|
|
| Re: Healthcare rationing: it begins (526103) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Healthcare rationing: it begins |
|
|
Posted by docstox on Thu Nov 19 07:13:10 2009, in response to Re: Healthcare rationing: it begins, posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Nov 18 22:04:11 2009. Yes, that baseline at age 40 for all women makes sense to me as a guideline in case pathology should occur later on.The insurance companies would jump on this new guideline gladly to save money but the data support the decision for eliminating non-family history women in the 40 to 60 age groups.Also, why expose yourself to radiation of a mammogram if it isn't necessary.My own personal experience with doctors is they want to protect their asses from trial lawyers so you get unecessary radiation.They wanted three CT scans on me, in 2000, 2001 and 2008 for what they thought was cancer, but I blew them off after doing my own research on the net.VIOLA, I ain't dead yet,LOL, so all that radiation of a CT scan was avoided.That's enough radiation to equal the exposure of a Hiroshima A Bomb victim.In fact, some studies suggest thast 10% of new cancers will be radiation induced from excessive use of CT Scans! Just my dime, anyhoo! |
|
|
|