When it comes time for treatment, our options are strongly influenced by our age - or perhaps our relative level of fitness compared to others our age, rather than how many years we've lived, as this has a strong determining influence on whether we would do better on BR rather than FCR, for example. So it was with some interest I read this article by Carissa Bonner, Research Fellow, University of Sydney: theconversation.com/what-is...
Of particular relevance: "There is some research to suggest “biological age” formats like heart age have more emotional impact and may act as a wake-up call to motivate people like Richard to change their lifestyle and reduce their risk factors – which is a good thing.
But they can also mislead people by making them worry that their risk of disease is higher than it actually is. As such, they shouldn’t be used to make decisions about preventive medication, such as whether to take drugs to lower cholesterol levels or blood pressure.
If you get an older “biological age” on any of these calculators, don’t get too worried about the exact number – it’s not a direct measure of ageing or life expectancy."
Importantly, like receiving a diagnosis of CLL, these biological age calculators do provide a wake up call for people to reassess what they can do to improve their health through lifestyle changes.
Photo: Camellia in bloom. I was interested to learn that it is possible to make tea from the leaves of camellia plants - not surprising given the botanical name of the bush from which tea is harvested is Camellia sinesis...