I was reading this blog from a Swiss founder who runs a digital health startup. The guy is 35, runs, trains, eats well and yet his heart attack risk was 20.5% and his cholesterol level kept rising without any symptoms. He ended up starting statins voluntarily. He’s not sick, but just “at risk” according to its data and the prediction model they use. I can’t tell if this is the future of smart prevention or the start of pharma-level hypochondria. Here’s the full article if you’re curious: https://care.me/ch-en/blog/prevention-starts-before-symptoms-appear/. I would love to hear from others if you trust these models? Or are we all just optimising to death everything we can ?
by RingSea724
9 comments
Angelina Jolie had a mastectomy based entirely on her theoretical risk of breast cancer. I see nothing wrong with this approach personally
How does normal health checkup work in switzerland? Is it covered by insurance?
Well genetics / hereditary issues (incl. undetected autoimmune diseases ) play a huge role.
Ofcourse hyperfocusing on one or two blood markers can be also very missleading e.g. having consistently a bit elevated CPK (Creatine phosphokinase) can be an indicator of heart muscle damage but is also normal for people who consistently workout and it can even be very, very elevated (like x10 of the upper limit) if someone ran a marathon 3-4 days ago.
So, I am 100% for prevention and check-ups (and find it weird that we live in such a rich country but prevention and check-ups are not really a thing), however interpreting the results is not so straight-forward or automatic.
We should normalize preventive treatments and get away from reactive treatments. When you know you have a high risk for something, then start early to better your chances for it to not happen at all. This applies to many health related things. Like… If you have a higher risk for diabetes (weight related or for different reasons), start to change your eating habits before you have it. If you know you have a weak back or knees, start working on that before something big happens.
I mean, what is the alternative? Not doing it, potentially having a heart attack with 40 and then treat it? News flash: Heart attacks are rarely something you just walk away from. You will always feel the aftermath of it. And I really don’t get how people willingly ignore their health and wellbeing, until it’s too late.
Farmongering by someone who benefits from that fear.
Also, brand new account with zero history other than this post and another similar one? And instead of posting on a longevity-focused sub, you’re posting here?
Nice try social media intern (if you’re not that founder himself)!
The guy selling it shares a personal medical anectode that shows how totally important it is?
I mean could be true. I’d look into dietairy changes for blood sugar, Vitamin D, avoiding vegetable and seed oils, exercise, improved sleep before taking Statins that inhibit cholesterol. On an unrelated note, our brain consists of cholesterol and dementia correlates with the introduction of Statins.
Fix the underlying issue vs fighting symptoms.
The effects of a high LDL cholesterol level are cumulative. Meaning the earlier you get it down, the better. And the longer it is elevated, the more plaque will have time to build up in your arteries.
Genetics might play a role, but also, just because you “eat well” (whatever that means) doesn’t mean you eat well for heart health. So many people think they eat well but they actually eat a lot of saturated fats, which are known for raising LDL.
I mean, it makes sense for him, given the business he’s in, he wants to push that narrative (might or might not truly believe it, but that’s another topic). To have a better answer we would need to check the science on prevention.
Idk Rick, I thought statins were widely debated 10 years ago as a useless treatment since they couldn’t directly link total cholesterol to an increase in cardiovascular diseases?
Comments are closed.