ng0rge
#182
My personal goal is 50 which I think is very good and I would stop being concerned with it. But there are people here who would say go lower (not mentioning any names). And I don’t really disagree if you want to target 40-50. But below that there’s some question.
There’s a lot of info out there. But just for a basic:
" Normal ApoB levels (40-120 mg/dL) can indicate healthy cholesterol transport and clearance. ApoB levels towards the higher end of this range may begin to indicate suboptimal cholesterol clearance." I would definitely stay under 100.
" Can ApoB levels be too low?
Yes, ApoB levels can be too low. Currently, 40-50 mg/dL is cited to be the lower end of the reference range. However, further research is required to establish a standard consensus for the lower end of the reference range.
Low levels of ApoB likely result from medical conditions or diseases in the body including hyperthyroidism, cirrhosis, or malnutrition. While other blood tests are used to detect or diagnose those conditions, always seek proper medical attention and speak with a physician if you have concerns about low ApoB levels."
https://www.insidetracker.com/a/articles/what-is-apolipoprotein-b-heres-what-your-apob-blood-test-means
3 Likes
LukeMV
#183
Someone else suggested a PCSK9 but that was before I said what my ApoB is. Obviously, I don’t need a PCSK9 unless I were to discontinue Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe. I am quite happy with 41, considering it was 89 prior to the combo.
I am going to stop taking the CocoaVia and high dose nattokinase (I eat a lot of natto anyway) once I run out I think
2 Likes
L_H
#184
Interesting, how do you measure the effect?
1 Like
Unfortunately it’s not too scientific for this one. I go with a gut feeling. 
1 Like
LukeMV
#187
Aren’t those super low ApoB’s a consequence of those disease states mentioned, rather than a cause?
Do we know that intentionally lowering ApoB to super low levels is actually unhealthy?
1 Like
ng0rge
#188
Just did some searching and found this article had the most extensive info on risks of super low ApoB. Mostly, as you say, from other health problems but also:
" Health Effects of Low Apolipoprotein B Levels
May Increase The Risk of Infections
Research suggests that apolipoprotein B may help defend the body against microbes [4]. Lower would in theory, therefore, increase the risk of infections.
There is one study with 40 people with severe injuries that showed that those with low ApoB levels had an increased risk of infection compared to those with higher levels [27].
However, additional studies that would support this finding are needed."
https://labs.selfdecode.com/blog/apolipoprotein-b/
Also found this, but not sure how to interpret it: ** Apolipoprotein deficiency and chronic liver disease**
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11225145/
3 Likes
AnUser
#189
Ice cream consumption may cause:
- heat stroke
- sun burn
- shark attacks
- beach volleyball
- a burning desire to unleash your animal spirits
Correlation does not mean causation
2 Likes
LukeMV
#190
There may be something to this. I seem to get a little under the weather slightly more than I used to (not often or anything serious but generally more). I was attributing it to Rapamycin but maybe it’s having an ApoB of 40 or less. Thanks for sharing this info. Another reason I’m dropping Ezetimibe.
ng0rge
#191
You are correct. However, let me quote one of your heroes, Thomas Dayspring, “let’s take the 5 year old, who’s ApoB is 50”. So, if you think that that is too high, maybe you should start a school for 5 year olds, teaching them how to reduce their ApoB…statins maybe?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QX25LR6Dno
AnUser
#192
It’s probably going to be done with vaccines or gene therapy in the future.
ng0rge
#193
As you’ve said before - solutions to heart disease are available but for some reason, poorly implemented in larger populations.
2 Likes
The top pick for cocoa from ConsumerLab.
9 Likes
A good writeup by Kamil Pabis, a longevity researcher in the Bryan Kennedy lab at the National University of Singapore:
No, your chocolate also won’t kill you
Many articles have raised the issue of elevated heavy metal burden in chocolates and cocoa products. Many articles have been written appearing to debunk the former, too. The reality, however, is a bit more complicated than that.
Before we start, I want to clarify that this is not another post that will tell you how “proposition 65” and consumer labs are wrong. There is, in fact, and as far as I am concerned, no safe intake level of cadmium. The major theme that this post will follow is also a driver for my own research direction and supplementation. All things involve risks and benefits that need to be traded off.
Ironically, and sadly, more articles have been written warning about chocolate than articles praising the results of the COSMOS trial which found that supplementation with cocoa flavonoids reduces cardiovascular mortality (although the statistical evidence was a bit shaky). Hard outcome data from real trials trumps mechanistic speculation based on observational studies that is used to argue for lowering Cd intakes.
There is now no way around supplementing cocoa polyphenols if you are serious about your health. The literature overall suggested that flavonoids are beneficial for a long time but there was no evidence from controlled trials to support this idea until now. With the results of COSMOS this has changed and the polyphenol/flavonoid hypothesis is validated. What remains is the practical implementation, which is were worries about Cd are reasonable.
Read the full article here: No, your chocolate also won't kill you - Kamil’s Substack
4 Likes
