Coronary CT calcium evaluation/ score better than genetics in assessing cardiac risk.
3 Likes
Has anyone done or looked into Peter Thiel backed Cleerly Health type of cardiovascular imaging
Seems to be even better than normal CT/CAC as it can also see soft plaque/ongoing calcification and not just past processes that had become solidified plaque.
Currently, conventional measures of risk-factor levels, such as blood pressure and cholesterol, are used by doctors to determine a personās likelihood of developing coronary heart disease or blockages of the arteries in the heart. But some people may experience a heart attack, or related heart problem, without one of those conventional factors picking it up.
Because your thresholds of ldl cholesterol for treatment is too high. Lower LDL needs to be treated earlier.
Completely clueless doctors, itās not a meme, itās reality & parody.
I watched Dr. Aseem Malhotra on Joe Rogan. Are you a doctor? Do you see both sides of this? Have you looked at the studies that the other side sites?
Also I think he mentions in this interview that 11% of oncology studies are repeatable. Science is broken. I think before you reach the level of certitude that you apparently have, you need to do the studies yourself. Pharma wants to sell statins, so they buy the studies necessary. Itās happening.
Also rivasp12 is not a regular mainstream doctor (if there is such a thing). He reads widely and practices what he does. What do you actually do for a living?
As a farmer, sales people come to me and want to sell based on plots. They cheat like crazy. If you donāt do your own science you will get it wrong. Not might, will. The system will bury anybody not doing their own work. Also some people canāt even do their own work because of bias.
Good luck with your godlike certitude.
2 Likes
Yes, you are correct.
Repeating myself, posted more than one time.
All should watch and remember;
The pursuit of ignorance
Stuart Firestein
Everyone knows, the point is to understand.
Shamelessly plagiarized from;
Albert Einstein ā āAny fool can know. The point is to understand.ā
In the medical field especially, decisions are based on benefit/ risk analysis. Iām neither pro nor anti statin, it all boils down to risk assessment.
In the low risk individual with a CAC of zero, the 10 year prognosis is extremely good, and the CV mortality risk is very low, so the gain in aggressive management is also very low.
Iāve previously posted a cardiologistās recommendation for interventions based on different levels of CAC scores. This is a very reasonable way to assess your risk and determine the course of action.
I am seeing some impressive lipid lowering results with citrus bergamot at 1000 mg per day. Some additional benefits can be had with pantothene 600 mg per day.
In the high risk person, with high CAC scores, combinations of statins and PCSK9ās are warranted.
My main concerns with statins are the risk for developing diabetes and the cognitive/ memory issues that Iāve seen ( occasionally). There are reports of serious global amnesia episodes and a Mendelian randomization study did find impaired cognition with statins, but not with the PCSK 9 inhibitors.
Under I fully understand whatās going on in the brain with statins, Iām going to try other interventions first, unless the person is high risk for CVD. This is still not settled and Iāll probably change my mind as newer data emerges.
7 Likes
So your concern is that the studies on LDL canāt be repeated? It does, over and over.
Statins are literally dirt cheap because they are generic, and for the aware consumer a much lower dosage than whatās sold is still effective. I am agnostic about statins, but they are inexpensive and very low risk, meaning most people do not get side effects.
āInterveningā, if you can call it that, after advanced disease has already developed isnāt good, it isnāt prevention at least.
The ideal approach would be to get a CAC at a young age and to begin interventions than if indicated by the score. Of course, most studies reveal the greatest gains come from secondary, not primary, prevention, and thatās because they are the ones at greatest risk.
3 Likes
Still, you are only treating people who have advanced ASCVD, rather than preventing it. It isnāt preventative medicine. It is standard mainstream medicine.
Yeah, my concierge doctor is a great lipidologist and of course wants me to lower my LDL. Itās around 140. His is high because of genetics and he is now on a statin and pcsk9, and shooting for 0 as near as I can tell. I hope he doesnāt drop dead on me, I actually like him as he prescribed Rapa for me and lets me try things without getting too worked up usually.
I am of course uncertain and have been getting by pretty well with Niacin and Garlic, Gotu Kola and pine bark. I will throw in Bergamot and see if it gets even better. I did try statins for awhile, and he got me a months worth of PCSK9ās to try. It never got below 140 doing that either.
My CACās have improved by quite a bit, from three hundred something to two hundred something and he said it has moved to a better place too. I think itās the keto diet and exercise. Iāve never worked this hard and felt so good.
The episode with Gary Taubes on The Drive with Attia talking about the bad scientists and broken science, followed by the pandemic and obviously disastrous science has me checking everything 3 times. Thanks for the help.
3 Likes
Thatās a very impressive correction of your CAC score.
One of my associates is a Harvard trained internist and he had a remarkable correction of his score using vitamin k2 as MK-4. No results with the 7 form. He did serial testing to see what would have the greatest effect on his score.
4 Likes
Thatās very interesting. Arr there any studies looking at CAC with mk7 vs mk4?
Im just off the Southwest France where they seem to live forever thanks to mk4 in foie grasā¦
2 Likes
The only studies using MK4 that Iām aware of are the Japanese using it to both prevent and treat osteoporosis at 45,000 mcg per day. It works as well as any prescribed drug.
As far as CAC scores, he thought initially that the 7 would be more effective, but it actually did nothing. The 4 was quite significant and it worked over a relatively short period of time.
3 Likes
So why not use MK4 vs MK7? It seems everyone is touting MK7 instead of MK4.
Since itās cheap enough, I just take a single capsule that contains vitamin K1 and two forms of vitamin K2, vitamin K2 MK4 (Menatetrenone-4) and vitamin K2 MK7 (Menaquinone-7).
3 Likes
Really? Can you provide a reference for this? Nothing comes up when I search menaquinone 4 and coronary calcium on PubMed. I personally took MK4 for years back when it was popular, expecting my coronary calcium to decrease, only to be shocked by it actually increasing.
I did a page on K2 a while ago
Personally I take MK4 every day and MK7 when I donāt mind extra energy which can be sleep disruptive. I also take MK9 every day. I donāt think it does any harm (MK9).
There are complex relationships between these that I go into on my page.
3 Likes
No, no actual studies to support our observation. He used a high dose, 45 mgās, and we even observed calcified plaque coming loose off of dental plaque in some patients. It was strictly MK 4.
How do you feel about ācalcified plaque coming looseā¦ā?