Would you have your child tested?

[BellyBelly]

Medical researchers have recommended that toddlers be given cholesterol checks to help prevent heart disease later in life. It would enable families to plan ahead and take precautions against heart disease.

A reporter is looking to interview and photograph a Sydney parent who has either had their child's cholesterol checked, OR who would consider doing it.

Please email Ellen at ConnollyE@sundaytelegraph.com.au if you would like to take part.

[BellyBelly]

So what does everyone think about this - cholesterol tests for toddlers?

[Indadhanu]

I wonder..... are they doing this because they are able to predict heart disease later in life in a toddler who has a healthy fresh and junk-food free diet.... or is it because of the increase of toddlers eating less fresh foods, and nore junky and fatty foods...?

[*Efjay*]

I would.

[Nadine]

If a toddler/child has a healthy diet, with very limited junk food, would one need to?

Are they purely just testing the childs cholesterol or the genetics (if that is possible) of whether the child is prone to it later in life, iykwim.....

If it's purely a cholesterol check, i wouldn't. If it is a genetics test, I would.

[Ozstar]

How do they test it? Is it a blood test? I would need heaps more info before saying yes but its something I would consdier.

[ricoandquesa]

If it was a genectic disease, yes I may. I would want to know how it is done etc. However, I dont think it is necessary if the child has a healthy diet.

[Olive]

if it ment potentially saving their life, then sure i would

[charli_girl]

i think we over-subject our children to invasive testing.
cholesterol tests involve a needle, and anyone who has been involved in taking blood tests from toddlers know that it is not a pleasant, or easy, thing to do.

as an RN working in emergency, i know that blood tests (for infants) normally involves a great deal of time and stress. first, a local anaesthetic is applied. it takes about 30 - 60 minutes to work. then you wait... next step - lay the child down, and restrict their movement.
hopefully, you hit the vein & can get the blood.

this process usually takes 3 people (person taking blood, another to restrict movement and parent to comfort the child), and is distressing for the child, and very often the parent.

i don't think i'll be rushing out for it.

[anoukstardust]

i say no i wouldnt get my child tested at a toddler, ill diffently wait to teenage yrs, and i also think if a child has heathy diet there should be no concern,

[alioops]

i think I would

[Roryrory]

Chronic high cholesterol runs in the family of a friend of mine and he has been on medication for it since he was 8, so if we had an indication in our family like that I would do it. But otherwise I wouldn't bother.

[joey2]

There is no way I would get my toddler tested for cholesterol. Food for thought, if your body has the ability to produce cholesterol maybe we need it!! Has anyone else checked out the Weston A Price Foundation info on cholesterol??

[dee73]

We have genetic high cholesterol in my family, so I would consider it when he's older, but not as a toddler. As someone who just watched my 2yo ds have doctors spend a very traumatic 20 minutes trying to get blood from him yesterday (he has an "undertermined virus!") I would not subject him to that again till he's much older. It's a horrible thing to have to hold your child down while someone inflicts pain on him!

[*Efjay*]

The reasons I would do it are because my Papa passed away following complications after haveing a tripple bypass. They believe it high cholesterol was a part of it.
My mother is also on medication to keep her cholesterol levels in check as she has type 2 diabetes & high blood pressure.

Oh & keep an eye out in the Sunday Telegraph for this artical. I am having a Photo shot tomorrow LOL

[suse]

I have concerns over testing at such a young age if it relates to testing of general cholesterol levels as an indication of future problems due to lifestyle, rather than testing for genetic predisposition, which I think is an entirely separate issue.

Should testing be voluntary or mandatory/routine, and will it be broadly effective if it is voluntary? Parents who volunteer their child for testing are more likely to be aware of the danger of high cholesterol and so would also be more likely to maintain a suitable lifestyle for avoiding the problem. Is it likely that parents of children at risk due to lifestyle would volunteer for testing?

Would cholesterol levels at such a young age be sufficient to indicate future problems? Even if testing identified the high risk cases, a lot of kids that are at moderate risk might not show signs of it at this age. Kids at moderate risk might even be worse off with testing at such a young age - if they did not show 'danger' signs the parents could be lulled into a false sense of security and think that their lifestyle is not a cause for concern.

Unless the tests go hand in hand with a thorough lifestyle review and education process, then general screening tests for toddlers might not be effective except in extreme high risk cases (where there are more obvious external signs of risk anyway). Routine testing of early primary school age children rather than toddlers would potentially identify a much broader area of risk, whilst still allowing enough time for preventative measures to be taken.

I also think that more should be done to address the cause. Except in cases of genetic predisposition, cholesterol related disease is a social problem that has medical implications, and would be better treated as such.

[Rach75]

jase his mum and dad are all on medication so yes i would especially if it could help show genetic links etc

[aussienic]

I think a lot would depend on what is involved in the testing.. As for blood tests sad to say but my 2 eldest have had enough of those anyways..

If it is just a finger ***** test or blood test I would say yes. I might not do it at toddler hood though.. Maybe around the age of 10 would be better