Triglycerides

Triglycerides are hard to figure. They have more to do with genetics than diet. So, what do you eat to lower your triglycerides and not raise your bloody sugar or suffer malnutrition in some other area. Mine shot up in one test and fell in next. I have to eat something.

Tell him to look at turkey sausage.

Keto. I have been on keto/generally low carb for two years. My triglycerides keep dropping to lower levels everything I get tested, and I eat a LOT of red meat and a LOT of butter. Maybe he should give it a try.

I have a blood test in the morning. I normally eat healthy-ish, but of course today I had a hot link for lunch, and Chinese food for dinner. Moo Goo Guy Pan isn't bad, but 3 cheese crab, an egg roll and some of those crispy chips in my egg drop soup and I am sure to hear about it from the doctor.

 Your doctor is absolutely correct. Not many know that.
To be more specific; cold-pressed veg oils are absolutely fine.

Veg oils such as canola and sunflower however, are not. High heat and chemicals are used in the extraction process. Heat makes oils rancid so they have to add chemicals to remove the smell.
It looks disgusting so they add more chems to clean it up.
Margarine is even worse.

I've been a strict vegetarian for over 25 years. If however, I was stuck in a remote place where I had the choice between animal lard or canola/sunflower oil, I'd choose the lard.
Given the choice between margarine or nothing I'd choose nothing.

Animal fats are NATURAL. Even rats and cockroaches do not recognise margarine as a food.

We have given up almost all fried foods. Bake oven fries, no more Popeyes or KFC. Grilled or blackened seafood. Steamed vegetables, fresh salads etc.

For my two cents, I'd advise your neighbor to listen to his physician before advice from some random guys on the internet.

That's partly tongue in cheek, but partly not. Physicians are not only highly educated and up to date on the latest knowledge of these conditions (at least they should be), they're more experienced than any of us. We trade stories about a friend, relative or neighbor we know who had high cholesterol... but a physician treats dozens or hundreds of patients a year with it. Their experience is far more relevant than ours, because their dataset is far larger.

None of us on a pipe forum are authorities on health issues .

Doctors, for the most part, know very little about nutrition. I wouldn't be taking diet advise from an MD.

Doctors are still pushing statins for Pete's sake! They have been proven to be ineffective in all but a few of the worst cases, and they cause far more harm than good. This has been proven in many studies. In a study of 10,000 patients that had already had a heart attack, the average life extension is less than 2 days. For this millions of people pay thousands of dollars and suffer muscle and joint pain, mental confusion and a list of other side effects. Every process in body relies on cholesterol and cholesterol precursors. The statins disrupt that whole process.
They prescribe beta blockers and ignore the cognitive side effects. People are diagnosed with senile dementia every day when they are really over medicated. I go to the best doctors in the Houston area, and I keep them on their toes. If they can't keep up I will go to another doctor. I have suffered years of pain and hundreds of thousands of dollars because of doctors who just follow the drug companies claims. Doctors are so bogged down in paperwork and heavy case loads that they rarely have time to read the latest studies and the stuff they teach in medical school is years out of date.
My primary care physician always asks me if I have any articles I think he should read and then we discuss it at my next appointment. I feel sorry for anyone who blindly do whatever their doctor says and never question if it's the right thing for them. G-d isn't spelled MD. I have a higher IQ than most of the doctors out there and I can study the same books they can. I can't do surgery on myself unfortunately, but I have doctors who I trust that I have known for decades to take care of that. All of my ancestors who didn't smoke cigarettes and weren't killed by accident or war lived into their late 80s and many into their late 90's. We eat a modified Mediterranean diet, but with more meat. We splurge sometimes, but otherwise what are we living for. If you're afraid to die you some introspection to find out why
Wife and I are almost guaranteed our 3 score and 10 unless I get the motorcycle running soon, otherwise all bets are off.
Either way looking forward meeting my Lord and will get there sooner or later.
YMMV 😎😁🤠

I'll mark the calendar in red. "Sean was agreeable on this day".
👍👍😁😎🤠

And this is my point. You can read the same studies, but unless you've spent 8 years of your life in full-time study of the background knowledge necessary to understand the literature, and have first-hand experience treating hundreds of people with the condition, you are not in any way equally equipped to properly interpret the literature.

