So much of the medical industry is pure qwackery. Why are both the old and new high blood pressure cut offs round numbers? If it were actually based on science you would probably end up with something like 133/78.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yeah. It's mostly BS. Sure, high BP is a symptom that you're not living healthy. But there is not real reason to start using meds unless you are in a very complicated state. Diet (Stop eating fucking sugar all the time), exercise and less bad stress. I'm sure that works on most people.
Agreed on the diet advice. Sugar and other refined carbohydrates are a major issue.
All manual blood pressure cuffs are measured in round numbers (they go up by twos). In a lot of studies (like the ones that set these standards), practitioners will take manual blood pressure on patients so they can see/hear for themselves where their blood pressure it at.
If an automatic/digital blood pressure cuff is used, it will give measurements that go up by ones and results in odd numbers sometimes.
See? Not that crazy.
By round numbers I meant to the nearest 10.
Oh! My mistake. I guess I'm a little unclear what the problem is with that. Generally parameters for lab values, vitals, and so on are based on rather large data sets, and the official normal range is set based on what trend your're seeing.
So a person with a heart rate below 60 tends to start experiencing problems, and a person with a heart rate above 100 tends to also start having problems. So, 60-100 bpm is a normal heart rate. Are there people who do fine outside those parameters? Absolutely! Medicine is not a one size fits all proposition.
Still, it's good to have a starting point, so you can be alerted to look for certain things in a patient if a vital sign (like blood pressure) is outside the norm.