OldShep
Über Member
- Location
- South West Scotland
Looks like you were running to go fetch the machine. 103!
Blood pressure
- Thread starter colly
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
Bazzer
Setting the controls for the heart of the sun.
- Location
- On the edge of reality
Each to their own.
There were no changes to my lifestyle I could make, but having seen first hand and at close quarters the effects strokes can have, I did not want my family to be put into the same position, if I could take steps to avoid it.
BoldonLad
Not part of the Elite
- Location
- South Tyneside
That is uncanny, with similar Omron Machine. I usually get almost same readings, doing same thing! ie there readings 5 minutes apart. The first is always highest, the following two are always lower, and, grouped quite close together.
Like you, I am still here, and pedalling, so, I assume all is (reasonably) well.
Last edited:
Bill Gates
Guest
- Location
- West Sussex
Just visited a very old thread I started in March 2010.
Quote:
Anyone take their blood pressure regularly at home?
My systolic (upper) varies between 145 and 125 and is normally around 135. Whereas my diastolic (lower) 65 and 75.
My last readings from today are
135/65 pulse 50
140/74 pluse 43
144/71 pulse 41
126/66 pulse 46
134/65 pulse 47
The pulse pressure (difference between the two values) is what concerns me slightly as it is consistently higher than what is normal (should be around 40); and mine from the corresponding blood pressures above are: 70, 66, 73, 60, and 69.
This could be the result of a very high stroke volume but might be linked to atherosclerosis.
Unquote
and
Quote
Just been to the GP and he agrees with me that the combination of high pulse pressure and low HR is an indication of large stroke volume. He took 2 x readings of my blood pressure and the first one was 162/78 (quite high, pulse pressure 84) and HR was 46; 2nd was 142/78 (pulse pressure 64) and HR was 45.
Oh and another thing which was amazing he agreed that I didn't need to take any statins!!!
They don't normally measure small/large particled of LDL but he is going to make enquiries to see if they can do it for me. Stunned really, quite a good bloke.
Unquote :
Lots of good stuff on that thread : - https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/blood-pressure.50493/
Quote:
Anyone take their blood pressure regularly at home?
My systolic (upper) varies between 145 and 125 and is normally around 135. Whereas my diastolic (lower) 65 and 75.
My last readings from today are
135/65 pulse 50
140/74 pluse 43
144/71 pulse 41
126/66 pulse 46
134/65 pulse 47
The pulse pressure (difference between the two values) is what concerns me slightly as it is consistently higher than what is normal (should be around 40); and mine from the corresponding blood pressures above are: 70, 66, 73, 60, and 69.
This could be the result of a very high stroke volume but might be linked to atherosclerosis.
Unquote
and
Quote
Just been to the GP and he agrees with me that the combination of high pulse pressure and low HR is an indication of large stroke volume. He took 2 x readings of my blood pressure and the first one was 162/78 (quite high, pulse pressure 84) and HR was 46; 2nd was 142/78 (pulse pressure 64) and HR was 45.
Oh and another thing which was amazing he agreed that I didn't need to take any statins!!!
They don't normally measure small/large particled of LDL but he is going to make enquiries to see if they can do it for me. Stunned really, quite a good bloke.
Unquote :
Lots of good stuff on that thread : - https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/blood-pressure.50493/
glasgowcyclist
Charming but somewhat feckless
- Location
- Scotland
Indeed.
Hypertension killed my father when I was sixteen.
He was only 54 and I'm now older than he was when he died.
Thanks @rualexander . Very interesting vid clips.
I have in fact ordered a device as suggested by few forumites. An Omron M7 Intelli IT.
We will see what we will see.
IanSmithCSE
Guru
- Location
- Worcester, Worcestershire
Good morning,
You may be well be right. :-)
I went to the NHS web site
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/nhs-health-check/what-is-an-nhs-health-check-new/
and
https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/mens-health/what-are-well-man-clinics/
to see what I was missing.
I won't be offended if you wish to elaborate on what I am missing. :-)
Bye
Ian
You may be well be right. :-)
I went to the NHS web site
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/nhs-health-check/what-is-an-nhs-health-check-new/
and
https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/mens-health/what-are-well-man-clinics/
to see what I was missing.
I won't be offended if you wish to elaborate on what I am missing. :-)
Bye
Ian
fossyant
Ride It Like You Stole It!
- Location
- South Manchester
Hmm,
Having had a good mate drop dead at 53 with no 'known' health issues, I went for a check up.
My mate cycled every day and at weekends. He had a heart attack whilst on the bike climbing a local hill. Coasted home, rushed to hospital, stent fitted and discharged. Was due for another stent once 'recovered' but dropped dead a few days after release - he felt 'fine' after discharge.
Only issue I have is my cholesterol is high, but both my parents have high cholesterol - so genetic.
I hate taking medication, but the low dose statins have dramatically lowered my cholesterol, with no side effects. I'd rather do that than drop dead like my mate.
Having had a good mate drop dead at 53 with no 'known' health issues, I went for a check up.
My mate cycled every day and at weekends. He had a heart attack whilst on the bike climbing a local hill. Coasted home, rushed to hospital, stent fitted and discharged. Was due for another stent once 'recovered' but dropped dead a few days after release - he felt 'fine' after discharge.
