DoctorSphere

Extremely misleading. They used a linear no-threshold (LNT) model, it's standard in regulatory contexts, extrapolating from high-dose data to low-dose clinical imaging has many uncertainties. These projections are more suited for radiation safety policies than for giving precise individual risk assessments.

"Approximately 5%of annual cancer diagnoses or
100,000 cancers were projected to result from [U.S.] CT utilization in 2023.
"https://t.co/IODr6KMrv7 https://t.co/AbqbbVot0u

Eric Topol

Extremely misleading. They used a linear no-threshold (LNT) model, it's standard in regulatory contexts, extrapolating from high-dose data to low-dose clinical imaging has many uncertainties. These projections are more suited for radiation safety policies than for giving precise individual risk assessments.

https://x.com/EricTopol/status/1911798598385455431

Physician always trying to learn, passionate about healthspan and precision medicine.

omarsaleem.xyz

IMO, CTs save lives. But again, my practice is hospital based, not the healthier ambulatory care patient

Building Farfessions, Phenomenon, and Flex

Practicing physician every other week, Dad every day, sometimes sh*tposter

100%. They’ve revolutionis case in many ways. 

Even outpatient as in this study, for men the most prevelant cancer they found was lung cancer which makes sense since low dose CT is the screening tool for that. So many issues with this one, yet many credible people running with it.