. This podcast is not a substitute for professional care by a doctor or other qualified medical professional. This podcast is provided on the understanding that it does not constitute medical or other professional advice or services. If you're looking for help in your journey, seek out a qualified medical practitioner. If you're looking for a functional medicine

practitioner, you can visit ifm.org and search their find a practitioner database. It's important that you have someone in your corner who's trained, who's a licensed healthcare practitioner, and can help you make changes, especially when it comes to your health.