Only issue I have is my cholesterol is high, but both my parents have high cholesterol - so genetic.
I hate taking medication, but the low dose statins have dramatically lowered my cholesterol, with no side effects. I'd rather do that than drop dead like my mate.
PaulSB
Legendary Member
- Location
- Chorley, Lancashire
Apologies I've only just caught up with this. Seeing as you have put me on the spot! 🙂
These annual checks are about the individual and not about cost savings. Obviously it's cheaper for the NHS to treat the early stages of illness to prevent something more serious and costly but the first concern is clearly with the person.
You've already read the information on "well man" but seem to feel much of this is irrelevant to you as you've decided against the check up. For myself, and I would have thought for the majority, to have such a thorough review provides real peace of mind or the opportunity to catch serious illness at an early stage.
"If I had something serious like cancer" - tomorrow I am driving a good friend to hospital for a bone marrow biopsy. He is the picture of health. The only indication of a possible problem being the blood results from his recent well man check up. Without being facetious how do you know you have nothing serious going on inside your body? My friend knew nothing, he had even missed the large mass growing in the general area of his pancreas.
"I already eat well" I've been there. I've lost 18kg over the last four years. However the final 6-7kgs proved very difficult. I took professional advice and was first asked to keep a food diary for a week. The first response I got after this was "like many people you think you are eating well." It's true I did. We prepare most of our meals from scratch, I thought all was good. Then I learned about the need to give my body the fuel it needs based on my activity. This proved to be very different from my diet. I've since shifted the final 6-7kgs with no pain other than dietary changes.
"Exercise more" like you I ride. Four years ago I had a heart attack. People were gobsmacked. "But you're so fit" was the refrain. I had high cholesterol and I'm part of the 15% of the population with a genetic disposition to high cholesterol. For people like me diet is 20% of cholesterol control and statins 80% - without statins my cholesterol cannot be reduced. Basically in cholesterol terms what I eat has very little impact on controlling the problem.
So my overall point would be as lay people we are not in a position to decide how good or bad our general health is. An annual checkup provides professional opinion on one's health and what if any problems need addressing.
Last edited:
Bill Gates
Guest
- Location
- West Sussex
You may not have any faith in what I'm saying but if you have an open mind then at least take a look at this:-
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQWZbfkpNhY
https://sherifsultan.ie/about/
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQWZbfkpNhY
https://sherifsultan.ie/about/
Last edited by a moderator:
classic33
Leg End Member
"..He pointed out that his own review had found there were benefits in prescribing some dosages of statins for certain patients who were already diagnosed with heart disease or had a history of a previous heart attack or stroke..."
https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/hse-gags-surgeon-after-cholesterol-drug-claims-29636095.html
https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/hse-gags-surgeon-after-cholesterol-drug-claims-29636095.html
Bill Gates
Guest
- Location
- West Sussex
Just got back from the doctors and had a lengthy interview with the practice nurse re my annual check up and review of meds. Only 75 Mg aspirin.
Blood Pressure 118/64
Blood sugar levels 5.8
Total Cholesterol 7.2
Statins came up briefly, but I pointed out that for me the higher my cholesterol level the better because the stats showed that I would live longer than those with low levels. BTW I'm banned from contributing to the Statins thread.
She said that I'm not the typical patient who has had 2 x MI. They mostly have a list of drugs as long as your arm. That's right maybe you could learn something from me rather than the other way round I said.
With a blood pressure of 118/64 where are the narrow arteries I should have from high levels of cholesterol?
BTW I'm not replying to any more statins stuff, it might raise my blood pressure.
P.S. Was offered a vaccination for shingles. The side effects are experienced by 1 in 10 and the efficacy 50%. No Thanks
Blood Pressure 118/64
Blood sugar levels 5.8
Total Cholesterol 7.2
Statins came up briefly, but I pointed out that for me the higher my cholesterol level the better because the stats showed that I would live longer than those with low levels. BTW I'm banned from contributing to the Statins thread.
She said that I'm not the typical patient who has had 2 x MI. They mostly have a list of drugs as long as your arm. That's right maybe you could learn something from me rather than the other way round I said.
With a blood pressure of 118/64 where are the narrow arteries I should have from high levels of cholesterol?
BTW I'm not replying to any more statins stuff, it might raise my blood pressure.
P.S. Was offered a vaccination for shingles. The side effects are experienced by 1 in 10 and the efficacy 50%. No Thanks
Last edited:
PaulSB
Legendary Member
- Location
- Chorley, Lancashire
@Bill Gates I wonder if you could explain this please as I'm confused. You're happy to live with a cholesterol reading of 7.2 or higher because the stats show you will live longer. I don't understand this, could you explain?
As regards the blood pressure and high cholesterol observation. I had a heart attack four years ago. My BP was then, and has been for decades, around 125/65, so we are similar. My cholesterol was around 6.0. I don't have narrowed arteries but the high cholesterol was sufficient to block one atery in my heart.
I should add I'm an ex-smoker and this will have been a contributory factor.
As regards the blood pressure and high cholesterol observation. I had a heart attack four years ago. My BP was then, and has been for decades, around 125/65, so we are similar. My cholesterol was around 6.0. I don't have narrowed arteries but the high cholesterol was sufficient to block one atery in my heart.
I should add I'm an ex-smoker and this will have been a contributory factor.
