low dose aspirin question

Forgot to mention that "Tildiem 90mg" is the brand name used
in the UK, but Dilitiazem is the name of the drug.

Thanks

"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

OK - sorry of this post is long, but the details are
relevant.

I have been recommended to take low dose aspirin by my GP.
I am 43, normal blood pressure, not overweight, fairly
fit, never smoked. Recent cholesterol reading 5.5.

I had some chest pains that were stress related. Once the
stress issues were resolved, the pains dissapeared and no
re-occurrence for 2 months. As part of checking me over
generally, my GP sent me for a treadmill ECG as purely
precautionary. This showed some very minor irregularity
during the last 30 seconds of the test. The cardiologist
then prescribed me tildiem 90, low dose aspirin,
sivastatin, an angina spray and gave me the card of a
local undertaker to carry at all times. I also had a
referral for an angiogram that will be in August. The
reason for the referral was mainly on the basis that my
father has angina.

The question the cardiologist didn't ask was "Did he
smoke"? My GP eventually asked this, and the answer is
that he was a heavy smoker for most of his adult life. My
GP felt that this was probably why he has angina, and
there may not necessarily be an inherited factor.

I don't see myself as an angina sufferer basically. I do a
13 mile bike ride over varying terrain 2-3 times a week, I
eat fairly heathily and drink with moderation.

The doctor has taken me of sivastatin on the grounds that
my cholesterol is "borderline high", and he agrees with me
that I should be allowed a few months to lower my diet by
healthier eating and regular exercise. He would have taken
me off the tildiem 90 too if it wasn't for the fact that I
have the angiogram coming up.

My question here is am I likely to benefit from low dose
aspirin? Is the balance between the gain of possible CHD
higher than bleeding in my case?

I did read on one website that low dose aspirin is not a
benefit unless you

Quoted message said:

are bad enough to have a risk factor on the "Sheffield
tables". Reading the "Sheffield tables" I'm not sure if I
actually "have" a risk factor - especially as I haven't
been diagnosed with anything as yet.

Does anyone have any input here?

Thanks

David

It is my understanding that usually you look for increased
risk of heart problems before starting aspirin. On the other
hand a heart attack can be worse than a gastric ulcer and I
don't know what that "minor irregularity" you speak of was,
but it may have been part of the reason to take a closer
look at things with an angiogram.

Aspirin can really help and my suggestion is to go along
with what your Drs. say until you get a better picture.

Bill - not a Dr.

Quoted message said:

It is my understanding that usually you look for increased
risk of heart problems before starting aspirin. On the
other hand a heart attack can be worse than a gastric
ulcer and I don't know what that "minor irregularity"

you

Quoted message said:

speak of was, but it may have been part of the reason to
take a closer

look at

Quoted message said:

things with an angiogram.

Aspirin can really help and my suggestion is to go along
with what your

Drs.

Quoted message said:

say until you get a better picture.

That's what I intend to do. I have a follow-up appointment
with the cardiologist booked for a few weeks after the
angiogram, and I'm intending discussing this at that point.

I can't be more precise on the minor irregularity, as
neither the cardiologist or the GP really explained it. I
think the reason here is that they may suspect a "False
positive" and would rather get more information themselves.
I gather that the readings refer to the lower left
ventricle, but I may have misheard this. However, I have
been told that whatever the irregularity is, it only showed
up in the last few seconds of the test.

The difficulty I have is that so far medications seem to
have been based on knee jerk reactions, and the need to be
cautious to avoid litigation. I'm happy to work with them,
and make whatever lifestyle, diet and exercise changes they
advise, and take whatever medicines they prescribe. Getting
them to work with me, and not rely on knee jerk reactions
is a battle!

The statin was prescribed on the basis of one cholesterol
test that was probably innacurate anyway. I wasn't told to
fast, and had eaten breakfast and a packed lunch in the 12
hours preceding the test. Hence the GP was more than happy
to take me off of this, try controlling it with diet and
exercise, and go for a proper test after fasting in a couple
of months time.

The Dilitiazem may be genuinely required, and I will discuss
that after the angiogram. The GP would have taken me off of
them temporarily (they make me nauseous), but said that he
wouldn't do that until after the angiogram "just in case
something happens". He didn't say the rest of the sentence
"and you sue us", but there was no doubt that was implied.

The low dose aspirin isn't based on anything historical.
My understanding is that the reccomendation to take this
is based on the ECG result. I don't really want to take
it unless there genuinely *is* an increased risk of
heart attack, and until the angiogram I guess we don't
really know.

Thanks for the reply.

David

David said:

.... The cardiologist ... gave me the card of a local
undertaker to carry at all times....

You mention in a later post that he never explained the
"minor irregularity" in your ECG.

Far more important than your aspirin question, in my humble
opinion, would be another: Have you gone for a consult by
another cardiologist?