Both flyer and spdrun are correct. For years, 120/80 was optimal. Before that, they even considered 100+your age as decent for the systolic (top) number. They’ve changed the acceptable levels over the years.
IMHO, it is all about the pharmaceutical/healthcare industry trying to create more patients with “chronic” conditions that need to be “treated.”
————
What Is a Normal Blood Pressure Reading?
Currently the textbook definition of normal blood pressure is 120/80 mmHg. But the definition of “normal” has changed over the years.
At one time, it was believed that normal systolic blood pressure was 100 plus your age. In the 1970s, intervention wasn’t even recommended until pressures exceeded 165/95. Prior to 2003, 140/90 was considered normal.
In 2003, however, a new classification was made. Now a blood pressure of 120/80 is considered normal, and blood pressure readings of 130–139 are considered “pre-hypertension.” Readings above 140/90 are considered high blood pressure, and the current thinking is that anyone falling into this category should be taking medication to lower blood pressure.
A study in the Journal of the American Medical Association has suggested the risk of cardiovascular disease can be reduced even more by lowering blood pressure in people whose readings are already 120/80 or less. I don’t know if the blood pressure guidelines will be lowered again, but it will be interesting to watch how it all plays out.
New guidelines suggest that people over 60 can have a higher blood pressure than previously recommended before starting treatment to lower it. The advice, criticized by some physicians, changes treatment goals that have been in place for more than 30 years.
Until now, people were told to strive for blood pressures below 140/90, with some taking multiple drugs to achieve that goal. But the guidelines committee, which spent five years reviewing evidence, concluded that the goal for people over 60 should be a systolic pressure of less than 150. And the diastolic goal should remain less than 90.
