Question

Which statement provides the best rationale for monitoring HDL and LDL as opposed to total cholesterol?

1. HDL and LDL monitoring is much cheaper than measuring total cholesterol.
2. Total cholesterol measurements include cholesterol that will be destroyed as well as transported to tissues and stored.
3. HDL and LDL measurements are more general, and frequently are used in patients not at risk for heart disease.
4. Total cholesterol measurements are often inaccurate and not as reliable as HDL and LDL

Answer 1

Monitoring HDL and LDL levels is better than only measuring total cholesterol because HDL ('good cholesterol transporter') and LDL ('bad cholesterol transporter') provide more detailed insight into heart disease risk, with the LDL:HDL ratio being a stronger predictor.

Step-by-step explanation:

The best rationale for monitoring HDL and LDL levels, rather than just total cholesterol, is that HDL and LDL provide more specific information about heart disease risk. HDL, known as the 'good cholesterol transporter', removes excess cholesterol from the bloodstream, helping to prevent plaque formation, which is essential for reducing heart disease risk. Conversely, LDL, often referred to as the 'bad cholesterol transporter', delivers cholesterol to tissues, and high levels can lead to cholesterol accumulation and plaque formation in arteries, increasing the risk of atherosclerosis and heart disease. Therefore, the LDL:HDL ratio is a stronger predictor of heart disease risk than the total cholesterol level.