<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://community.wddty.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>'Super-x-ray' excess</title><link>http://community.wddty.com/blogs/lynnemctaggart/archive/2008/01/28/_2700_Super_2D00_x_2D00_ray_2700_-excess.aspx</link><description>In the 1970s, computed axial tomography (CAT), or CT, scans revolutionized diagnosis, offering pictures ith up to 20 times the detail of ordinary x-rays, particularly of bones, blood vessels and soft tissues of the body. It has made it possible to scan</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 (Build: 60809.935)</generator><item><title>re: 'Super-x-ray' excess</title><link>http://community.wddty.com/blogs/lynnemctaggart/archive/2008/01/28/_2700_Super_2D00_x_2D00_ray_2700_-excess.aspx#2981</link><pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:51:06 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">e6c67f3d-bf7b-4201-a2c0-6e02384b9f98:2981</guid><dc:creator>Lesley</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;And somebody asked why I refuse my mamograms...... It's jobs for the boys in my mind and yet another money spinner.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: 'Super-x-ray' excess</title><link>http://community.wddty.com/blogs/lynnemctaggart/archive/2008/01/28/_2700_Super_2D00_x_2D00_ray_2700_-excess.aspx#3011</link><pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:45:09 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">e6c67f3d-bf7b-4201-a2c0-6e02384b9f98:3011</guid><dc:creator>Alan</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I agree it is dangerous but you have to look at risks &amp;amp; benefits, so CAT scans are only used when necessary. It is not used as a screening tool. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: 'Super-x-ray' excess</title><link>http://community.wddty.com/blogs/lynnemctaggart/archive/2008/01/28/_2700_Super_2D00_x_2D00_ray_2700_-excess.aspx#3019</link><pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 20:02:09 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">e6c67f3d-bf7b-4201-a2c0-6e02384b9f98:3019</guid><dc:creator>Debbie Griffiths</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I am having to pay for an MRI scan because my consultant will not authorise MRI due to cost because a CT scan will suffice even though I was told 15 years ago that I had had enough radiation from repeat normal x rays and to only have them if no alternative available. My consultant refuses to acknowledge there is danger to too many x rays. AFter months of banging my head against a brick wall my only option is to pay for MRI scan myself.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: 'Super-x-ray' excess</title><link>http://community.wddty.com/blogs/lynnemctaggart/archive/2008/01/28/_2700_Super_2D00_x_2D00_ray_2700_-excess.aspx#3022</link><pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 20:50:06 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">e6c67f3d-bf7b-4201-a2c0-6e02384b9f98:3022</guid><dc:creator>Karen</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Having reached 50, I've paid &amp;#163;372 to have an ultrasound examination of each breast rather than have a mammogram, plus &amp;#163;140 to see the consultant, a necessary part of getting the ultrasound. Very expensive but I hope this is a suitable alternative way of avoiding x rays as I had a lot when younger. Doctors didn't agree that there was any risk from x rays.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: 'Super-x-ray' excess</title><link>http://community.wddty.com/blogs/lynnemctaggart/archive/2008/01/28/_2700_Super_2D00_x_2D00_ray_2700_-excess.aspx#3038</link><pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:39:33 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">e6c67f3d-bf7b-4201-a2c0-6e02384b9f98:3038</guid><dc:creator>Keith</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Interesting article, But I wish I wish that WDDTY would identify their sources. What's the point of putting 'latest eveidence' when that evidence is not identified. It leaves the whole thing open to criticism.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: 'Super-x-ray' excess</title><link>http://community.wddty.com/blogs/lynnemctaggart/archive/2008/01/28/_2700_Super_2D00_x_2D00_ray_2700_-excess.aspx#3697</link><pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:19:19 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">e6c67f3d-bf7b-4201-a2c0-6e02384b9f98:3697</guid><dc:creator>graham</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Dear Keith,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There have been numerous peer-reviewed articles published in the medical press in recent years which illustrates the huge amounts of radiation being given to patients in CAT scans and MRI scans to the extent that, for example, it has been reported that 1-3% of female patients being given an x-ray will develop breast cancer as a result of the scan. If so, we conceivably have an industry which is creating its own patients. &amp;nbsp;When considering the huge amounts of radiation given to patients in a CAT scan, reported in some articles to be greater than the radiation exposure at Hiroshima, one can only consider with amazement how such scanners could be used routinely. &amp;nbsp;Of course there is a risk versus a benefit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It does not take much time or effort to make an internet search to find these articles.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;G&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: 'Super-x-ray' excess</title><link>http://community.wddty.com/blogs/lynnemctaggart/archive/2008/01/28/_2700_Super_2D00_x_2D00_ray_2700_-excess.aspx#3849</link><pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 05:12:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">e6c67f3d-bf7b-4201-a2c0-6e02384b9f98:3849</guid><dc:creator>richard ponsonby</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;There are homeopathic remedies to radiation that are worth taking after every XRay, CT Scan, ultrasound or MRI.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Combination Homeopathic Remedy, containing Belladonna 7c and Irradiated Water Plus Alcohol, Belladonna, Sulphur, Ledum palustre should be considered.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>