undefined

points

[-]

> as much as my health anxiety would love another set of CT scans to feel relieved about, even if they do find something potentially interesting it may be worse to act on it than to do nothing

I personally have a preference for having the maximum amount of information available to make a decision.

“Don’t get that “unnecessary” test, it might give you a result that might lead to treatment you don’t need” — hearing this blows my mind every time.

by hibikir1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

The treatment you don't need might be zero risk, but it might also have quite a bit of it. And some tests carry risks too: See how different countries have very different protocols. The US system, which is colonoscopy first, and where polypectomies will be done at the same time, can end up with bowel perforations when the polyp was not even cancer. So the diferente treatment protocol is not just about costs, but about balancing different risks.

The unnecessary test, leading to an unnecessary intervention, which gets you unnecessary long term issues is a real risk in many cases. It's not just a matter of doing a bonus blood test here or there.

by cj51 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

To take it to the extreme:

If there were a risk free button that you could click to see a full breakdown of all illnesses no more how early stage, would you click the button?

It would include a report of cells that may eventually turn into cancer (or may not).

It would include things like polyps, and every other diagnosable condition.

Do you avoid pressing the button? Why?

by jchw46 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

Unnecessary medical treatments can have serious consequences. Even if you are absolutely certain you have a given condition, some treatments are very not worth it. More importantly, any given scan misses tons of important potential health issues. Not just the fact that CT scans don't show signs of MS vs MRIs, but neither of them will tell you about many cardiovascular conditions. So time spent treating made up issues from CT scans you don't need may be better spent doing other regular exams instead. Meanwhile, many aggressive cancers will be far too fast for any reasonable scan interval to catch in time. (And CT scans, to my understanding, can miss tumors early on, since it can't see as fine of detail as MRIs.)

by NetMageSCW22 minutes ago|

prev|

[-]

The ADA no longer recommends routine x-rays - they should only be taken when there is something specific that needs to be investigated.

by Terr_2 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

> If nuclear hormesis holds up

TIL of that theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis

by jchw2 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

It's fiercely debated but as time goes on it seems like it is at least partially true. I'm guessing that some effects of radiation really do map better to LNT whereas others map better to radiation hormesis; why and when is a mystery, I think. Maybe some folks more vested in this topic have an idea.

The most fascinating example of hormesis I can think of is that after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, some people who would've received a relatively small dose of radiation seemed to have a slightly lower cancer risk than people who wouldn't have received any additional radiation.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6937943/

I'm sure there is plenty of debate about these studies and their methodology, but I have some suspicions. There seems to have been a lot of handwaving and intentional omission to explain away or ignore why LNT didn't seem to match reality. Radiation hormesis may be an illusion itself, but as it stands it appears LNT is unable to explain experimental evidence sufficiently. We're clearly missing something, and there is a lot of potential conflict of interest, especially given the obvious incentives for the energy sector...

But also, I just read Wikipedia and watch YouTube causally, so hell if I know.

by bawolff3 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Hmm, googling it, it seems like a cross country flight is equal to 40 dental xrays. had no idea it was that low.

by warunsl3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

There is a reason why Los Algodones has 1000 dentists for a city with population of 5000. It is called Molar City.

by Terr_2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Off topic: The idea of a City of Dentists seems like a Grim Fandango [0] kinda thing. Bonus points if somehow "cotton" (algodon) can be worked into the afterlife themes.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grim_Fandango