Hello bOObs Bloggettes:
Today I wanted to get back to the discussion of radiation exposure, as anytime you come in contact with medicine these days it seems they want to scan something.
Let me first share a few personal stories of my own (some of these have already been shared in past blogs, so excuse the redundancy):
Story #1) When I had a swollen lymph gland under my jaw for months, I began to think I had a dental problem. I was meeting with my GP doc about something else and casually mentioned this. She felt the gland and said I should immediately go and get a head/neck CT scan — which have tons of radiation. I said, er, no thank you; I’ll go to the dentist first. She reiterated that I should get it checked out right away in case it was cancer somewhere, and that head/neck cancers were on the rise. I said, yes I know that, but I don’t want to get cancer from the high-dose scan if I didn’t already have cancer.
Fast forward a week or two later at the dentist: Your teeth are a mess! I was told. You need deep-scale cleaning at about $2,000 (ouch). I was perplexed as to how this happened because my teeth rarely had problems. Have you had any radiation the past year? he asked. Why yes, I have; they thought I was having a heart attack, but then regardless of finding nothing, they wanted to do a stress test using radioisotopes. High-dose or low-dose? I asked the hospital’s radiologist. I was assured it was low-dose — BEEEEEP! Wrong answer. It was one of the highest radiative tests you can undergo. Apparently, my teeth demineralized from all the radiation and were left susceptible to bacteria; thus, I ended up with bad plaque problem below the gum line. Needless to say, after the Deep Clean, my gland went back to normal size. And I was able to avoid all that additional radiation which caused the darn problem in the first place! Whew.
NOTE: I found out later that I could’ve done an echocardiogram (an ultrasound) without any radiation instead of the treadmilll with radioisotopes, but radiologist had assured me the latter was the only test I could take when I asked him this point blank. Argh…
Story #2) I was told after my second “DEXA bone scan” (which checks women for bone loss as they get older) that I had osteoporosis all over the place: My back, my hips, and especially my wrists. In fact, I was told by my doctor, if I fell on my wrists they would shatter into a million pieces! So don’t fall! was her adamant advice. I said no thank you to the bone-building drugs I was offered and went on my merry way.
Fast forward a year later: I was out hiking at top speed and stepped over a log — but my sneaker hit a sawed off limb that I didn’t see and BOOM! I went crashing down the hill, all the weight of my entire body landing on my left wrist. I was sure it was broken, maybe even “shattered”. My sister convinced me to take an ambulance (high drama) to the ER, where they took an X-ray…which showed not one darn thing. My wrist hadn’t shattered at all, it was just a very painful sprain.
So, I am now forever sworn off of those lovely DEXA scan machines that, as far as I’m concerned, don’t do anything but give you radiation all over your body. What a quick Google search and per HPS radiation specialists say of radiation amounts for DEXA compared to other scans is this: “DEXA—Whole body 0.003 mSv. Extremity (hand, foot, etc.) x ray—0.001 mSv. Dental X Ray—0.005 mSv.” But they’re talking about scattered radiation here and not the absorbed dose, so I bet if I dove further into this I’d find DEXA isn’t as “low-dose” as they’re professing (see my previous blog of the difference between scattered vs. absorbed radiation — the latter is a LOT higher and the one we need to be concerned about).
Story #3) My 96 year old father was in the ER having collapsed on the floor one morning. The ER docs had already figured it was at least a stroke if not a heart attack, but wanted to continue doing high-dose scans on him. He’d already had a head CT scan and now they wanted to do a CT of his chest. I said, How about an MRI instead? His leukemia is in remission right now and we’re trying to keep it that way. The doctor tried to comfort me by saying that his cancer wouldn’t return for another 5 years due to the scan. In other words…well, you get the drift.
***
As my doctor mentioned above, head and neck cancers are on the rise — even in small children. What the heck is going on? Well, for one thing, have you noticed how dentists have gone a wee crazy with the X-rays? Those 3D machines have a lot more radiation than the old type and most dentists don’t realize this because the ADA puts it into terms of scattered vs. absorbed radiation dose going directly into such places as your thyroid and your brain and your throat and other radiation-sensitive tissue. In fact, a radiologist that I interviewed confided that he’d just had his thyroid recently removed, which was fairly common practice in his field. “One of the hazards of the job”, as he put it. Ouch.
Let’s look at an article in the New Eng. Journal of Medicine (one of the top 5 journals in the world). This is one of many journal articles I came across, which voices the concern of researchers and doctors over the amount of needless radiation given by the needless medical scans readily doled out:
Here’s a summary of the 2007 paper: “The number of computed tomographic (CT) studies performed is increasing rapidly. Because CT scans involve much higher doses of radiation than plain films, we are seeing a marked increase in radiation exposure in the general population. Epidemiologic studies indicate that the radiation dose from even two or three CT scans results in a detectable increase in the risk of cancer, especially in children.”
I pulled this article up readily a few years ago, but now you have to pay to read it. But here are some other notes I came across that I’d made at that time. Per the paper:
About 20 million adults and 1 million children per year are being irradiated needlessly, subjecting them to future cancers.
It continues that about a third of all CT scans are probably not justified by medical need. This article has been cited about 10,000 by the researchers peers. That’s very significant.
[REF: N Engl J Med 2007; 357:2277-2284
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra072149
“Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure”
David J. Brenner, Ph.D., D.Sc., and Eric J. Hall, D.Phil., D.Sc.]
In addition, remember the blog a few weeks ago I sent out about “kickbacks” for certain medical procedures? Well, scans are one of them. As I said on that blog, I’m not ever sure if the doctor is really thinking that I need the scan or if they’re looking at their bottom line income. This Conflict of Interest in the health field needs to be corrected by Congress as it’s doing nothing but harming patients.
bOObs BOTTOM LINE: Make sure you really need a scan, especially if it’s a CT scan, before you receive one. Ask the doctor if there’s any other non-radiative scan that does roughly the same thing.
Blog at you soon, thanks for reading and helping to spread the word! (Please see the “share” links below.) And we’d love to hear comments from you! (see below as well)
Stay healthy,
Megan
Megan Smith, M.S.
Director, bOObs: The War on Women’s Breasts
If you haven’t signed up for the bOObs email list and/or to receive notifications for new blogonbOObs posts, and important political advocacy news (including rallies or petition sign-ups to Congress or State/Federal Government entities), you can sign up here. :)))
For more info on my documentary film “bOObs: The War on Women’s Breasts” or to buy/screen the film: bOObsDoc.com
Our films are entirely self-funded, so we appreciate any contributions. Click on the yellow button below and you’ll be directed to PayPal, where you can make a tax-deductible donation. Or use the QR code.
Please follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/boobsthewaronwomensbreasts and Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/boobsdoc/
If you have a comment or suggestion, please contact us here.
DISCLAIMER: THIS BLOG DOES NOT PROVIDE MEDICAL ADVICE. I am not, nor am I holding myself out to be, a doctor/physician, nurse, physician’s assistant, advanced practice nurse, or any other medical professional. The statements on this blog reflect the author’s personal opinions. The content of this blog is for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as, nor should it be considered a substitute for, professional medical advice. The information presented is not intended to replace or substitute for professional medical advice or care, should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease, and is not intended for diagnostic or treatment purposes, prescribing any medication, or for use in diagnosis or treatment of any medical or health condition. You should consult your doctor for medical advice or services. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have seen or read on this blog.
0 Comments