Re:Why Doctors Reject Tools That Make Their Jobs Easier
by 08-15 on Wednesday October 17, 2018 @04:07PM
(#18243235)
> Overall, OP said "there is no evidence" and it seems that yes, there is.
This is evidence for a correlation between the number of CT scans and cancer incidence. To jump to the conclusion that the cancer is caused by the radiation from the CT requires a leap of faith.
The funny thing is, if an epidemiological study shows that low dose ionizing radiation is beneficial (radioactive apartment buildings, nuclear navy workers), it's dismissed by a completely ad-hoc "healthy worker effect" or "healthy student effect". But in a study of people who received a CT scan, where you should expect a "sick people effect" (healthy people don't get CT scans), you "don't see a problem".
This is evidence for a correlation between the number of CT scans and cancer incidence. To jump to the conclusion that the cancer is caused by the radiation from the CT requires a leap of faith.
The funny thing is, if an epidemiological study shows that low dose ionizing radiation is beneficial (radioactive apartment buildings, nuclear navy workers), it's dismissed by a completely ad-hoc "healthy worker effect" or "healthy student effect". But in a study of people who received a CT scan, where you should expect a "sick people effect" (healthy people don't get CT scans), you "don't see a problem".