3 ms·

> heart disease is primarily not age-related Uh... it absolutely is? Not sure what you're trying to say here. All progressive diseases, including heart diseas

by ajross 1y ago

> heart disease is primarily not age-related Uh... it absolutely is? Not sure what you're trying to say here. All progressive diseases, including heart disease (cancer too) are going to be "age related" simply because they take time to develop. And plaque-related heart disease, the big killer, takes a long time to develop. The statistics are really clear here. People under 30 simply don't die of congestive heart failure absent one of a handful of very rare disorders. It starts to show up in middle age and really takes off after 70. They are preventable, sure. They are "early" deaths in that the sufferer would die before something else got them. But they absolutely skew toward the elderly. Heavily.

rybosworld 1y ago
Not really - that's like saying that dying from smoking is primarily age-related, just because the damage you're doing takes time to accrue. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2023/numbers-know-healthy-heart https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2023/numbers-know-healthy-hea...
- ajross 1y ago
  Dying from smoking is age related! How many lung cancer deaths are there in 20-something chain smokers? Honestly I think you're interpreting "age related" differently than the upthread discussion. The point is to renormalize a cause of death to something like "lost years of life". So if you have a preventable death (from smoking, say) that kills people with on average 10 years of life left, that should be less notable than one (maybe homicide) that kills people with 60 years to go on average.
  - rybosworld 1y ago
    I looked up the definition of age-related and it's true that I'm misusing that term. My original comment was in reference to the OP's comment: > I’m not really interested in how I’m going to die of old age, but what I have to worry about today to avoid an early death. My point was just that heart disease is primarily not caused by natural aging (the 80% of cases).

by ajross 1y ago

rybosworld 1y ago

Not really - that's like saying that dying from smoking is primarily age-related, just because the damage you're doing takes time to accrue. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2023/numbers-know-healthy-heart https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2023/numbers-know-healthy-hea...

ajross 1y ago
Dying from smoking is age related! How many lung cancer deaths are there in 20-something chain smokers? Honestly I think you're interpreting "age related" differently than the upthread discussion. The point is to renormalize a cause of death to something like "lost years of life". So if you have a preventable death (from smoking, say) that kills people with on average 10 years of life left, that should be less notable than one (maybe homicide) that kills people with 60 years to go on average.
- rybosworld 1y ago
  I looked up the definition of age-related and it's true that I'm misusing that term. My original comment was in reference to the OP's comment: > I’m not really interested in how I’m going to die of old age, but what I have to worry about today to avoid an early death. My point was just that heart disease is primarily not caused by natural aging (the 80% of cases).