Reply do my doctor's concern

I decided to seek a new doctor after my doctor always pushes pills on me. When I had a UTI few months ago she immediately prescribed antibiotics without even running a simple urine test. The new doctor I went to see indicated she believes in nutritional prevention and seemed more holistic. Boy, was I wrong. After I told her I was Paleo she wasn't happy. 

Here's what she wrote: "The good points of Paleo diet is that it encourages cutting out sugars, refined grains and oils, and processed foods. The bad part is it also cuts out beans and legumes which are a great source of lean protein, and depends too heavily on animal foods. There is overwhelming evidence that consuming large amounts of animal foods is bad for you. The caveman didn't generally live past 40 so the didn't have time to develop heart disease, stroke, roost of our modern disease which have been shown to be related to animal product consumption."  

I let it slide although I was very unhappy with her ignorance. But when my blood test results came back with a very high number of total cholesterol (421) she said:
"your cholesterol is incredibly high and it is imperative that you cut back on the meet, cheese and eggs in your diet. As we discussed, cholesterol is not the only factor involved in heart disease but it is certainly a big one and we need to get your down ASAP." 

I am still debating if I should even reply. In the meanwhile since I am very interested in the topic here's the draft that I prepared and researched. 

HI Dr. XXX,

Thank you for your note regarding my test results. What are your thoughts about my Vit. D levels? Any suggestions? Should I just spend more time in the sun?

Even though my total cholesterol number seems high I am not really concerned with them. I will explain below but according to Dr. Davis and Dr. Pinney, it might be related to body fat loss and low carb http://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2012/06/i-lost-weight-and-my-cholesterol-went-up/

The recommended cholesterol number of 300 mg/d isn’t exactly backed up by science: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20683785

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/02/10/feds-poised-to-withdraw-longstanding-warnings-about-dietary-cholesterol/

Scientific Report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee,  "Previously, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommended that cholesterol intake be limited to no more than 300 mg/day. The 2015 DGAC will not bring forward this recommendation because available evidence shows no appreciable relationship between consumption of dietary cholesterol and serum (blood) cholesterol, consistent with the AHA/ACC (American Heart Association / American College of Cardiology) report. Cholesterol is not a nutrient of concern for overconsumption." http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015-scientific-report/06-chapter-1/d1-2.asp

There is plenty of more recent scientific information and growing body of scientists suggesting that dietary cholesterol is not something to be worried about. There have been many changes regarding nutritional recommendations in the past few years year and more official recommendations are in the works.   

As it seems, cholesterol levels are produced by the body and not related to intake from food. Eating cholesterol has very little impact on the cholesterol levels in your body.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19852882  

Years ago the Canadian Guidelines removed the limitation of dietary cholesterol as well as  Australia, New Zealand, Korea, Japan, the EU and other countries because the research no longer supports limiting it in your diet. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15640515  The United States should really catch up (and hopefully will do so by the end of the year). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22037012 as indicated in the 2015 dietary guidelines mentioned above.

http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/panel-suggests-stop-warning-about-cholesterol-in-food-201502127713

Thank you for recommending Dr. Fuhrman’s work but as we discussed when we met we agree only on the removal of sugar, sweets and refined foods. I am very happy with Primal nutrition and it’s working well for me.

You and I seem to agree about prevention of illness through nutrition but we don’t see eye to eye regarding the rest of the picture. I and social science strongly disagree with your statement regarding the caveman not living past 40. Those who survived the childhood years had a very good chance to live a long life. They did not die of bad nutrition but more of environmental causes (battles, plaques, accidents etc.).

If you are interested I highly recommend reading the writings of Viljamur Stefansson in our modern day era (beginning of 1900s). The Eskimo lived on meat only in harsh environment and lived very long lives. The Native Americans and many African tribes did so too. Health and Rise of Civilization by Mark Nathan Cohen is one among many excellent accounts.

We can agree to disagree.