I don't know about LDL in particular, but low total cholesterol is associated with some health problems. Here is some info:
Can Your Blood Cholesterol Be Too Low?
By Larry W. Axmaker EdD, PhD
Everybody knows that high blood cholesterol puts you at risk for coronary heart disease. The conventional wisdom about cholesterol has been, "the lower the better." That may not always be true.
The research that has been done on low cholesterol has indicated there may be some health problems when your cholesterol gets too low. Both men and women with low cholesterol (total cholesterol below 160) have been shown to be at increased risk for anxiety and depression. People with low cholesterol also have an overall death rate higher than those with normal cholesterol levels (between 160 and 200).
It's Not As Simple As It Sounds
Those with low cholesterol are not at increased risk for cardiovascular diseases, but their overall risk for depression, cancer, hemorrhagic stroke, respiratory diseases, and suicide increases. Why? There is no definitive medical answer at this time. And, in some instances the benefits may outweigh the risks.
There is some evidence that having very low cholesterol alters the way brain cells function, affecting mood stabilizing brain chemicals. That may explain the increase in anxiety and depression. Much more study is needed to better understand the role of cholesterol in the overall functioning of the body.
If Your Total Cholesterol is Lower than 160
Talk with your doctor - it may be OK, or there may be medical problems that can be treated and will help stabilize your cholesterol at a healthy level. But, some people at high risk for heart attack or stroke are encouraged to bring their cholesterol level below 160 - and their LDL cholesterol level to 100 or below.
A balanced, healthy diet can raise cholesterol levels (especially HDL cholesterol) into the healthy range. Eating more fish and fish oils can help.
Depression and anxiety can be treated, so see your doctor if you or those around you notice symptoms.
Summary
For the half of American adults with high cholesterol, there is no immediate need to worry about the dangers of low cholesterol. But if you are in the ten percent of adults with total cholesterol levels below 160, check with your doctor to be sure you are not at increased health risk. Don't try to lower your cholesterol level below what your doctor considers normal and healthy. In the case of cholesterol, normal is good for most healthy people.
2. Low Cholesterol Levels May Be Linked To Depression, Anxiety. May 25, 1999. Available online at: http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/fff8a.htm. Accessed August 24, 2005.
3. Too Little Cholesterol Is 'Harmful for Elderly.' PersonalMD.com. August 2001. Available online at: http://www.personalmd.com/ news/n0803031908.shtml. Accessed August 24, 2005.
According to a web page on cholesterol testing from the the Discovery Health Channel, abnormally low levels of cholesterol may indicate:
hyperthyroidism, or an overactive thyroid gland
liver disease
malabsorption
inadequate absorption of nutrients from the intestines
malnutrition
Manganese deficiency has also been linked to low cholesterol levels (hypocholesterolemia).
While high cholesterol levels may be indeed be warning signs of many health issues, it does not logically follow then that all cholesterol is bad and you should try to wipe out any cholesterol in your body. We need cholesterol to build and maintain cell membranes, for production of sex hormones, to aid in the manufacture of bile (which helps digest fats), and to convert sunshine to vitamin D. Cholesterol is also important for the metabolism of fat soluble vitamins, including vitamins A, D, E, and K. Check out How Stuff Works: Cholesterol to find out more about the role of cholesterol in our bodies and the many important functions it performs.
Low Cholesterol - Links to Anxiety, Depression, Suicide & Hemorrhagic Stroke
The BBC news reported in 1999 that low cholesterol levels were linked, in both men and women, to depression and anxiety. In a separate story on the same topic, the BBC also reported that, "People with low cholesterol levels are more prone to suicide and depression." The article went on to point out that previous research has suggested that low levels of blood cholesterol were linked to low levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin in the brain.
The CNN web site has an article on low cholesterol that reports that people with cholesterol below 180 had twice the risk of hemorrhagic stroke over people with cholesterol levels at 230.
__________________ dx pcos 1984, type II diabetes 2001, also hypertension
Met 2000mg since 2001, started Glucophage XR 4/22/04, then switched to Met ER 6/04; also: multi, Vit. C, Vit. E, B12/folic acid combo, fish oil & borage oil combo, garlic capsules, cinnamon, Vitex, calcium with magnesium/zinc, biotin, CoQ10, selenium,iron
Other meds: Verapamil and Altace(for blood pressure)
Started laser hair removal 7/29/03, completed 3/04 (it works!)
UAE for fibroid 3/24/03 and 3/16/04
I know you posted the topic about having too low cholesterol two years ago, but you are the only post I've found that mentions this. My doc told me the same thing today. I am reading the internet and freaking myself out. What happened with your decreased cholesterol levels??
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
A retrospective analysis suggests that intensive statin therapy resulting in very low LDL levels is safe, but whether such levels should be a target is not clear.
Results of studies in patients with cardiovascular disease suggest that intensive statin therapy is associated with reduced risk for cardiovascular events. However, LDL cholesterol levels in these patients could be well below the target levels of 100 mg/dL or even the 70 mg/dL level suggested in recent guidelines. In this retrospective analysis, investigators analyzed outcomes in more than 1800 patients with acute coronary syndrome who were randomized to intensive lipid-lowering therapy with atorvastatin in the PROVE IT study (Journal Watch Apr 13 2004). For the current analysis, patients were stratified by LDL levels at 4 months (>100, 80–100, 60–80, 40–60, and <40 mg/dL).
