Pneumonia saved my son's life

[ncbill]

This brings up a subject that I've often wondered about. Why NOT do full body MRIs on folks once they reach a "certain age." Even better (if it weren't for the radiation) would be a CT scan at that certain age. I understand that there is a risk/benefit ratio to such things - especially anything to do with ionizing radiation. BUT the only real downside to MRIs is the cost. Well, I guess the other down side is "finding something" which means the doc has to "do" something - which may not turn out to be necessary. For me, I would take the chance, but docs won't do it.

Benign scar tissue that looks like a possible tumor = expensive, invasive biopsy.

 

[Koolau]

Benign scar tissue that looks like a possible tumor = expensive, invasive biopsy.

Yeah, I wondered about that. The same argument goes for PSA testing. My doc tried to talk me out of it - and finally did when I hit 75 with my last, low PSA. Same with colonoscopy - I've had my last one for "prophylaxis."

However, with the thought that early discovery is the only way to survive some cancers (I'm thinking about liver or pancreatic, just as a couple of examples) there has to be at least some school of thought to "look hard" for these at some age. Normal X-rays are probably good enough to diagnose or at least begin the "hard look" for advanced cancers. But heading off small/early cancers likely take a bolder approach. Just thinking out loud here as I've lost 3 friends to pancreatic cancer. Virtually nothing they could do once it was diagnosed other than adding a few months of chemo-dominated life.

 

[JoeWras]

There is not nearly enough testing equipment out there for everyone 50+ to have an MRI every year, even if people pay out of pocket.