Overexposed: Imaging tests boost U.S. radiation dose | Reuters

Americans are exposed to seven times more radiation from diagnostic scans than in 1980, a report found on Tuesday as experts said doctors are overusing the tests for profit and raising health risks for patients.

The findings, issued by National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement, add to already mounting evidence that doctors are ordering too many diagnostic tests, driving up the cost of healthcare in the United States and potentially harming patients.

While diagnostic scans give doctors valuable information and many times are necessary, doctors fear too much radiation exposure can cause cancer, especially in younger people.




  1. McCullough says:

    Yeah, after a skiing accident 2 weeks ago, 2 sets of X-Rays, and a very expensive MRI (which the doctor said was “muddy”, he’ll know more once I am in surgery…..), I go to have my teeth cleaned last week….and they want to take X-Rays.

    Not gonna happen.

  2. bobbo says:

    Complete BS. Modern X-ray imaging exposes you to less x-ray than a day at the beach or a cross country airplane flight. Doesn’t matter if that is 2-4-5 times what you got 10 years ago because it is all way too minimal.

    A relevant report would list the recommended max daily/weekly/monthly/yearly exposure level and then STATE the amount some x-ray procedure gives you.

    McCullough–I would have no concerns about the dental x-rays. When you do have them, its fun to see how often the tech will place the lead apron in the wrong position so that you get a full exposure to the beam anyway.

    Most of life is BS – – from every direction.

  3. MikeN says:

    Why do you say they are unnecessary? If something happens and you get sick, you’re going to blame the doctor for not conducting that test, which catches something .1% of the time.

    If I’m a hospital or doctor, the smart thing to do is to order the test, to keep lawsuits away.

  4. McCullough says:

    #2. Fine, so with all the expense of X-Rays and NMRI the doctor still couldn’t tell if the damage required surgery? Part of the article implies the doctor using these tests to drive up the cost, which is what I feel I experienced.

    Plus X-Rays to have your teeth cleaned? Seems a tad excessive.

  5. bobbo says:

    #4–McCullough==we are mixing about 3-4 separate issues. But yes, what you are experiencing is the fraud and abuse of standard medical practice as the doctors medical judgment is clouded by the opportunity to make money by unnecessary procedures.

    Its why single payer can provide healthcare to all cheaper than what is delivered today.

    I wouldn’t allow xray for cleaning either unless I wanted to keep the dentist for other reasons. If you don’t present yourself as a brain dead dittohead, you will be rejected as potentially too litigious and “non-compliant.”

    BS American Medicine.

  6. McCullough says:

    #5. bobbo- “If you don’t present yourself as a brain dead dittohead, you will be rejected as potentially too litigious and “non-compliant.”

    Or tight with a buck.

  7. MikeN says:

    #5 bobbo, HMOs operate on that principle of eliminating that incentive.

    The end result was that politicians could rail against HMOs successfully, suggesting that single payer wouldn’t be very popular either.

  8. bobbo says:

    #6–McCullough==self pay? Thats different. “Doc, I’d love to have an x-ray, but I can’t pay for it.” should work like a charm. But don’t get between a dentist and a willing insurance carrier.

    Actually, it is a red flag. I’d be willing to bet the dentist will falsify your bill to the carrier to show preventative services. Fraud is so rife in dental care, it is to be expected.

  9. bobbo says:

    #7–Mike==”#5 bobbo, HMOs operate on that principle of eliminating that incentive.” /// I agree they are “sold” that way but most often the individual care providers are motivated by procedures===especially dental services that are VERY procedure driven.

    There are exceptions of course but not to avoid the 30% fraud and abuse that characterizes the poor practice of medicine in the USA.

  10. Paddy-O says:

    # 1 McCullough said, “and a very expensive MRI ”

    At least no harmful radiation from that.

  11. Thomas says:

    EMF Radiation not harmful? Hmmm. I think the jury is still out.

    http://mtbeurope.info/news/2007/709029.htm

  12. bobbo says:

    #11–Thomas==that intrigued me as there is shielding and distance in the design of USA MRI facilities and I thought it was “safe.” Appears it still is for patients and the concern is only for employees?

