Coronary Artery Calcium Score By Computed Tomography

[ddjd]

What's the opinion of this examination from a peat perspective? waste of time? harmful?

 

[ecstatichamster]

Treats you as a passive recipient of medical care. Helpless. I don’t like it.

 

[rei]

Well according to what i have heard it is the only standard that should be used to diagnose risk and current situation. LDL, HDL etc. are just very inaccurate markers that are not decisive and in some cases can lead you in the wrong direction.

Look up ivor cummins videos on youtube, he is one of the leading people promoting this.

 

[ddjd]

Well according to what i have heard it is the only standard that should be used to diagnose risk and current situation. LDL, HDL etc. are just very inaccurate markers that are not decisive and in some cases can lead you in the wrong direction.

Look up ivor cummins videos on youtube, he is one of the leading people promoting this.

thanks, interesting to hear.
What about issues with radiation? is it dangerous in that regard

 

[rei]

the radiation will of course damage you. But very minorly compared to other methods. Especially radioactive contrast agents should be refused.

 

[ddjd]

the radiation will of course damage you. But very minorly compared to other methods. Especially radioactive contrast agents should be refused.

do you think for anyone under 40 its pretty much not necessary?

 

[rei]

I would imagine it is unhealthy, but we get every second similar unhealthy rays from space, so as long as the exposure has some real benefit i would not hesitate one second.

 

[ddjd]

I would imagine it is unhealthy, but we get every second similar unhealthy rays from space, so as long as the exposure has some real benefit i would not hesitate one second.

no i mean for someone under 40 the likelihood of calcium deposits in the heart a relatively low so perhaps the test isnt so vital. thoughts?

 

[rei]

I have yet to see compelling evidence against such levels of radiation once in a decade. Quite frankly, if i was concerned i would do it yearly.

 

[ddjd]

I have yet to see compelling evidence against such levels of radiation once in a decade. Quite frankly, if i was concerned i would do it yearly.

How old are you out of interest?

 

[rei]

That is irrelevant, what i meant is that if i got a high score i would implement changes and get scanned again until the progression stops. The radiation dose is kinda insignificant compared to whatever you are doing that causes it to advance.

 

[ejalrp]

In order to "treat" a high CAC score, cardiologists will put you on statins. Strangely some studies have shown that individuals with high Agatston (CAC) scores have fewer coronary incidents than people with low to moderate Agatston scores. It is believed that calcium in the arteries is less of a danger than unstable plaques. Also strange, some studies have show that statins speed up the increase in Agatston scores (yet simultaneously reduce cardiac incidents). Try and make sense of all this I dare you!