I have an issue with most of these risk calculators because it really isn't an exact science just an indicator. I think that the Harris Benedict formula for calculating how many calories we need is way off the mark for me, I couldn't possibly eat the amount I'm supposed to. It's an indication of an approximate amount.
I feel the same about QRISK3, I've been lucky enough to have my tubes thoroughly inspected and would suggest a different outcome to QRISK. Sorry, starting to go off topic.
The qrisk3 calculator is at ...
https://www.qrisk.org/three/index.php
I have an appointment with my GP next week to discuss my latest blood test results. I expect they will suggest statins, which I shall refuse. My age is 64 and my QRISK3 heart age is 63 (non diabetic), 70 (type 2) and 76 (if I was type 1). So they assume type 2 reduces life expectancy by 7 years and type 1 by 13 years. Since my HbA1C is now 43 I would not be classed as diabetic if this was my initial diagnosis and it looks like my numbers should be nearer the non-diabetic values, which is better than average.
Looking at that NHK Glucose Spike documentary, it finds that frequent glucose spikes results in calcification of the arteries even if you don't have diabetes. This is because high blood glucose causes inflammation. So a diet which prevents glucose spikes is going to protect your heart and lower the risk of cancer. High cholesterol is a response to inflammation, not the cause of it, so taking drugs to reduce cholesterol is treating the symptoms, not the underlying cause, which is spikes in blood sugar.
