How Dangerous Are CT Scans?

TheStripey1 · #1 (**permalink**) 07-24-2008, 12:15 PM

I recently had my first CT Scan and had been scheduled for another this month, but when I saw this article discussed on CNN, I cancelled it.

Quote:

How Dangerous Are CT Scans?
Friday, Jun. 27, 2008
By CATHERINE GUTHRIE

Computed tomography (CT or CAT) scans help doctors detect everything from cancer to kidney stones. But some physicians are raising concerns about the safety of such procedures — most notably, an increase in cancer risk. A CT scan packs a mega-dose of radiation — as much as 500 times that of a conventional X-ray. If your doctor orders a CT scan for you or your child, should you think twice?

Absolutely, say researchers behind two recent studies that sound the alarm about the increased cancer risk associated with multiple CT scans. In the first study of its kind, physicians at hospitals in Florida and Washington, D.C., evaluated the medical-imaging records of 1,243 randomly selected patients to calculate just how much radiation each patient had sustained in the past five years.

...snip

The results of the study, presented in May at the annual conference of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, were disturbing: the average patient had received 45 millisieverts (mSv) of radiation. (The typical chest X-ray dispatches 0.02 mSv of radiation.) And 12% of patients had gotten more than twice that amount — 100 mSv or more.

...snip

Exactly how much radiation is too much? Because CT scans came into vogue in the 1980s and radiation-induced cancer takes roughly 20 years to develop, long-term studies of CT scans and cancer are still under way. But scientists are already anticipating future health implications. Indeed, researchers found a population of 25,000 Japanese post-atomic-bomb survivors who were exposed to roughly the same amount of radiation as two CT scans. Based in part on those studies, the Food and Drug Administration estimates that an adult's lifetime risk of developing radiation-induced cancer from a CT scan is roughly 1 in 2,000. Worse, the risk for children is even higher.

...snip

So what should you ask, if a doctor recommends a CT scan for you or your child? Brenner suggests the following: is a CT scan really necessary? Might a test that doesn't involve radiation, such as an ultrasound or MRI, do the job?

...snip

So... a list of questions.

1) Have you or your children ever had a CT Scan?
2) Have you or your children ever had more than one CT Scans?
3) Any problems?

TheStripey1 · #2 (**permalink**) 07-24-2008, 12:17 PM

1) Yes
2) No, but one was scheduled this month and because another may be done in three months, I cancelled this month's.
3) None yet, other than the weird after taste of the banana flavored barium I had to drink.

katiegrrl0 · #3 (**permalink**) 07-24-2008, 01:50 PM

I had serveral and had no problem.

MasTequila · #4 (**permalink**) 07-24-2008, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katiegrrl0

I had serveral and had no problem.

Are you sure?

Justice Strike · #5 (**permalink**) 07-24-2008, 02:02 PM

the scan's do more good then bad. Ofcourse they will harm you in a minor way (that's why operators have such stringent guide rules)

but overall you'd rather risk the small 0.0001 % change you'll get cancer, to make sure you don't have cancer!

submarinepainter · #6 (**permalink**) 07-24-2008, 02:14 PM

low levels of radiation may be helpful , I have been a radiation worker for 22 years and have received 25,000 milliroentgens with no effect as of yet .the risk is small compared to other hazards in life , the risk being cancer

Makedde · #7 (**permalink**) 07-25-2008, 12:36 AM

I've had a CT scan and an MRI and I suffered no ill effects. CT scans I think would only be performed when necessary. If there really is such a high level of radiation whatever then I doubt doctors would be sending people to have one when they didn't need it.

katiegrrl0 · #8 (**permalink**) 07-25-2008, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasTequila

Are you sure?

Yes thank you. It was several years ago i had heart problems and had to have several CT's because i can not have MRI's because of a Pacemaker and Defibrilator implants.

Guy Fawkes · #9 (**permalink**) 07-25-2008, 01:22 AM

How dangerous is not having a CT scan?

Guy Fawkes · #10 (**permalink**) 07-25-2008, 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by submarinepainter

low levels of radiation may be helpful , I have been a radiation worker for 22 years and have received 25,000 milliroentgens with no effect as of yet .the risk is small compared to other hazards in life , the risk being cancer

25,000? WOW you should be glowing in the dark.. Just kidding.

Then Jimmy Carter is 85 years old and was involved 55 years ago in a nuclear spill at a Canadian reactor. Look at Jimmy go.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What's a dangerous weapon in D.C.?	ArmedBlog	Political Blogs	0	01-28-2008 06:40 AM
3 Dangerous Jews!	BroNathanael	Zionist Agenda	10	10-17-2007 03:30 PM
Is This Dangerous?	graeme	Security & Defenses	0	10-13-2006 04:29 PM
Fallujah still dangerous	Nathan	Current Events	16	12-04-2004 03:22 PM
Dangerous toys...	SplendidSplinter	Current Events	2	11-17-2004 12:58 PM