My Authors
Read all threads
For what it's worth, here's the 10-year risk of myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular death for the three candidates with a history of ASCVD:

Sanders: 46%
Bloomberg: 45%
Biden: 45%

Work shown below, using the SMART-REACH model. Gaps in the data provided are noted.

SMART-REACH is a model for estimating morbidity and treatment benefits in people with prior coronary, cerebrovascular, and/or peripheral artery disease. Here's one of the papers on it:

You can run it yourself here:…

Props to @axios for posting the letters submitted by the candidates:

* Sanders:…

* Bloomberg:…

* Biden:…

* Warren:… (For her, can't use SMART-REACH, but can use other calculators.) /3
Warren was most transparent, including specific medication & dosage, plus full hematology and chemistry lab results.

Bloomberg was the least transparent, not even identifying which medicines and breezing past recurrent skin cancer (see pic).

Biden & Sanders were in-between. /4
Here's Sanders. He didn't disclose atorvastatin dosage or creatinine levels. I guessed the dosage (range is 10mg-80mg) and used population mean for creatinine levels.

He is unlikely to have CVD for the next five years (<50%), but nearly even odds over next ten years (46%). /5
Here's Bloomberg. He didn't disclose his cholesterol-lowering med, so I gave him the same as Sanders. He didn't disclose creatinine levels, so again population mean. He notably has afib and takes an unspecified blood thinner (i.e., "DOAC"). Virtually same result as Sanders. /6
Here's Biden. Says creatinine is "normal." He had an aneurysm, has afib. He had peri-operative DVT and PE, but I accepted his doctor's conclusion this was due to immobilization and it hasn't recurred, so I didn't give him PAD. Again, virtually same as Sanders and Bloomberg. /7
The only other Dem candidate over 65 years old is Warren. Without a prior ASCVD event, we can't use SMART-REACH (she released full hematology and chemistry, so ironically we have her creatinine levels). We can use general ASCVD risk calculators. She has a 10-year risk of 7%.
SMART-REACH obviously isn't destiny, it's a model based on epidemiology. And there's other issues not covered by SMART-REACH where we lack data, such as Sanders' troponin levels after his MI, and the details of Bloomberg's recurrent skin cancer. /9
Does any of this matter to voters, beyond the obvious "people in their 70s with prior acute cardiovascular / cerebrovascular events are at substantially increased risk?" I don't know. But I think more transparency is better, so voters can decide for themselves if they care.

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Max Kennerly

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!