New to the Board - Introduction

Newcomer introductions, personal anecdotes, caregiver issues, lab results, and n=1 experimentation.
dog19
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2021 1:50 pm

Re: New to the Board - Introduction

Post by dog19 »

NF52 wrote:
dog19 wrote:When I go into my SNP report for rs429358, I get this under the T allele:

Allele: T= (allele ID: 682795 )
ClinVar Accession Disease Names Clinical Significance
RCV000019447.31 APOE3 ISOFORM Pathogenic
RCV000856604.2 Alzheimer disease 3, protection against, due to APOE3-Christchurch Protective

Does that mean anything? This stuff is all so new and confusing to me!

Shane
Great question that shows how much these sites could use some lay people to improve how they present info!

My husband is ApoE 3/3 and his 23&me report shows exactly the same info. I found one scientific article from a cardiac and neurology lab in Spain that sequenced a convenience sample of patients, using a multi-step process to find how many had the Christchurch variant. Here are their results:
We have found 12 unrelated patients with the rare variant among a cohort of 2560 patients;... a 0.4%of allelic frequency.
APOE Variants E2, E3, and E4 Can Be Miscalled By Classical PCR-RFLP When The Christchurch Variant Is Also Present.

Something that may only be found in 1 out of every 200 people (1/2 of one percent) seems less likely for any one individual than "regular" ApoE3, which is found in 75% of people of European and ancestry.

Here's another topic from Snpedia that indicates a newer listing for Rs121918393 as a SNP that identifies the Christchurch variant (with C/C being the common variant; A/C showing one copy of the Christchurch variant and A/A showing two copies).
https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs121918393. I don't know if 23& me routinely screens for that SNP.
Did 23andme report your husband's results as ApoE 3/3 or 3/4 initially? From the article you linked, ApoE4ch is indistinguishable from ApoE3 in their testing. The report you reference seems to indicate ApoE 3/4ch = ApoE 3/3. Do I do some more digging into this, and if so, how? Would 23andme reference the Christchurch variant in my report if it wasn't actually present?
NF52
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 2772
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:41 am
Location: Eastern U.S.

Re: New to the Board - Introduction

Post by NF52 »

dog19 wrote:Did 23andme report your husband's results as ApoE 3/3 or 3/4 initially? From the article you linked, ApoE4ch is indistinguishable from ApoE3 in their testing. The report you reference seems to indicate ApoE 3/4ch = ApoE 3/3. Do I do some more digging into this, and if so, how? Would 23andme reference the Christchurch variant in my report if it wasn't actually present?
My husband's results are ApoE 3/3; on SNP rs429358 he shows exactly the same information as you do. Most articles I've seen refer to the Christchurch variant as a rare variant of ApoE3, not of ApoE4. You may want to reach out to 23&me's Customer Service to find out, but I think they are simply listing some other "clinical variations" of rs429358 rather than telling either you or my husband that they found that variant.

I've often had the experience of reading about genetic SNPs (small parts of a genome) that have been discovered to be associated with either increased risk or increased resilience to Alzheimer's pathologies such as tau and amyloid beta. In almost every case, 23&me has not tested for those, because they are not needed to determine ApoE status and are instead found only in massive GWAS (genome wide association studies) from tens of thousands of individuals.
4/4 and still an optimist!
dog19
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2021 1:50 pm

Re: New to the Board - Introduction

Post by dog19 »

floramaria wrote:
dog19 wrote: Cholesterol - 209 mg/dl (normal range is <=199, so this was a little high)
Tryglycerides - 89 mg/dl (normal range is <=149, so this one was normal)
HDL - 59 mg/dl (normal range >=40, so normal here too)
LDL - 132 mg/dl (normal range <=129, so slightly higher than normal)
Non-HDL Cholesterol - 150 mg/dl (I have read anything below 130 is optimal, so this one needs a little work)
Cholesterol/HDL ratio - 3.5 (not sure if that is good or bad, I wasn't given a normal range on the result)

My main goal is to get my cholesterol and LDL numbers down over the coming year.
Hi Shane, As you’ll learn as you read the forums, there are a lot of different opinions about the importance of total cholesterol and/or what the ideal range is. You can access the previous posts about cholesterol.... or LDL, or Triglycerides:HDL ratio or any other topic ....through the website’s Search function by using the magnifying glass to the left of your user name. Like Tincup suggests to you, I’d also prioritize the triglycerides to HDL ratio. To add more detail, Dr. Bredesen, whose recommendations I follow, recommends is that triglycerides to HDL ratio be 1.3:1 or lower. Yours is 1.5. With your current HDL of 59, your triglycerides would need to be 76 or lower to be in that range.
Thank you for all of your input! I am going to read Dr. Bredesen's book and take his recommendations as well. My goal is to get my numbers in a solid range, but hopefully not nitpick my diet so much so that I drive myself crazy. The thought of cutting foods like potatoes, whole wheat bread, and pasta completely out of my diet seems daunting and maybe unrealistic. I have no problem cutting out foods high in sugar like sweets, that will be easy for me. I also do eat red meat, but not all that often. Figuring out a sweet spot for a healthy but realistic diet is going to be my biggest challenge I think. I am back to exercising at least three days a week, which has made me feel so much better. I will be completely content with regular exercise and and a healthy, well balanced diet.
User avatar
floramaria
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 1423
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:22 am
Location: Northern New Mexico

Re: New to the Board - Introduction

Post by floramaria »

dog19 wrote:My goal is to get my numbers in a solid range, but hopefully not nitpick my diet so much so that I drive myself crazy.
Hi, dog19, that seems like a really good approach, especially since you are in your 40’s. In my 40’s I was still eating all of those foods you mention and hadn’t even considered what my numbers were. So you are off to a great and early start!
Even now, when I have tightened up my diet considerably and follow a ketogenic diet about 350 days of the year, I occasionally “splurge”. Having given up sweets, I’ve lost my taste for them, so a splurge now is a croissant. Another thing to consider is that you don’t necessarily have to give up all of the carb-heavy foods, but instead can find low carb substitutes. With more and more people following low carb diets, it is easier than ever to find things like almond flour tortillas (Siete brand). There are now cauliflower crust and almond flour crust pizzas. (For making them at home, Capello’s is my favorite alternative pizza.). You have plenty of time to gradually adjust your diet and move things in line with long term health.
Functional Medicine Certified Health Coach
IFM/ Bredesen Training in Reversing Cognitive Decline (March 2017)
ReCODE 2.0 Health Coach with Apollo Health
Post Reply