Did you take a look at empirical health and what they are doing? Their goal is to prevent 1 million cardiac deaths by 2030.
Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
371–380 of 501 posts
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#372My first thought after reading: where does a guy like Peter Attia fit into the mix? Is he motivated and communicating in legitimate ways? Just a promotion machine at this point? Somewhere in between? I love the idea of knowing biomarkers but have trouble with what I might do with them. Yes there are specific actions, but then what? A lifetime of SaaS to monitor? Planning to ask my doctor for expanded tests in upcomin…
Attia's one of those expensive concierge doctors. But his public youtube recommendations are basically sound.
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#373Going deep on biomarkers, blood tests, and debates about optimal levels is okay for some people who derive motivation from obsessing over topics, but I’m starting to notice a trend where people obsess about these things for a couple years before burning out and moving on to the next topic. The best thing you can do for yourself is to establish healthy diet and lifestyle habits that are sustainable. A lot of people wh…
Guarantee this guy had wearing a CGM as a hobby a few years ago when metabolic health was popular among the tech dork set.
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#374So your doctor won't agree that you have heart disease but you need to be on a statin but statins are by prescription only... So if you're not going to hire an expensive doctor what can a normal person actually do?
Ask another regular doctor?
But the whole premise of this article is that the regular doctors won't get it or do it
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#375The value of the biomarkers are they applicable for all age range? What if someone already had a heart attack, then what should be the normal values post incident?
AFAIU, for LDL and ApoB, the real danger lies in the area under the curve. Lifetime exposure. That's not to say that lifestyle improvement can't help in other ways, but the damage caused by LDL is very difficult (impossible) to reverse.
So, if you hit the point where you already had a heart attack, you really want to prevent any further damage, but the "accumulated" risk is still there.
I think that's part of what makes LDL so tragic. You should care about it your whole life, but when you are young, you just don't.
Worse, high LDL is becoming a thing in children as well, that's an extra decade of accumulation which has historically not happened.
I don't think people should panic about these things, but I think it highlights the importance of developing good habits early, and the role parents and society has in making those habits easy for young people to adopt.
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#376Summarizing:
- Get a regular physical, or at least a blood test. (Don't wait 5 or 10 years)
- If it shows cholesterol issues, get an advanced lipids blood test, which can indicate whether it's caused by genetics (LipoA/ApoB?)
- If eating and exercise alone aren't helping, consider taking statins for cardiovascular health
- Consider a CT scan to check for calcium build-up, which is not reversible (afaik)
fwiw, I think the advice is much more than just "eat well and exercise".
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#377Summarizing: - Get a regular physical, or at least a blood test. (Don't wait 5 or 10 years) - If it shows cholesterol issues, get an advanced lipids blood test, which can indicate whether it's caused by genetics (LipoA/ApoB?) - If eating and exercise alone aren't helping, consider taking statins for cardiovascular health - Consider a CT scan to check for calcium build-up, which is not reversible (afaik) fwiw, I think…
A regular lipid panel won't test for Lp(a) which is genetic. So you need to test specifically for Lp(a) once in your lifetime because you need to know your risk factors. The test was $35.20 when I had it done by LabCorp last year. 20-30% of the population (including me) have high Lp(a). Statins don't reduce Lp(a).
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't the global population like 50% obese? What is your actual risk of dying from it if you are relatively in shape and in your 40s?
The most current and up-to-date risk calculator for heart disease risk is the PREVENT score. https://professional.heart.org/en/guidelines-and-statements/...
Thanks for posting this. I was able to plug in all the required values from my last checkup and blood work. Even EGFR was there, I've never paid attention to that before.
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have an objection to the "better lifestyle and diet" approach. Sure, it is absolutely true that better lifestyle and diet has a huge effect. However it is absolutely certain that the vast majority of people who are told to improve their lifestyle and diet, won't. The result is doctors giving advice that they know won't be followed. And thereby transferring potential fault from the doctor to the patient, with no imp…
You're arguing against a strawman. The reality is that most doctors will tell the patient their options and let them pick. While statins have some significant side effects in many patients, there is no downside to a better diet and frequent hard exercise (assuming proper technique). So it usually makes sense to at least try lifestyle modification as the initial therapy. And if that doesn't work for whatever reason th…
> While statins have some significant side effects in many patients
It's more accurate to say that certain statins have significant side effects in certain patients. Atorvastatin made me dizzy. But I switched to Pravachol and that went away. I switched again to Rosuvastatin and it stayed away.
Not all statins are the same.
Re: Ticker: Don't die of heart disease
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the signs are only in your head. There is no hard evidence. It is a disingenuous and false way to attempt to discredit someone. Anyone can be accused of it for writing anything at all. The argument that the writing started after the invention of ChatGPT is simply horrible because everyone starts sometime. It's like calling someone a witch in historical times. By the way, your comment looks to be AI generated,…
Of course there is no "hard evidence" unless someone leaves evidence of the prompt or AI response in their blog post. There are certain clues and syntax. Your comment seems like it would fit in much better on Reddit than on HN.
Negative. You're the one making unproven bad-faith assertions, trying to discredit someone on the basis of witch-hunting logic. Your comment belongs nowhere.