Virtual Physical - anyone had one?

[Anonymous]

If you have done this, please share your experience. I'm thinking it might be a good way to spend what's left in my FSA. No real health issues. I think I'm being a bit paranoid but my mother had cancer at 38 and I'm close to that age so that's on my mind.

[Anonymous]

What is it?

[Anonymous]

I had one a few years ago when I was sure there was something wrong and my doctor repeatedly dismissed my concerns. I did have a very large tumor (thankfully it was benign) and ended up having major surgery. The Virtual Physical was quick and painless. I think doctors don't like their patients having them because they reveal things that you may have had all your life which are nothing to worry about. Then you go for futher tests, etc. which may be unnecessary and expensive and there's the potential for complications.

[Anonymous]

bump

[Anonymous]

Other FSA ideas- glasses, orthedontia.

[Anonymous]

anyone else have any experience?

[Anonymous]

I think unnecessary exposure to radiation is bad, but if you have a reason to think there is something wrong you that your regular Dr. Is dismissing, than it think it may be ok.

[Anonymous]

I haven't, but I'm sort of intrigued by the idea. If I had a few thousand lying around, I might do it.

[Anonymous]

I think it's only $800.

[Anonymous]

Can someone provide a link to a provider they used?

[Anonymous]

As a physician, I think this is not a good idea. There is so much talk in the medical community about whether we are over-using CTs even when there is an actual concern (abdominal pain, minor car accidents, etc) and whether there's going to be an increase in cancer in the future from people getting so many over a lifetime. I find the idea of offering totally healthy and asymptomatic people a CT as a "virtual physical" bizarre, dangerous, and really contrary to both medical ethics and common sense.

OP, what kind of cancer did your mom have? Asking your doctor for more targeted testing might make more sense than just zapping your whole body. E.g. if it was cervical cancer, a Pap smear is going to pick it up in the early and treatable stage -- a CT will not. Likewise, a CT is actually not the greatest test for looking at the ovaries and uterus -- an ultrasound is both safer and gives better information. If it's breast cancer that's a concern, and you are very high risk but too young for a mammogram to work well, some docs will do a breast MRI -- also safer than a CT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a physician, I think this is not a good idea. There is so much talk in the medical community about whether we are over-using CTs even when there is an actual concern (abdominal pain, minor car accidents, etc) and whether there's going to be an increase in cancer in the future from people getting so many over a lifetime. I find the idea of offering totally healthy and asymptomatic people a CT as a "virtual physical" bizarre, dangerous, and really contrary to both medical ethics and common sense.

OP, what kind of cancer did your mom have? Asking your doctor for more targeted testing might make more sense than just zapping your whole body. E.g. if it was cervical cancer, a Pap smear is going to pick it up in the early and treatable stage -- a CT will not. Likewise, a CT is actually not the greatest test for looking at the ovaries and uterus -- an ultrasound is both safer and gives better information. If it's breast cancer that's a concern, and you are very high risk but too young for a mammogram to work well, some docs will do a breast MRI -- also safer than a CT.

I'm not a doctor but the daughter of a radiation physicist who works in medical phyics. I'm pretty lax about radiation exposure bc I understand it better, but I agree with the doctor above. Seems like a LOT of exposure that you don't need and a more targeted approach would be better.