Aviation Medical - Heart Attack – Super Fit - surf lifesaving legend Dean Mercer Dies of Heart Attac

[SSCBD]

So has the CASA fallacy that YOU passed a GA “Medical Two” standard Just been blown out of the water and is useless, other that a money making scheme for CASA.

 

Australian experts have found a big increase in patients having heart attacks but who have no obvious risk factors such as high blood pressure, diabetes, being obese or smoking.

 

Key points:

 

• Study found rate of healthy patients having heart attacks went up from 11 per cent to 27 per cent over eight years
   
   
  
• Researchers not sure what causes patients with no risk factors to develop hardening of the arteries
   
   
  
• Doctors say it's a misperception that coronary disease only happens in older men who've smoked or lived an unhealthy lifestyle
   
   
  

 

 

Heart Research Australia's Professor Gemma Figtree and her team reviewed almost 700 heart attack patients at Sydney's Royal North Shore Hospital from 2006 to 2014.

 

They found the rate of otherwise healthy patients having heart attacks went up from 11 per cent to a surprising 27 per cent of patients over eight years.

 

"As interventional cardiologists we all remember the fit, young patient that comes through the door and looks up at you and says 'Why me?'" Professor Figtree said.

 

"It really triggered us to try and look at how often this was happening in patients who don't have traditional, modifiable risk factors."

 

Doctors found the surprise heart attacks occurred across all age groups, and were just as dangerous and deadly as those in people with risk factors.

 

 

[onetrack]

Yep, spot on. And after the nephews healthy wife dropped like a stone at age 42, with no disease risk history or indications of problems, we all found out about this ....

 

SCAD: The Heart Attack That's Striking Young Women

 

(She's recovered, but her heart is damaged so badly, she's now carrying a HeartMate 3 pump inside her. The hope is, her heart will repair itself - if not - she's shortlisted for a heart transplant.

 

The amazing thing is, the highly-qualified heart Docs had no idea what had happened to her - they thought she had a blocked artery, and wasted a couple of hours trying to insert a stent!)

 

 

[nathan_c]

Yeah okay cool guys so there are some individuals that unluckily have heart problems or diseases that are very fit and healthy and thats a gigantic shame and I wouldnt wish it on anyone.

 

But this does not mean that having to do a medical is useless or all of a sudden invalid. The medicals look for family history and well known triggers etc, and for any signs you could be pre disposed to a condition or if your health is sending you in that direction. Just because some healthy people get struck down by these unfortunate events doesn't mean that joe bloggs who is 150kg's with related health problems who would have a much higher risk of actually having some kind of disease or heart attack etc should now not have to complete a medical or have lesser medical standards imposed on him.

 

I for one will not be arguing for reduced medical standards for GA and if I was ever unfortunate enough to lose my medical then I wouldnt be happy about it but would acceptingly have to give up GA flying and that would be the end of it.

 

 

[derekliston]

I have to agree. I had a heart attack a bit over three years ago. I can't claim that I was young 67 but I can state categorically that I had none of the risk factors. I am a lifetime non-smoker, only drink maybe six alcoholic drinks a year (if that), have perfectly normal blood pressure and have never been overweight. Why? Who would know but I fly again courtesy of modern medical technology (a stent) and a stress echo-cardiogram and class2 medical every 12months. Crazy thing is that before the heart attack and presumably I was a heart attack waiting to happen CASA were happy for me to have a biennial medical but now that it is presumably fixed I have to have all this every year which increases the cost of my hobby quite considerably.

 

 

[Mick]

Not a good plan to point this out to CASA, they will ground us all.

 

 

[derekliston]

I have to agree. I had a heart attack a bit over three years ago. I can't claim that I was young 67 but I can state categorically that I had none of the risk factors. I am a lifetime non-smoker, only drink maybe six alcoholic drinks a year (if that), have perfectly normal blood pressure and have never been overweight. Why? Who would know but I fly again courtesy of modern medical technology (a stent) and a stress echo-cardiogram and class2 medical every 12months. Crazy thing is that before the heart attack and presumably I was a heart attack waiting to happen CASA were happy for me to have a biennial medical but now that it is presumably fixed I have to have all this every year which increases the cost of my hobby quite considerably.

