I put this below in response to Mike's post, but worth repeating separately
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi...
It's another piece on FH risk.
"The CVD burden from FH differs considerably from patient to patient. This was already recognized in 1966 when Harlan et al. reported normal survival in a large FH pedigree [28]. Recently, this was confirmed by three different mortality studies, carried out in the UK and the Netherlands [2, 3, 29]. In addition to patients with serious excess CVD mortality, many patients were observed having a normal lifespan."
Exactly the point I have been making futilely - to the many professionals I have seen. If I have got FH then one of my parents had it. They both lived to 72, despite having been smokers for about 30 and 40 years respectively - at the time they died average life expectancy was 76. Plus my mother had 6 children which doubles a woman's risk of heart disease. None of my siblings or cousins have developed heart disease, despite them being aged from their 50's to 70, though two of my cousins died of caner
Yet when we see consultants we still get scaremongering and are told we are automatically at high risk even if we are just possible FH. And all this does is cause stress which - oh so ironically - probably raises our risk of heart disease!
Coronary Calcification
Do I really have FH
FH and niacin