After 4 months of therapy, most subjects had LDL levels of 60–80 mg/dL (31% of patients) or 40–60 mg/dL (34%), but 11% had levels of 40 mg/dL or lower. Patients with lower LDL levels at 4 months were more likely to be older, male, or diabetic, and to have lower baseline LDL levels. No significant differences were noted in liver, muscle, or retinal abnormalities between patients with lower LDL levels and those with higher levels. The lower-LDL patients had fewer cardiac events, but no significant differences were reported in overall mortality. Comment: This retrospective analysis suggests that intensive lipid-lowering therapy to achieve very low LDL levels is safe and effective. The authors suggest that, based on these data, we need not reduce statin doses when intensive therapy results in LDL levels well below guideline recommendations. However, it remains to be determined whether such very low LDL levels should be our target, and whether adverse effects of very low levels could emerge during longer-term follow-up. — Kirsten E. Fleischmann, MD, MPH Published in Journal Watch General Medicine November 25, 2005 Citation(s):
Wiviott SD et al. Can low-density lipoprotein be too low? The safety and efficacy of achieving very low low-density lipoprotein with intensive statin therapy: A PROVE IT-TIMI 22 substudy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005 Oct 18; 46:1411-6.
Study Is Side Effect Of First Comparison Of Lipitor, Pravachol
ORLANDO, Nov. 13, 2003
(AP) A new study offers an answer to doctors' long-running debate over how far heart patients should lower their bad LDL cholesterol: As low as possible.
"There is no such thing as too low an LDL. That's what the data seem to show," said Dr. Steven Nissen of the Cleveland Clinic. He presented the results Wednesday at a meeting of the American Heart Association in Orlando.
He conducted the first head-to-head comparison of popular statin drugs. The results suggest that lowering cholesterol more aggressively than the current national guidelines recommend can completely stop dangerous clogging of the arteries.
Nevertheless, other experts caution that it is too soon to rewrite federal guidelines, although that may be in the offing as several new studies tackle this issue in the next few years.
The latest study compared two statin pills, Lipitor and Pravachol. It found that Lipitor did a considerably better job of both lowering cholesterol and controlling the insidious buildup of gunk inside the arteries when given to people with serious heart disease.
Exactly why, though, is unclear. The benefit could not be totally explained by the lower cholesterol levels. Researchers wondered if some other property of Lipitor, such as its stronger effect on inflammation, accounted for its more potent effects.
The study was sponsored by Lipitor's maker, Pfizer. Another similar but larger study is nearing completion, sponsored by Bristol-Myers Squibb, which makes Pravachol.
Guidelines recommend getting LDL, the bad cholesterol, down to 100. But many have wondered whether lower is better. The latest study lowered that target to 80 and found the more rigorous treatment seemed to stop artery clogging in its tracks.
The study involved 654 adults with LDL over 125 who had symptoms of coronary disease. They were randomly assigned to get either 40 milligrams of Pravachol or 80 milligrams of Lipitor, the top doses available of the two drugs. At the time the study began in 1999, Lipitor was considered to be the most powerful statin on the market.
The doctors used highly sensitive intravascular ultrasound to watch what happened to the buildup, known as plaque, in volunteers' heart arteries. After 18 months of typical follow-up, average LDL was 110 in the Pravachol patients and 79 in those on Lipitor.
The volume of plaque in their arteries increased almost 3 percent in the Pravachol patients, while it actually regressed a fraction of 1 percent in those on Lipitor. However, the shrinkage was too small to be statistically meaningful.
Even when people on Pravachol reached the same LDL levels as those on Lipitor, their plaque buildup was worse. Nissen speculated that Lipitor's especially powerful effect on inflammation of the blood vessels could be the reason.
In this study, Lipitor lowered this inflammation, as measured by a substance called C-reactive protein, by 36 percent, while Pravachol reduced it by 5 percent.
"I think Pravachol is a good drug," Nissen said. "I just think it's not the best drug. I do respect that all statins work. But there are differences across the class."
Julie Keenan, a spokeswoman for Bristol-Myers Squibb, noted that the study did not measure actual heart complications, such as heart attacks and death, and earlier studies have shown that Pravachol reduces the risk of both.
Dr. Christopher Cannon of Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital is directing Bristol-Myers Squibb's comparison of the two drugs and said that study will judge which one does a better job of keeping people alive and healthy.
He said Nissen's finding that Lipitor is more effective at blocking plaque is "fascinating," but he asked, "Is it important?"
Meanwhile, Dr. Raymond Gibbons of the Mayo Clinic said cardiologists will demand hard evidence that more aggressive cholesterol lowering saves lives before they make wholesale switches in therapy.
"We are not treating the people who need it, period, to even moderate LDL levels," Gibbons said. "We are not getting them to even 110. This study suggests we need to go to a new level."
Guidelines from the National Institute of Health's National Cholesterol Education Program, last revised two years ago, set LDL under 100 as the target for treatment in people with heart disease.
Such a things as too low LDL? 
2 years later.... 
