Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:F yes this would worry me!

OMG shut up.

CT scans are safe.

Define "safe"? There is no "safe" level of ionizing radiation. Every bit you are exposed to harms you a little more.

I mean then don't go outside or fly on a plane? Being exposed to ionizing radiation is 100% inevitable and you weigh risks. Like getting a dental X ray to diagnose needing a root canal rather than letting your teeth rot.

If you think that the radiation of a dental x-ray is anywhere near the level of a CT scan, you really need to educate yourself. And by the way, you should limit the number of dental x-rays you have in your life. The dentists have to pay for those machines somehow, so unnecessary scans it is!

Anonymous wrote:I have had 3. My son has had two. Sometimes you have to assume risks to get the necessary information. Nothing is risk free.

You really don't. Not unless you are treating cancer. You won't know or feel the consequences until a few years out. The fact is, a large percentage of cancers are caused, directly, from CT scans in prior years. Please stop having your son get the unless it's for a very very serious reason. OP: I realize this thread is days old, but you are right to question. Doctors get commissions for use of machines or are lazy. MRI would be the best logical next step. My FIL has sinus cancer and has yet to get a CT--they do MRI. So close to the brain, CT scans of the head should be avoided at all costs.

Anonymous wrote:Talk to your doctor about treating your anxiety.

This 100%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:F yes this would worry me!

OMG shut up.

CT scans are safe.

Define "safe"? There is no "safe" level of ionizing radiation. Every bit you are exposed to harms you a little more.

I mean then don't go outside or fly on a plane? Being exposed to ionizing radiation is 100% inevitable and you weigh risks. Like getting a dental X ray to diagnose needing a root canal rather than letting your teeth rot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.independent.co.uk/health-and-wellbeing/mri-scan-injection-oxalic-acid-b2732737.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawJqgtVleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHsnxScux-bytPLWcDl7uR5_Es_oQqJFCS3qGd0M3i9rMq55QHQVrLFA9vR4B_aem_0EVSOigVeoYyxEhenMNViQ

That is about MRI and not CT scan.

Correct. Someone posted that MRI’s are safer but the contrast used with MRI’s causes some people a lifetime of problems.

Those are mostly used in CT not MRIs.

You don’t know what you’re talking about. CT’s use ionizing contrast and MRI’s these days (especially for head things, breast things, and pelvic organ things) are given with the contrast gadolinium, a toxic heavy metal that doesn’t fully leave the body and can cause long term issues. Some people become incapacitated after just one dose, others after several doses as it builds up.

Anonymous wrote:MRI or nothing. That is ridiculous to do a CT scan for congestion.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:F yes this would worry me!

OMG shut up.

CT scans are safe.

Define "safe"? There is no "safe" level of ionizing radiation. Every bit you are exposed to harms you a little more.

This is not true. Radiation is in our everyday environment. If you wear a dosimeter inside a building and walk outside, it will start ticking from the radiation from sunlight. We have evolved to live with radiation. Environmental regulators decided that, unlike any other substance known to man, the curve for damage from radiation was "linear no threshold" (meaning there is no dose that is harmless) based upon zero scientific evidence. How do I know this? I talked to one of the guys who wrote the regs. They had no evidence of harm from radiation at lower doses, so they just drew a straight line to zero. Every other substance known to man has a threshold beneath which there is no harm, and he agreed that is the case with radiation. If no level of radiation were safe, people who live in Colorado would have a higher incidence of cancer, not a lower one. This is just used to scare people. If you really believe this, then never fly in an airplane or live at altitude (or go inside any building in DC made of granite, which are literally radioactive).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also- remember that cancer patients, those with autoimmune issues like Crohns, those with head injuries, etc., are scanned frequently- sometimes yearly .

… which increases their cancer risk.

This. Some get secondary cancers like someone I know. It'd all about weighing risks.

How could you know the CT scan was the cause of the cancer?

Seriously. Particularly when a huge % of cancer patients have radiation therapy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:F yes this would worry me!

OMG shut up.

CT scans are safe.

Define "safe"? There is no "safe" level of ionizing radiation. Every bit you are exposed to harms you a little more.

Meant to add this chart showing comparisons.



The URL if picture isn't large enough to read. https://infobeautiful4.s3.amazonaws.com/2011/03/2552_IIB_Radiation-Chart_Feb19.png

There are many similar charts online to make comparisons. Of medical procedures, CT's are one of the most radioactive due to the tracers such as Barium dyes they use.

Thank you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:F yes this would worry me!

OMG shut up.

CT scans are safe.

Define "safe"? There is no "safe" level of ionizing radiation. Every bit you are exposed to harms you a little more.

Meant to add this chart showing comparisons.



The URL if picture isn't large enough to read. https://infobeautiful4.s3.amazonaws.com/2011/03/2552_IIB_Radiation-Chart_Feb19.png

There are many similar charts online to make comparisons. Of medical procedures, CT's are one of the most radioactive due to the tracers such as Barium dyes they use.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.independent.co.uk/health-and-wellbeing/mri-scan-injection-oxalic-acid-b2732737.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawJqgtVleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHsnxScux-bytPLWcDl7uR5_Es_oQqJFCS3qGd0M3i9rMq55QHQVrLFA9vR4B_aem_0EVSOigVeoYyxEhenMNViQ

That is about MRI and not CT scan.

Correct. Someone posted that MRI’s are safer but the contrast used with MRI’s causes some people a lifetime of problems.

Those are mostly used in CT not MRIs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:F yes this would worry me!

OMG shut up.

CT scans are safe.

Define "safe"? There is no "safe" level of ionizing radiation. Every bit you are exposed to harms you a little more.

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:F yes this would worry me!

OMG shut up.

CT scans are safe.

Define "safe"? There is no "safe" level of ionizing radiation. Every bit you are exposed to harms you a little more.

Some CT scans for sinuses (with allergists or ENTs) are lower radiation.