    Anyway, the directive has been delayed until 2012–to give time to confirm it is addressing a valid concern? Chicken littles. Who is behind this type of legislation? The PeP scanning industry?

    http://tinyurl.com/cgdjdp

  13. Montanaguy says:

    Want to get rid of lots of ‘unnecessary’ testing?
    **** Tort reform. ****
    On the one hand, MRIs have obviated the need for lots of unnecessary surgery and therapy, based on older and more unreliable methods of diagnosis, so there is a cost and morbidity savings there.
    On the other, of course is the increased cost of the scan – but without any kind of rationing, people are going to always want ‘the best’. In our town, with two hospitals and several hundred docs, the MRI machines are owned by the hospital, so profit is not an issue, at least not for the docs.
    The other option, of course, is the Canadian system where people get an immediate scan only for ‘true emergencies’. The rest either wait for months or go to the good old USA. You can have that system if you like. Not for me.

  14. Thomas says:

    #15. pedro…wipe the drool off your chin, and quit babbling.

  15. Montanaguy says:

    There seems to be a misconception; MRI does not use ionizing radiation. It combines an extremely powerful magnetic field with the use of radiofrequency waves. Not to say that it’s impossible that it could do harm of some sort with very frequent or prolonged exposure – but that is not a known fact. Prolonged use of an automobile is somewhat likely to lead to death or injury also. Not to mention cigarettes and overeating.

  16. MikeN says:

    Other than the magical phrase ‘single payer’, you haven’t given any reason why we should expect providers to not engage in fraud under that scheme. Perhaps you mean to say ‘single provider’?

  17. amodedoma says:

    Social medicine takes away all motivation for such abuses. Other abuses exsist of course, but this one no.

  18. Don says:

    Hmm, is there any studies out there that compare the damage caused by ionizing radiation scans to the damaged caused by the exploratory surgery required in place of the xray studies.

    I will take the slight increase in my cancer risk to the much greater chances of complications from surgery.

    Don

  19. Mr. Fusion says:

    ‘dro,

    STFU

  20. Mr. Fusion says:

    McCullough

    I hope your injury isn’t serious and all works out well.

    One of the problems, as you point out, is that each instance only adds a bit of radiation. And it isn’t the cumulative radiation that is dangerous, it is that specific one that turns a cell cancerous. The cumulative dose is just an arbitrary statistical cut-off point, it is not a magic point.

    My beef would be paying for a “muddy” MRI.

  21. Paddy-O says:

    # 22 pedro said, “#20 Yeah, like waiting forever to get an x-ray or MRI”

    Yes, under socialized anything, shortages are more problematic.

  22. Rick Cain says:

    Shortages are not problematic under single payer. Germany, japan, taiwan, switzerland all have very successful health care systems and they don’t ration health care, and people don’t go bankrupt when they get sick, its unheard of in those countries. Technology isn’t stifled either, japan has the most MRI machines and does diagnostic scans for EVERYTHING. $90 out of pocket for a scan, no big whoop.

    Even if there is a wait, is it better to wait for an MRI, or to not get one at all because you can’t afford the $1500 for one?

  23. Paddy-O says:

    # 26 Rick Cain said, “Shortages are not problematic under single payer. Germany, japan, taiwan, switzerland all have very successful health care systems and they don’t ration health care,”

    I have close friends in, Canada, UK, Germany, Spain, France & Portugal. Yes, it is rationed & you have to get in “line”.

    That being said I don’t have a problem if the Gov’t wants to compete with the private sector. If the gov’t thinks it can provide care more efficiently then let it set up a system that people can join if they want. If it is a better system it will replace its competitors as a matter of course.

  24. Mr. Fusion says:

    #27, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath, Retired Mall Rent-A-Cop, Pretend Constitutional Scholar, Fake California Labor Law Expert, Pseudo Military Historian, Phony Climate Scientist, Leading Troll Extraordinare, and Asstrologist

    Two errors,

    The first is trying to suggest you have friends.

    The second is to suggest Rick is incorrect. You don’t know that because you like to make crap up when you don’t have any facts supporting your position.

  25. brendal says:

    #28 – I personally have FRIENDS in Canada who go across the border into Wash. for medical care. I used to LIVE up there. So shut up!!!!!

  26. Sonny says:

    #29, ‘dro,

    Shouldn’t you be cleaning someone’s pool instead of playing on her computer? Get back to work.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5219 access attempts in the last 7 days.