People tend to over-simplify and cherry-pick when it comes to medical knowledge, and it strikes me that part of the reason is because they have trouble acknowledging that a full-time professional in a field knows more about it than they do, after reading a few books and putting in a few hours at google U. They delight in "catching" the doctors being wrong, even though in most cases it turns out not to be the doctors who are mistaken.

Sure, doctors have made mistakes, human error is inevitable. But it is inarguably true that, on any given issue, accepted modern medical science has a far greater statistical likelihood of being correct than a random guy on the internet. Thus my suggestion that the man listen to his doctor before us.

.I have spent 35 years reading medical journals in my quest for the best health I can achieve. I have taught myself along the way to look at studies for statistical significance, to look at the statistical model used, to look for confounding factors that were not considered and to almost never accept a meta-analysis because the data is always cherry picked. I have come to the conclusion that doctor's are morons when attempting to treat heart disease. Doctors don't read studies! You are very naive if you think your doctor reads medical journals in his spare time. Doctors get their Health information from their drug dealers that show up once or twice a week to supply them with the new wonder drug.  Treating  "...hundreds of people with the condition, you are not in any way equally equipped to properly interpret the literature." This is a meaningless statement. To mean something, a doctor would have to treat hundreds of people SUCCESSFULLY. This is not the case with doctors and heart disease. In 50% of heart attacks the patients had normal cholesterol. That should tell any simpleton that cholesterol is not a risk factor for heart disease yet cholesterol medications are a multi-billion dollar industry. It is very difficult for the average layman to understand cardiovascular disease for the very reasons pointed out by Stearmandriver.. people do not have the education level to decipher all of the gobbledygook that is on the internet nor to fully understand a medical journal study.

The best indicator of heart disease is LDL-Particle number. Do not confuse this with the typical LDL-C that most doctors test for.
There are other important blood markers too such as Lp(a), C-Reactive Protein.

Keep in mind too that typically 10-20 years go by before research in the lab makes it into mainstream medicine.

All I can say is, you guys seem not to know many doctors on a personal level, or much about research or clinical medicine. This idea that (ethical) physicians do not keep abreast of the latest literature is, well... bizarre. I don't know where it comes from or why it's perpetuated; my only guess is that for some reason, people have trouble trusting that a full time professional in a field knows more about it than them. I've never understood this position, and I would guess that those same people would find it ridiculous if someone read a couple books about their profession and then proceeded to try to tell them "you're doing it wrong", ignoring the years of experience that you've accumulated doing it full time.

The data is quite clear: modern medicine almost ALWAYS has a much higher success rate than either "alternative" treatment or non-treatment, whatever condition we're talking about. Sure it's not perfect and never will be and how could it be? I don't think any of us think immortality is possible lol.

I have no problem with an individual choosing to risk their health on any type of treatment or non-treatment that they want to, but the problem with giving advice to ignore modern medicine, when the advice giver isn't someone who truly understands modern medicine (ie a physician or researcher), is that an observer can get a skewed picture of how legitimate this advice is.

This is why, when my primary care physician decided to go to a concierge type of medicine where he has a limited number of patients and has the time to actually listen to my issues, and then has the time to explain it to me in plain English so that I understand why he is doing what he is doing with regard to my medical condition...fortunately I'm in really good condition considering my age and with my issues.  My blood test results are excellent and he says I could very easily reach my 90's as my parents did.  Not sure I want to reach my 90's considering the way the world is going.
Sean, to me, is absolutely right, an informed patient is critical to getting the best health care possible.