Just a footnote, I am happy to comply with medical requirements because it keeps me au fait (as far as is possible) with my state of health.

 

 

[SSCBD]

Yeah okay cool guys so there are some individuals that unluckily have heart problems or diseases that are very fit and healthy and thats a gigantic shame and I wouldnt wish it on anyone. But this does not mean that having to do a medical is useless or all of a sudden invalid. The medicals look for family history and well known triggers etc, and for any signs you could be pre disposed to a condition or if your health is sending you in that direction. Just because some healthy people get struck down by these unfortunate events doesn't mean that joe bloggs who is 150kg's with related health problems who would have a much higher risk of actually having some kind of disease or heart attack etc should now not have to complete a medical or have lesser medical standards imposed on him.

 

I for one will not be arguing for reduced medical standards for GA and if I was ever unfortunate enough to lose my medical then I wouldnt be happy about it but would acceptingly have to give up GA flying and that would be the end of it.

Nathan I think you missed the point - no being rude.

Key points:

 

• Study found rate of healthy patients having heart attacks went up from 11 per cent to 27 per cent over eight years
   
   
  
• Researchers not sure what causes patients with no risk factors to develop hardening of the arteries
   
   
  
• Doctors say it's a misperception that coronary disease only happens in older men who've smoked or lived an unhealthy lifestyle
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

[red750]

Heart problems can be tricky. One day 5 years ago, I dropped like a stone, out cold for a few seconds. Got driven to the doctors, where they called for an ambulance. Nearly passed out again while being transferred to the stretcher, then again when being moved to the ER gurney. I guess I was a prime suspect for a heart attack, having been quite overweight all my life. But I have never smoked, and had less alcohol than Derek mentioned. But it was not a heart attack, as defined in the link in Onetrack's post. Rather than a build-up of plaque, similar to a fuel line blockage, mine was more like a distrubutor problem with the spark not getting through. My heart was barely firing on one cylinder, not pumping enough blood to my head to keep me upright. As soon as I became horizontal, the blood started flowing again, and I came around. A pacemaker was implanted to boost the spark. So technically it was not a heart attack.

 

 

[nathan_c]

Nathan I think you missed the point - no being rude.Key points:

 

• Study found rate of healthy patients having heart attacks went up from 11 per cent to 27 per cent over eight years
   
   
  
• Researchers not sure what causes patients with no risk factors to develop hardening of the arteries
   
   
  
• Doctors say it's a misperception that coronary disease only happens in older men who've smoked or lived an unhealthy lifestyle
   
   
  

No problems, I did see those points and I was not trying to say that that science or studies are not correct.

 

The point I was trying to make about it all is that yes, if you are a perfectly healthy human being with no risk factors and you have a heart attack well then thats unfortunate and theres nothing that any one could do to predict it and no medical was going to stop that.

 

Unfortunately there is a significant amount of the population, young or old that DO show risk factors, are unhealthy and are more pre disposed to having a heart attack, diabetes etc, and the risk factor for these people having issues is significantly higher then the people who dont show any predispositions.

 

You need to way to catch these people, (because they will and are flying in various forms already) and unfortunately this means the healthy people need to go through screening too even though their risk may be lower (but how would you know without seeing the doctor? Plenty of people dont know something is wrong with them until a doctor accidently finds it.)

 

Also when I say catch these people, I do not necessarily mean preclude from holding a medical, but they do need to be assessed in the first place. I think derikliston's case above is actually a great example. He had a problem, he had it medically rectified and while its unfortunate that its now more expensive for him to maintain it he has been given a medical back and is still allowed to fly (unfortunately thats the case after one heart attack because once you have had one its considered the risk of others is higher).

