AW: [ RadSafe ] AAPM Response to NEJM article on CT scans and cancer risk

[NeilKeeney at aol.com]

Radsafers:
 
I consider I must agree with the viewpoint expressed by many others  
concerning imaging exams where there is no apparent need.  My spouse  recently asked 
me about the practice, almost universal now, among chiropractors  performing or 
obtaining X-ray photos of their patients prior to performing any  services.  
She had wanted to take our kids for adjustments and said  that everyone she 
had talked with wanted X-rays prior to any  treatment.
 
I objected to the notion entirely for both the obvious reasons:   1)  I 
consider it unnecessary since neither kid has 'suffered' any kind of  bone or 
structural injury to their body and 2) I considered it an  unethical business 
practice for the domain of Chiro; a group that, in the  main, has had it's mainstay 
in more homeopathic treatments or  services.
 
I told my wife that if she was emotionally attached to doing this, then she  
should just offer them $40 bucks to augment their gross income and just skip 
the  x-rays.  Naturally we skipped the whole thing...
 
Neil Keeney
 
 
In medicine, as politics, where there is money there
is crime. Cynical,  but true.  One of the issues that I
believe is the new Medicare bill is  the restriction of
reimbursement to physicians who own labs they  refer
patients to.

--- Sandy Perle <sandyfl at cox.net>  wrote:

> John,
> 
> Your points are valid as well. As you  know, I was
> referring to the medical establishment requiring
>  many tests where no evidence exists indicating a
> need for the tests.  That is due to concern of
> malpractice litigation in the event a  condition
> isn't diagnosed.




**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest 
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)