I've been on statins for a number of years and been on BP pills. My BP before treatment was 175/95 and my cholesterol was 8.3 (HDL of 1.3) before treatment. BP now reduced to 155/90. I've been having a few problems with the statins and i'm 40 so GP sent me to lipid clinic to check if I had FH. No lumps / bumps etc on tendons so specialist couldn't diagnose FH (he pointed me to this site) and only one incident of early heart attack in quite a big family (rest of my parents aunts and uncles into their 60's now and no CVD - only one uncle died at 42 with CVD).
So - spoke to GP to ask opinion of whether or not taking statins would be a problem. She did a QRISK2 analysis and as I don't smoke, not diabetic etc, put in value of Systolic of 175 and Total Cholesterol / HLD ratio of 6.5, I got a risk of CVD in next 10 years of 3.9% (person with 'normal' cholesterol and BP gets 2%). So is all this effort based on 1.9% extra risk?
I then ran the same QRISK2 analysis with the same numbers if I was 50 and 60 and only by 60 did my QRISK2 numbers approach 20% (NICE recommendation for statin therapy!).
I'm now very confused about the actual risks in question. From a medical standpoint, doubling my risk of CVD in the next year is impressive, but from 2% to 4%?