OT - Cardiac Issues

Off topic but the Heart Disease forum is very quiet, as in dead. And based on our demographic on PCa forum, I know there are a fair number of guys here, unfortunately, with experience in cardio issues...

As I’m in Florida 4-5 months a year, I decided I need a Cardiologist down here. If I have an event, or a problem, last thing I want is to be treated by someone I don’t know in an ER. My NY Cradiologist agreed that it was a good idea.

SO I SAW SOMEONE WHO WAS RECOMMENDED yesterday, and liked him a lot.
One thing surprised me though. When we talked about my stubbornly high Trigkycrides, which are now 315, he seemed not to concerned. He said that high Triglycrides themselves even with low HDL, which I have, don’t correlate with cardiac events. He said that LDL is the most and only super important thing, as far as risk of an event goes. And since my LDL is 46, he’s not concerned.

This goes against a lot of what I’ve read. This was my first time seeing him, so I didn’t want to challenge him with pressing the question.
He seems highly qualified, is actually an Interventional Cardiologist, and graduated Harvard Medical School 20 years ago

Any thoughts on this, if you have knowledge about it would be appreciated.

Another thing that surprised me a bit was, my blood pressure was 130 /70. That’s an ok number, but I always thought 110/70 was the ideal, especially with Coronary artery disease. He said no, that’s actually a little low, and 120-130/70-80 is the target.

Same thing, any thoughts appreciated

This is hearty news indeed. Now grab a tall one or whatever you like & we'll salute to you tonight.

mattam said...
Harvard MD with 20 years of experience telling you, don't worry about it. Sounds pretty good to me. 🙂

Thanks Mattam

Its what i said to myself. I read too much.

Yes, the lower the blood pressure, the better (lower risk of a cardiac event).

Did you fast for your Triglycerides test? They don't reach a nadir until a 12-14 hour fast.

< 70 LDL is the goal for those at risk for cardiac events or stroke, and lower down to 20 is not harmful.

A combination of lifestyle changes and medications cuts heart attack and stroke risk.

Speaking of Harvard Medical School, I subscribe to their monthly Harvard Heart Letter, which has been a help with my own heart problems.

Tim, yes, I fasted 12 hours.

Despite the doctors comment that the ldl is the more important number, I’ll keep working to get TG lower.

Bobbesian...of coarse exercise can make a difference...but not as much difference as no exercise makes!!! Thimk...

My TG issue is, I believe genetic,as I said I’ve struggled with it all my adult life. I actually was able to get it down to 85, with diet alone, but it was an extreme, and for me, unsustainable diet. So I know, for me , diet works.
I was just surprised to hear the Dr minimize its importance in light of a super low,LDL

I’m sure you’re well read on this topic Prat. I’ll just tell ya fwiw...when I had my physical for usaf flight training, they told me my triglycerides were too high for acceptance. Crestfallen...he told laughed and said, “Come back tomorrow and don’t eat a Big Mac before you come.” Passed with flying (lol) colors. That was 40 years ago. I have no heart disease (according to a treadmill a year ago and a heart cath 5 years ago).

Bobbiesan, PVC's are very common, and i am told (by both of my cardiologists) that occasional PVCs are nothing to worry about.
Talk about Bradycardia, my resting pulse is usually around 50-52. However in the morning, it is 47-48, even 45-46 on occasion. But i feel fine, so Dr isnt concerned.

Speaking of varying opinions and/or arterial calcium scores: about a year(or maybe less) after my RP- so maybe 6 years ago- my primary care doc- leans towards veganism- was concerned about my high total and LDL, and not high enough HDL, and wanted me on statins. My numbers had worsened since he checked them before my RP. But, he is a bit more on the natural side than most MDs( or he might be a DO, I'd have to check), so he wanted to confirm my need with a Calcium Scoring scan. He said "any other doctor would have you on statins already". He told me he had a guy in just a few week earlier exactly like me: same numbers, age, weight. He had the Calcium scan done and a week later he was either getting bypass or stents, something like that. But then he said: but, he also had a strong family history. And maybe some minor symptoms. And I reminded him that I not only had no family history, but my TGLs and BP were on the low side, and I had zero symptoms hiking briskly up steep hills with a pack. But, he wanted me to have the test, and I finally did. I came back at zero, I think bad a score of 100 to 300 means moderate plaque deposits. So, he did not push for statins any more, though he still recommended I work to improve my numbers. Though from what I read, improving my numbers a lot would not really do much to lower my risk when I already have a zero calcium score. However, I probably should have them checked, hoping they will have improved( except the TGLs, which were already pretty good), since, due to BP concerns, some recent IF and some low carb eating has removed some the excess weight and lowered the BP. So I am curious to see how it has affected the blood work, if at all.

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 12/26/2020 10:29:14 AM (GMT-7)

@BillyBob--My Coronary Artery Calcium score was 1,600, so I got put on statins. A stress test with echocardiogram was normal. My dearly beloved wife got a CACS of zero. Go figure. I follow all 7 heart health recommendations from the American Heart Association. Two years later, still no heart attack. The waiting is killing me.

@BillyBob. Initially, when I got the high calcium score, my anxiety about an imminent heart attack was sky-high. Like you do, I've done a lot of research and that helped a lot. Calcified arteries aren't a death sentence. I may need an invasive procedure someday, but in the meantime I live life, and no longer worry about it much.

Clocknut, that is incredible!