Dragonheart
Well-Known Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 2
qrisk 3. https://qrisk.org/
My postcode reduces my risk by 1.6 from a blank entry. Presumably others could raise risk by similar or possibly even greater amounts. If we are not typical for our postcode or have only just moved there for example that’s a significant red herring (in either direction). Diabetic control isn’t even considered despite being reported as highly relevant to cvd outcomes. Types of LDL (part of the only cholesterol measure used - total/Hdl ratio) are not considered either and different types are reported to have significantly different risk profiles, yet they are rarely measured. Different eating patterns produced different LDL patterns and the assumptions used in the calculations (not measurements usually) may or may not reflect all eating styles.
I get that tools are needed for population health. I get that nothing is perfect but this seems particularly blunt. A bit like bmi (which is part of the assessment btw rather than height to weight ratio for example).
I do admit with the facts disclosed on this forum (and using my postcode as a ”good” one) I can only manipulate a level of 7 ish and not as low as 5.5 for the OP. But this is under the magic 10 still.
@Jenny65 do you have further lifestyle changes you feel you can reasonably make? More activity? dietary changes? room for more weight loss? Can you ask for additional testing like an CAC scan to see what is actually happening in reality if you get as far as a consultant? Ultimately the decision is yours as is the risk it assumes. Some prefer one type of risk over another. If you do take the statins you have the option to stop or change types if you do feel they are detrimental to your mental well-being or diabetes management. You may be one of those that do fine on them.
My postcode reduces my risk by 1.6 from a blank entry. Presumably others could raise risk by similar or possibly even greater amounts. If we are not typical for our postcode or have only just moved there for example that’s a significant red herring (in either direction). Diabetic control isn’t even considered despite being reported as highly relevant to cvd outcomes. Types of LDL (part of the only cholesterol measure used - total/Hdl ratio) are not considered either and different types are reported to have significantly different risk profiles, yet they are rarely measured. Different eating patterns produced different LDL patterns and the assumptions used in the calculations (not measurements usually) may or may not reflect all eating styles.
I get that tools are needed for population health. I get that nothing is perfect but this seems particularly blunt. A bit like bmi (which is part of the assessment btw rather than height to weight ratio for example).
I do admit with the facts disclosed on this forum (and using my postcode as a ”good” one) I can only manipulate a level of 7 ish and not as low as 5.5 for the OP. But this is under the magic 10 still.
@Jenny65 do you have further lifestyle changes you feel you can reasonably make? More activity? dietary changes? room for more weight loss? Can you ask for additional testing like an CAC scan to see what is actually happening in reality if you get as far as a consultant? Ultimately the decision is yours as is the risk it assumes. Some prefer one type of risk over another. If you do take the statins you have the option to stop or change types if you do feel they are detrimental to your mental well-being or diabetes management. You may be one of those that do fine on them.