The problem of overuse of medical radiation
For patients, navigating the debate can be difficult because doctors, patient advocacy groups and manufacturers often endorse positions that are in their economic self-interest. Radiologists, who often own and use CT machines, for instance, often endorse their use; while gastroenterologists, who often own and use camera scopes, often favor their own methods. Patient groups often get financing from drug and device makers, or physician-specialty groups.
Radiation warnings ignored, GDS Publishing, By Jodie Humphries | 03/29/10 Urgent warnings by government experts about the risks of routinely using powerful CT scans to screen patients for colon cancer were ignored by the Food and Drug Administration, according to agency documents and interviews with agency scientists.
After staying quiet for a year, the scientists say they plan to make their concerns public at a meeting of experts on Tuesday called by the FDA to discuss how to protect patients from unnecessary radiation exposures. The two-day meeting is part of a growing reassessment of the risks of routine radiology.
The average lifetime dose of diagnostic radiation has increased sevenfold since 1980, driven in part by the increasing popularity of CT scans. Such scans can deliver the radiation equivalent of 400 chest X-rays.
An estimated 70 million CT (for computed tomography) scans are performed in the US every year, up from three million in the early 1980s, and as many as 14,000 people may die every year of radiation-induced cancers as a result, researchers estimate.
The use of CT scans to screen healthy patients for cancer is particularly controversial. In colon cancer screening for instance, the American College of Radiology as well as the American Cancer Society have endorsed CT scans, in a procedure often called a virtual colonoscopy,…..
For patients, navigating the debate can be difficult because doctors, patient advocacy groups and manufacturers often endorse positions that are in their economic self-interest. Radiologists, who often own and use CT machines, for instance, often endorse their use; while gastroenterologists, who often own and use camera scopes, often favor their own methods. Patient groups often get financing from drug and device makers, or physician-specialty groups.
Radiation warnings ignored | GDS Publishing
1 Comment »
Leave a Reply
-
Archives
- May 2012 (262)
- April 2012 (259)
- March 2012 (342)
- February 2012 (304)
- January 2012 (259)
- December 2011 (274)
- November 2011 (331)
- October 2011 (247)
- September 2011 (272)
- August 2011 (249)
- July 2011 (227)
- June 2011 (195)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- people
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety and incidents
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina background info
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- general
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS














There should be a registry of all Xrays, scans and MRIs. Very few doctors ask the patient how many Xrays they have had. One in utero Xray doubles the chance of leukemia, for instance. I was astounded that a CT scan can deliver a radiation load that is 400 times that of a plain Xray – and I’m a doctor. Recnetly my GP suggested I have a CT scan of my sinuses because of sinusitis. I have had it since I was 11 and there is nothing more that surgeons can do – so why scan? Good article – but will the medical profession read it?