IdahoMtnSpyder
Active member
It is reactive. Failure to react is why a lot of folks die needlessly.
My cardio did a blood test on me a couple of times after my second stent that required sending the sample to Mayo for testing. I think it may have been an inflammation marker, but don't recall. He decided it wasn't all that reliably beneficial so didn't do any more.
When I had my first stent my GP was shaken to his boots. He said I had done everything right by current medical standards, keeping my cholesterol, blood pressure, and blood glucose in check. I went in for a checkup 3 times a year. And yet I had to have a stent. I think it truly shook his faith in current medical thinking. The same things were still in check when I had to have the second stent. My brother was a pilot for Southwest for 19 years after being a Navy jet jockey and officer for 21 years. As a pilot he had a physical twice a year and everything was monitored. Yet, his episode occurred just over a year after he retired. He was physically active and exercised regularly this past year. My oldest brother had a clear carotid artery when he had a heart attack and required a triple bypass. Family history is a trustworthy indicator of the vulnerability to a heart attack.
Even being proactive, as you rightly advocate, is no guarantee of catching the development of a heart artery blockage. Often, the last, and only, absolute indicator of trouble is chest pains. That then demands immediate reactive response.
An interesting impact of a heart attack is it can screw up your mental processes. A guy at work several years ago had chest pains about 2 am. As he was standing at the sink taking antacids he thought about going to ER, only a couple of blocks away. But if it was only heartburn he would have to pay a $50 copay, so was debating if he wanted to risk a $50 fee. Ultimately he went, and ended up with a triple bypass. To a rational thinker the choice was a no-brainer, but he wasn't thinking rationally because of the effects of the cardiac event.
