Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy
There is a fine line between proactive and reactive medicine. My 80 year old cardiologist put me through all the tests, even though I didn't show any significant signs. . The only data point was and still is, my grandfather had a heart attack at 50, my dad at 60. . that's it for me. . borderline hypertensive . . framingham heart study said low risk, exactly the same score for another friend who had a heart attack. .
the calcium scan came back at 94. . . where the 100% score is total fossilization .. . . but agreed that there were no invasive tests. . . or at least these did not appear to me to be invasive. .
the smoking gun. . so I am on the same meds as those who have had heart attacks. .
the body is still a black box . . . until genetic medicine and AI is perfected, it will always be a black box. . and humans are humans. . the data and more data is great, but a human can only handle so much data, and that's where AI will really change medicine . . . being able to test thousands of data points for better predictors. .
AI Predicts Future Pancreatic Cancer | Harvard Medical School
OpenEvidence
full disclosure. . . i am a certified data junkie in the corporate world, building corporate data warehouses and building forecasting models. . |
Good story, and it shows that your cardiologist applied risk factors of family history, hypertension, gender, age, and ? LDL to appropriately evaluate risk. That's evidence based medicine, kudos to you and him.
That's quite a bit different that shot gunning a large array of unnecessary tests, usually for profit, or in the case of "holistic" or "alternative" practitioners, ignorance.
Also different than someone with no knowledge base being critical of the standard of care.
Stay healthy.