Test your risk of a sudden cardiac arrest

[tcg]

Should be dead heart attack at 47 and stroke with a few stents.

I run and up until this year I could finish in the top 3 of my age group when running 5k races. I've got one more marathon in me as part of a relay team and I'm done due to to injuries then it's back to biking.

The exercise is what allowed me to survive both incidents.

I ran a 5k 30 days after my heart attack. 100% blockage cardiac arrest.

Total cholesterol is 110 (through diet and exercise) blood pressure 115/60, resting heart rate upper 40s, can remain on a treadmill stress test until the doctor gets bored.

I'm nursing a 70% blockage in a tricky spot that would be difficult to stent.

My cardiologist has informed me that what's going to kill me, if I don't get hit by a bus, is a sudden plaque rupture that I may or may not get advanced warning for. He said hopefully I'll be near an ER when it happens.

When I had the heart attack the doctors could not believe I survived or that I actually had one.

Point is those online risk tests are a good starting point but at some point you really need to get evaluated by an actual doctor.

It would be better to do that before the heart attack that confirms you're at risk.

[Minnesota51]

It's all good and well to take risks with only your own life.

But don't risk other people's lives by driving if you are at high risk of losing consciousness at the wheel of an RV on the highway.

The test I posted is a good start. See a cardiologist for an evaluation if the online screening test says you are at high or medium risk. It's simply the right thing to do.

[SarahW]

I am much more afraid of idiots texting on their cellphones than sudden cardiac events.

[Arch Hoagland]

Originally Posted by SarahW

I am much more afraid of idiots texting on their cellphones than sudden cardiac events.

Amen!!! We got rear ended by a person who was texting.

I've had quadruple bypass surgery and suggest to anyone who thinks they may have a heart problem get your rearend to a doctor and find out what's going on.

[followingsea]

Originally Posted by Minnesota51

The test I posted is a good start.

The test is BS as I explained before. I will happy if someone with a medical explains why I could be wrong.

To para phrase Mark Twain: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

I will use SIDS as example. I was watching infant grand daughter when one of those fear mongering public service TV adds stated that she should be put into the crib on her back. She would roll over when put on her back.

So I looked at the statistics. There is no statistical basis for the advice. There is explained sudden infant death and unexplained. While explained deaths for at risk babies have been reduced significantly, doctors are just guessing about how to reduce the risk.

What is another word for 'unexplained'? Guessing.

My wife recently died in her sleep. The listed cause is cardiac arrest. This really a best guess based on a discussion between the coroner and her cardiologist concerning 20 years of serious heart problems that required medicine with severe side effects to prevent a stroke.

The good news is that she did not have a stroke before setting the kids out on there own.

What the fear mongers do is use statistics to support an agenda.

This brings us to assumed risk. When you go out in public you assume a risk of something bad happening to you. The risk of being killed in a MH accident is extremely small.

Worry about the drunk driver getting on the freeway the wrong direction or the truck driver falling asleep and crossing the center line.