To: Perdogg
Computed Tomography does give a much larger dose than a General Radiography exam does, the question is” are the exam results worth the radiation exposure risk?
In general, a CT is not ordered unless there is some issue where an axial slice type of exam is needed. Blocked intestines, blood in the cranium, etc. So a little radiation exposure is the least of your health concerns at the moment.
8 posted on
12/14/2009 6:34:56 PM PST by
Ouderkirk
(Democrats: the party of Slavery, Segregation, Sodomy and Sedition)
To: Ouderkirk
If you get one, is it really that bad? I had one in 2008.
11 posted on
12/14/2009 6:36:25 PM PST by
Perdogg
(Sarah Palin-Jim DeMint 2012 - Liz Cheney for Sec of State - Duncan Hunter SecDef)
To: Ouderkirk
I had an MRI not a CT scan.
14 posted on
12/14/2009 6:39:18 PM PST by
Perdogg
(Sarah Palin-Jim DeMint 2012 - Liz Cheney for Sec of State - Duncan Hunter SecDef)
To: Ouderkirk
I read the article and the article footnoted that said they calculated the radiation risk. They did not indicate the method of calculating the risk, they just said they calculated it. I’d like to know the assumptions they made and the statistics of risks they used. That should be in the article, and it was not.
To: Ouderkirk
In general, a CT is not ordered unless there is some issue where an axial slice type of exam is needed. Blocked intestines, blood in the cranium, etc. So a little radiation exposure is the least of your health concerns at the moment. Or for insurance purposes, something to point to in court. Defensive medicine, in other words.
40 posted on
12/14/2009 7:35:32 PM PST by
Former Proud Canadian
(How do I change my screen name now that we have the most conservative government in the world?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson