Thread by @MaxKennerly

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.

/1

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: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30369323

You can run it yourself here: u-prevent.com/en-GB/ReachCal…

/2

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

* Sanders: axios.com/bernie-sanders…

* Bloomberg: axios.com/michael-bloomb…

* Biden: axios.com/joe-biden-medi…

* Warren: axios.com/elizabeth-warr… (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%.
/8

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.

/end