Relative vs. absolute risk
Many wellness services quote relative risk reductions — numbers that sound dramatic. A 40% relative reduction on a small absolute risk can mean very little for you personally. We translate both, always.
The Science
Evidence first. Claims last.
Preventive medicine has a credibility problem: too many services promise too much. Our editorial stance is deliberately conservative — we follow established clinical guidelines, we state uncertainty openly, and we never sell outcomes.
Our scientific commitments
01
Guideline-anchored
Our cardiovascular approach follows internationally recognised prevention guidelines, including European cardiology and lipidology recommendations.
02
Biomarkers with a track record
We prioritise markers with substantial outcome evidence — apoB, Lp(a), HbA1c, blood pressure — over novelty tests.
03
Trends over snapshots
Single values are weak evidence. We build decisions on trajectories measured under comparable conditions.
04
Exploratory is labelled exploratory
Where evidence is immature — microbiome analysis, for example — we say so, prominently.
05
No outcome promises
We do not claim to extend life or guarantee health improvements. We provide measurement, interpretation and structured care.
06
Peer-review over marketing
Our editorial content is written to a standard you could take to your own physician.
Editorial
How to read health claims
Association is not causation
Observational data shows relationships; it cannot prove that changing X will change Y. We are explicit about which interventions rest on randomised evidence and which rest on reasonable inference.
The biomarker hype cycle
Novel biomarkers are marketed long before they are validated. Our rule: a marker enters clinical use when guidelines or outcome studies support it — not when press coverage peaks.
What wearables can and cannot tell you
Consumer wearables are useful for trends — sleep, activity, HRV. They are not diagnostic devices. We use them as continuous context around clinical measurements, never as a substitute.
Selected references
A starting point for reading the evidence we build on.
Ference et al., “Low-density lipoproteins cause atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease”, European Heart Journal, 2017
The mechanistic and genetic case for apoB-containing lipoproteins as causal.
Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
Major individual-participant-data analysis of risk factors and vascular mortality.
ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias
European Society of Cardiology and European Atherosclerosis Society recommendations.
Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology, “Heart rate variability: standards of measurement”, European Heart Journal, 1996
The foundational standards for HRV measurement and interpretation.
References are provided for context and do not constitute medical advice or endorsement of any specific outcome.
Ask us anything about the evidence
If you want to know why a marker is in (or out of) our panels, ask. We answer in writing.
Nordic Quantified does not promise longevity, guaranteed health improvements or specific medical outcomes. Our services concern structured assessment and preventive care under physician direction.