1. People can absolutely go out of alignment in the hip joints. But yeah, it’s possibly more due to muscle weakness or lack of muscle. An MRI would do a better job of diagnosing that. But you’re against that. Over time the condition would come back.
2. 80% of heart attacks are those whose numbers are in “normal range”. Your point about number 3 could just as easily be applied to #2 for doctors over diagnosing medications people don’t need.
High triglycerides absolutely do not necessarily go hand in hand with high cholesterol. Ask any hyper responder on a keto diet.
Hell, my triglycerides were 115 my last test (high is > 150) and my total cholesterol and LDL were borderline high. LDL is calced anyway so a lower triglyceride number would mean a higher LDL.
3. There’s nothing to refute about this. If the OP wants one for peace of mind and has the means to pay for it, more power to him.
1. That is why the budget of public healthcare blows out and why insurance premiums go through the roof: everyone wants more information but without due consideration of how it changes the management of the patient. One can satisfy themselves clinically that a presentation is of an aetiology which will respond to physical therapy and time, and will safety net if the symptoms do not resolve within the expected time frame or if they should manifest any sinister features.
2. You’re right, outside of familial hyperlipidaemia, high cholesterol in isolation is not necessarily the cause of vessel disease; however, those with multiple risks factors which put them in a high risk category could benefit from statin therapy. One should use cholesterol levels to form a risk profile and not as a sole surrogate marker for cardiovascular disease.
3. An ultrasound is only as good as the person performing it and the doctor interpreting it. Indeed, nearly all tests have their limitations with regards to their specificity and sensitivity with regards to a clinical query, and the more you test the more you get equivocal results which then lead to further, potentially more invasive, investigations and patient anxiety. Rationalising tests is very important in preventing an unnecessary chain of further tests and anxiety as well as obviating access issues for those who truly need them.