 

People will disagree but I personally think the current standard for a class 2 medical is pretty well placed, and if something does come up at the time of the medical then it is likely it is something that probably needs looking at anyway.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

WEll you cant fly according to CASA on their modified Ausroads medical if you have had stents or bypasses. But seems if you pay enough money to the right hands they will give you a class 2...sounds like double standards to me

 

 

[ian00798]

WEll you cant fly according to CASA on their modified Ausroads medical if you have had stents or bypasses. But seems if you pay enough money to the right hands they will give you a class 2...sounds like double standards to me

Rather than double standards it sounds to me more like they have had a medical professional investigate the case in more detail for the class 2 than for the RAMPC. For all the speculation and opinion on this forum, I suspect none of the people commenting actually have any medical background and therefore are doing nothing but speculating based on their very biased opinions. I don't think AVMED do everything right, but im certain there need to be medical standards in aviation. Let's take it to the extreme, how comfortable would anyone on this forum actually be flying on an airliner with a flight crew that hasn't been subjected to medical scrutiny? Yet in the airliner if a pilot becomes incapacitated there is another pilot to back them up, so if anything it is more critical in smaller aircraft.

 

 

[planesmaker]

Nathan c plenty of pilots flying now with no casa medical with no difference in health related incidents compared to those with casa medical. Casa medical is not required for safety reasons. If you think you are at less risk because you just passed your medical then your sadly mistaken. If you think about a private pilot doing 50 hrs a year, say 1 hr/ wk that works out to be 0.59% of his/her time actually flying, very low risk if you ask me.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Ian

 

you did say to the extreme...but here we are not that case 99% of us here are in that 10 to 50 hrs a year in a small aircraft usually taking a pax and thats all....not a aluminium tube with 200 pax on board. I am sure everyone would agree to tougher testing for those commercial pilots. This Recreational flying not commercial flying. The 2 are two very different scenarios

 

 

[ian00798]

Ian you did say to the extreme...but here we are not that case 99% of us here are in that 10 to 50 hrs a year in a small aircraft usually taking a pax and thats all....not a aluminium tube with 200 pax on board. I am sure everyone would agree to tougher testing for those commercial pilots. This Recreational flying not commercial flying. The 2 are two very different scenarios

The people on the ground who get hit by the aforementioned recreational aircraft may not feel the same way. 600kg doing 180km/h is not an insignificant amount of energy. And even RA AUS has a medical standard that may disqualify people from flying an aircraft. When casa issues a class 2 they cant assume your just flying a Cessna with 2 passengers onboard, they have to assume your are flying what the medical allows you to fly, which even on a PPL is nearly everything. I know of a metroliner that is flown quite often by a PPL holder, and if you honestly think that should be flown by someone who hypothetically may not have seen a doctor in decades then that is insane. Casa tried to come up with something reasonable with the RAMPC for people who don't fly bigger aircraft, and quite frankly it is reasonable. If your GP isn't confident you can safely fly an aircraft then it goes to aviation specific doctors who can then make the judgement call. Frankly if it was up to me I would introduce the same standard for RA aircraft.

 

 

[ian00798]

Nathan c plenty of pilots flying now with no casa medical with no difference in health related incidents compared to those with casa medical.

Have you got some evidence to back that up or is that just your opinion?

 

If you think about a private pilot doing 50 hrs a year, say 1 hr/ wk that works out to be 0.59% of his/her time actually flying, very low risk if you ask me.

But your in an environment which is considerably harsher than most environments, with some conditions that are known to trigger or exacerbate medical conditions. Have you actually calculated the risk? Otherwise there is no point asking you, because it is meaningless. I would be absolutely certain that avmed makes a risk calculation on every decision it makes, because they may have to explain the decision in a court of law, and saying "very low risk if you ask me" probably won't help them avoid a stay at one of her majesty's fine institutions.

 

 

[shafs64]

CASA is like the media they don't let facts get in there way.

 

 

[frank marriott]

Oh dear - you will always find one who wants MORE restrictions for some reason. It's sad but a fact or life.

