One CT scan = 400 x-rays!

[soulfeast]

What is the make and model number of these new 'lower dose radiation' CT scans, please? How much lower are they? Have you been offered any info or just been told they are lower?


Natural background radiation is NOT comparible to a CT scan. Whilst amusing looking at a table stating these CT scans are equivalent to 3, 8 years or 3 hours etc of 'natural' radiation, its also misleading. How many X-rays are they equivalent to?

Then ignore that part. Call a radiology center that offers them and ask. Otherwise google "low dose CAT scan".. compare the sMv between low dose and regular and between areas to be scanned. Some areas are less dense and don't require as much radiation as others.

 

[golden]

Then ignore that part. Call a radiology center that offers them and ask. Otherwise google "low dose CAT scan".. compare the sMv between low dose and regular and between areas to be scanned. Some areas are less dense and don't require as much radiation as others.

Its more complicated than that :-/

I dont know if you scanned the link I put a couple of posts up by Dr.Len.

In it, is a link to 'paper 2':

http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/Mobile/article.aspx?articleid=415384#ioi90119t3

It seems there is no standardisation between hospitals or even within the same hospital!

One would perhaps have to get in writing from the radiologist, exactly how much radiation they will be using since it wildly varies...

One could significantly reduce radiation just by ringing round...

 

[soulfeast]

Its more complicated than that :-/

I dont know if you scanned the link I put a couple of posts up by Dr.Len.

In it, is a link to 'paper 2':

http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/Mobile/article.aspx?articleid=415384#ioi90119t3

It seems there is no standardisation between hospitals or even within the same hospital!

One would perhaps have to get in writing from the radiologist, exactly how much radiation they will be using since it wildly varies...

One could significantly reduce radiation just by ringing round...

It's not as simple as the title of this thread, that's for sure. As with most things good vs bad is dependent on factors and not a one size fits all paradigm. Sure we should avoid CAT scans if possible but scaring people that they are so very horrible when they are indeed medically necessary is not right. I HAVE to have scan of my lungs due to scleroderma and may on a somewhat spaced out regular schedule. I am more than intelligent enough to access when I think this is necessary and when it is not. I looked into this and I know what I am talking about FOR ME. You do whatever you think you should do.. if you are even considering a CAT scan?

That article is from back in 2009. The newer lower radiation CAT scans are just recently out. Still good idea to check with radiologist performing CAT about specifics.