Re: CT scans - patients underestimate risk of cancer and radiation

[Guest guest]

Chris:

Thanks to you and others on this and the Acor board I have had only two CT scans

since being diagnosed with CLL in 03. One of those was due to a fall and not CLL

related. It showed that I had two cracked ribs. I really thank you for

all the information you provide to all of us. None of us need another cancer

caused by CT scans.

Dave

________________________________

From: cllcanada <cllcanada@...>

Sent: Sat, January 8, 2011 1:54:53 PM

Subject: CT scans - patients underestimate risk of cancer and radiation

 

Survey shows that patients underestimate the radiation from CT scans and the

risk of cancers. " The point of the paper was not to create mass hysteria, " said

Dr. Brigitte Baumann, an emergency physician at University Hospital.

Question 1: Will getting two or three CT scans of the abdomen expose a person to

the same amount of radiation as people who lived near the atomic blast that

ravaged Hiroshima in 1945 but survived?

Question 2: Will CT scan increase a person's lifetime cancer risk?

If you answered yes to both questions, you're right according to the survey.

You're also better informed than many patients at inner-city emergency

departments, according to a new survey .

" More than 70% of participants underestimated the radiation dose of CT relative

to chest radiography, and cancer risk comprehension was poor. Patients told the

researchers tests such as blood work and CT scans would boost their confidence

in their medical evaluation. "

The paper goes on to mention that there are patients that have had over 50 CT

scans.

To learn more follow these links...

Abstract Source:doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.10.018

http://www.annemergmed.com/article/S0196-0644(10)01716-6/abstract

Article: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/735308

~chris

CLL CANADA

[Guest guest]

I agree we should avoid unnecessary exposures.

Fortunately, middle and older age at CT reduces the risk signficantly. See

chart: http://www.lymphomation.org/ct.htm#risks

Karl

>

> Survey shows that patients underestimate the radiation from CT scans and the

risk of cancers. " The point of the paper was not to create mass hysteria, " said

Dr. Brigitte Baumann, an emergency physician at University Hospital.

>

> Question 1: Will getting two or three CT scans of the abdomen expose a person

to the same amount of radiation as people who lived near the atomic blast that

ravaged Hiroshima in 1945 but survived?

>

> Question 2: Will CT scan increase a person's lifetime cancer risk?

>

> If you answered yes to both questions, you're right according to the survey.

You're also better informed than many patients at inner-city emergency

departments, according to a new survey .

>

> " More than 70% of participants underestimated the radiation dose of CT

relative to chest radiography, and cancer risk comprehension was poor. Patients

told the researchers tests such as blood work and CT scans would boost their

confidence in their medical evaluation. "

>

> The paper goes on to mention that there are patients that have had over 50 CT

scans.

>

>

> To learn more follow these links...

>

>

> Abstract Source:doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.10.018

>

>

> http://www.annemergmed.com/article/S0196-0644(10)01716-6/abstract

>

>

> Article: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/735308

>

>

> ~chris

> CLL CANADA

>

[Guest guest]

Yes it is primarily lifetime exposure that is a concern. The older you are, the

shorter your life.

Therefore you more likely to die of something else.

The FDA is rightfully trying to curb unnecessary CT scans and the key word is

'unnecessary'

Here is the paper: " Initiative to Reduce Unnecessary Radiation Exposure from

Medical Imaging " Feb 2010.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationSafety/Radiatio\

nDoseReduction/UCM200087.pdf

~chris

[Guest guest]

I think we should avoid it as a routine procedure, and

reserve it for real serious issues. Dr. Hamblin wrote once

that CTs are not routinely necessary for cll, that

ultrasounds, which of course, cause no radiation, work well

for cll. They've certainly shown up my lymph nodes.

Ellen