I am new to this site as have just joined the BHF. My first name is Stephen.
I had an ECG last November. This was done through a 'spiderflash' recording monitor for a continuous period of 7 days, with 3 attachments to the chest.
The outcome of this was that they said from the ECG recording that there were some low rates (beats per minute). According to the the graph the lowest recording was 34bpm, and the longest was for 5 seconds. Generally my beats per minute are in the 60-75bpm range. I did not have any symptoms or need to press the button on the monitor. The recommendation of having a pacemaker fitted was made.
Six months on I am concerned that the recommendation for a pacemaker should not be the case. I have had no symptoms of dizziness or other issues related to bradycardia.
I therefore would like to do another ECG test, either through the NHS or privately, to see what the present situation is. I have found it hard to get the NHS to do another test, and they want me to just go ahead with having a pacemaker inserted, which I am loathe to do, if it is not necessary or urgent at present.
I have seen a few videos on You Tube, that say even with occasional bradycardia (low bpm), a pacemaker is not always necessary, as the heart is quite capable of supplying the body and more importantly the brain, with good oxygenated blood.
I am therefore left with either trying to get another ECG, do nothing at all, or go ahead with having a pacemaker fitted, with taking on the pros and more importantly the cons (avoiding magnetism, microwaves, mobile phones, living near a 5G mast,etc).
Any suggestions appreciated.