Cholesterol Levels Got Worse While Using Reta?

Minkster

Explorer
Joined
Dec 28, 2025
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Location
The South
Has anyone else seen their cholesterol numbers decline while taking Reta? I've used Reta for 6 months and dropped 25lbs, with about 15lbs more to lose. My HDL fell by over 10pts, putting it too low, while my LDL & nonHDL rose by a couple points and were already elevated. This is completely opposite to what I anticipated. The only positive changes were in triglycerides, fasting glucose, and A1c.
 
How do you eat? Do you take any other supplements, and do you exercise consistently? For me, Reta brought my lipid and glucose readings down over 3.5 months.
 
Minkster said:

Has anyone else seen their cholesterol numbers decline while taking Reta? I've used Reta for 6 months and dropped 25lbs, with about 15lbs more to lose. My HDL fell by over 10pts, putting it too low, while my LDL & nonHDL rose by a couple points and were already elevated. This is completely opposite to what I anticipated. The only positive changes were in triglycerides, fasting glucose, and A1c.

HDL can be driven down by weight loss, and TRT can do the same. I'm on both, so my HDL sits a little below normal; everything else in my most recent lipid panel came back fine (that was last month). I'll have labs drawn again next month if I haven't already. I do have older labs, but those came from at-home capillary kits before I knew any better, so they're junk and can't really be lined up against the newer ones.

Last month I added fish oil, specifically 3-4g/daily of EPA/DHA.

3/16/26





91dafda3833d4843a499f00e513628085b467b999b21a4e3c93a77d1caf4251f.webp


e0777d086e4da15cc20d3c5f97615a360b50ddd8de30a76d59ab2a971e9c158a.webp
 
I eat fairly well, though I know I should get more fiber. I'm a 58-year-old female. I train with weights at a fairly heavy level and do cardio 4 days each week. Honestly, I was hoping my LDL would have gotten better.
 
Minkster said:

I eat fairly well, though I know I should get more fiber. I'm a 58-year-old female. I train with weights at a fairly heavy level and do cardio 4 days each week. Honestly, I was hoping my LDL would have gotten better.
For my LDL, Reta had basically no effect—if anything, it crept upward slightly. On the other hand, my triglycerides fell by 25% and HDL rose by 15%, which means my Tri/HDL ratio is pretty favorable at this point. That said, LDL is sitting around 200.
 
tendency said:

Minkster said:

I eat fairly well, though I know I should get more fiber. I'm a 58-year-old female. I train with weights at a fairly heavy level and do cardio 4 days each week. Honestly, I was hoping my LDL would have gotten better.
For my LDL, Reta had basically no effect—if anything, it crept upward slightly. On the other hand, my triglycerides fell by 25% and HDL rose by 15%, which means my Tri/HDL ratio is pretty favorable at this point. That said, LDL is sitting around 200.
My LDL is sitting at 154, and the problem is my HDL fell by 12 points — it needs to come up, and because of that drop my ratio ended up worse. On the triglyceride side, mine went from 110 down to 93.
 
Boosting HDL by itself is a real challenge. The reason most endurance athletes carry high HDL is their aerobic training.

Omega-3 supplements probably won't move the needle much...

For me, what really turned my HDL around was doing 25 minutes of cardio daily combined with eating properly.

One more thing worth noting: the cholesterol ratio (LDL/HDL) matters more than any single figure. Looking at the numbers on their own doesn't tell the full story.
 
Minkster said:

Has anyone else seen their cholesterol numbers decline while taking Reta? I've used Reta for 6 months and dropped 25lbs, with about 15lbs more to lose. My HDL fell by over 10pts, putting it too low, while my LDL & nonHDL rose by a couple points and were already elevated. This is completely opposite to what I anticipated. The only positive changes were in triglycerides, fasting glucose, and A1c.

For LDL or TG, a swing of just a few points (assuming the units are mg/dL) carries essentially no significance. Such values fluctuate naturally day to day, and likely even within the same day.

HDL is a different story. Its range tends to be tighter, and it matters considerably more, so a 10 mg/dL decrease is worth paying attention to. Is it possible you've reduced your saturated fat intake? A lot of people get convinced they should keep it as low as possible, and their cholesterol readings end up suffering for it. An illustration of what a diet centered on maximizing saturated fat can achieve (think butter, dairy, and coconut oil supplying most of the fat) is shown here.

My own HDL had already been at a decent level (I think eating plenty of cheese played a role), but when I moved to a low-carb/keto style of eating and lost weight along with it, the numbers improved substantially: HDL climbed a lot and TG fell a lot across roughly 18 months. I'm leaving out a lab result from the middle of that stretch (one where everything looked better) because it was drawn while I was still losing weight; the two results I'm showing both came from times when my weight was fairly steady, which makes for a fairer comparison.

There has been an overly strong emphasis on lowering LDL instead of raising HDL, yet when it comes to cardiovascular health, a meaningful rise in HDL is worth far more than a small drop in LDL.
 
One more thing I should mention (the last post won't let me edit it for whatever reason): every one of those results came from before I started any GLPs. Clearly, once GLPs enter the picture, that adds yet another complication when trying to read before-and-after lab work.
 
tubby said:

Minkster said:

Has anyone else seen their cholesterol numbers decline while taking Reta? I've used Reta for 6 months and dropped 25lbs, with about 15lbs more to lose. My HDL fell by over 10pts, putting it too low, while my LDL & nonHDL rose by a couple points and were already elevated. This is completely opposite to what I anticipated. The only positive changes were in triglycerides, fasting glucose, and A1c.

For LDL or TG, a swing of just a few points (assuming the units are mg/dL) carries essentially no significance. Such values fluctuate naturally day to day, and likely even within the same day.

HDL is a different story. Its range tends to be tighter, and it matters considerably more, so a 10 mg/dL decrease is worth paying attention to. Is it possible you've reduced your saturated fat intake? A lot of people get convinced they should keep it as low as possible, and their cholesterol readings end up suffering for it. An illustration of what a diet centered on maximizing saturated fat can achieve (think butter, dairy, and coconut oil supplying most of the fat) is shown here.

My own HDL had already been at a decent level (I think eating plenty of cheese played a role), but when I moved to a low-carb/keto style of eating and lost weight along with it, the numbers improved substantially: HDL climbed a lot and TG fell a lot across roughly 18 months. I'm leaving out a lab result from the middle of that stretch (one where everything looked better) because it was drawn while I was still losing weight; the two results I'm showing both came from times when my weight was fairly steady, which makes for a fairer comparison.

There has been an overly strong emphasis on lowering LDL instead of raising HDL, yet when it comes to cardiovascular health, a meaningful rise in HDL is worth far more than a small drop in LDL.
My saturated fat intake is definitely lower now—I eat a lot of baked chicken breast with broccoli for dinner. So I was really surprised when my HDL fell from 52 down to 41. My LDL has always been on the high side of borderline, but my total cholesterol-to-HDL ratio used to stay under 5. Now it's sitting at 5.2.
 
My biomarkers haven't budged one bit. Reason being, it's been roughly 5 years since I last got labs drawn. Feels great.
 
Back
Top