 

 

[nathan_c]

Planesmaker,

 

That's not the point of a medical system though. It's not designed to tell you you have less risk just because you passed, it's just saying you are in the lower risk bracket. There's always risk with everything.

 

The system is designed to catch those that do hold a much higher risk. It's inconvenient for us who pass the medical, or those who could who don't feel like they want to spend the money on maintaining a medical, but there are people flying right now in RA without a medical that definitely should not be, that I can categorically state, and those are the ones the medical system is trying to weed out.

 

 

[ian00798]

Oh dear - you will always find one who wants MORE restrictions for some reason. It's sad but a fact or life.

Seriously how hard would it be to visit your GP once per year and have them give you a quick once over to make sure you are actually in a fit condition to fly an aircraft? It wouldn't even be particularly expensive. Then you only have to go and see a DAME if you want one of the higher classes of medical or if something comes up in the check with your GP. Signing a piece of paper basically saying yeah bro I feel like I'm fit to fly an aircraft just doesn't cut it as due process as far as I'm concerned because there is a bias in the decision making there.

 

 

[planesmaker]

Ian if I were you I would seriously consider giving up driving, with the risk other drivers may have drugs or alcohol or may have a heart attack, doing 100 kph and passing within a metre or two of you also doing 100kph, fairly risky I would say. A 2000 kg car can do a lot of damage. FAA & U.K. CAA have recognised the pilot medical for recreational/private pilots does not contribute to increased safety.

 

 

[ian00798]

Ian if I were you I would seriously consider giving up driving, with the risk other drivers may have drugs or alcohol or may have a heart attack, doing 100 kph and passing within a metre or two of you also doing 100kph, fairly risky I would say. A 2000 kg car can do a lot of damage. FAA & U.K. CAA have recognised the pilot medical for recreational/private pilots does not contribute to increased safety.

Damn right driving is risky, doesn't mean we shouldn't do it but a smart driver does everything they reasonably can to reduce the risks. Aviation should be the same, and an occasional medical to reduce the risk isn't that onerous

 

 

[nomadpete]

Seriously how hard would it be to visit your GP once per year and have them give you a quick once over to make sure you are actually in a fit condition to fly an aircraft? It wouldn't even be particularly expensive. Then you only have to go and see a DAME if you want one of the higher classes of medical or if something comes up in the check with your GP. Signing a piece of paper basically saying yeah bro I feel like I'm fit to fly an aircraft just doesn't cut it as due process as far as I'm concerned because there is a bias in the decision making there.

All well and good, but if we are going to create rules requiring a high standard of physical fitness for all pilots, shouldn't we impose those same standards upon all vehicle operators (eg motorists). If you are talking risk management to third parties, then the statistical probability of an unfortunate accident in a handful of recreational pilots doing a handful of hours activity must pale into insignificance when compared to the multitudes of motor vehicles doing multitudes of hours of operation annually. Those medical related events do happen on our roads but they are not seen as significant by the rule makers, otherwise there would be this same discussion happening on the motorists forums.

 

I haven't seen any statistics on RAA or GFA pilots (non Avmed) coming to grief through medical issues. So I am not convinced there is any benefit in strict medicals for recreational pilots

 

 

[planesmaker]

Seriously how hard would it be to visit your GP once per year and have them give you a quick once over to make sure you are actually in a fit condition to fly an aircraft?

 

That quick once over will not make sure you are in a fit condition for anything.

 

 

[ian00798]

Seriously how hard would it be to visit your GP once per year and have them give you a quick once over to make sure you are actually in a fit condition to fly an aircraft?That quick once over will not make sure you are in a fit condition for anything.

Yeah checking things like cholesterol, blood sugar levels, blood pressure etc is useless and won't detect anything. I mean it makes way more sense to just wait until you have full blown diabetes or something and then worry about it right? Preventative medicine is for noobs.

 

 

[planesmaker]

I have never had blood sugar, or cholestrol levels checked as part of a class 2 medical!