View Single Post
  #95   ^
Old Fri, Feb-10-17, 13:42
Liz53's Avatar
Liz53 Liz53 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,140
 
Plan: Mostly Fung/IDM
Stats: 165/138.4/135 Female 63
BF:???/better/???
Progress: 89%
Location: Washington state
Default

Quote:
Liz is right in that age is a factor. But I don't think the score is weighed. I think that the score you get places you in a different percentile of risk based on your age. With my score I'm in the 90th percentile for a 53 year old male. Yikes! But if I was 70 my score would have put me in the 50th percentile. If I was 90, that score would be well below the 50th percentile. So I don't think that the actual calcium score changes with respect to age, but the score as a "risk factor" assessment is age dependent.


Thanks, Ken for following up on this. I had my scan done back in 2008, and was away from town when I wrote that, so could not consult my scan report. As I look at it today, it appears you are right that the score is absolute, only the percentile you fall into, and your risk of CVD associated with the calcium, varies with age.

I thought Ken had settled the issue pretty well so did not bother to update my erroneous statement when I got home (frankly never gave it another thought), but I'm doing that now.
Reply With Quote