Re: color doppler ultrasound to detect prostate cancer?

Jason wrote:
In article <124th3pev79gr77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Pete"
<pete@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

ugghle wrote:
The key words here are "detecting signs of colon cancer or rectal
cancer".
You still need to get a biopsy, so you just wasted your time getting
the
virtual bull***, and will need an endoscopic colonoscopy anyway to
get a
biopsy

The question is if you don't detect any signs of colon cancer or
rectal cancer, then you don't need a biopsy. Here's another
example, when you go to the dentist and he thinks there might be a
cavity but can't see it, he has two choices. Drill and look or get
more information by taking an xray. I think an xray would be
prudent to confirm a cavity. I'm not saying technology is all
inclusive, but I sure would avail myself of all the non invasive
exams prior ot any "procedures".

Ugg...your missing a couple of my main points. Catscans are far from
non-invasive (they are very invasive - a simple chest CT is
equivalent to approx 100 flat view chest x-rays - you need to study
radiation if you think that catscans are non-invasive ). Plus, the
damn virtual full body scans (which may or may not include the
colonoscopy) are very expensive and not covered by insurance. They
basically open up a can of worms, for further investigation into
something that is unlikely to be cancer in most cases (haven't you
heard or read about this stuff - ie the virtual controversy). It's
been on the news for years now.

I told you the that EGD's and colonoscopies are not that invasive
(except for the possible risk with general anesthesia, which you
would probably know about if you had GA before). Go ahead and waste
your money on the virtual colonoscopy if you want to, because if it
finds anything, you will end up with a real colonoscopy anyway.

People have the virtual stuff (mostly the more well to do people who
can afford it) basically because they are over 50 and looking for a
peace of mind (and they don't even have any symptoms). Then when it
shows something suspicious, they are usually headed for a barrage of
further tests, even though it may not be anything serious. I think
it is bull*** personally, and that is my opinion. Don't kid
yourself its all about making money in this beautiful (dog eat dog)
capitalistic world we live in

Pete

Pete,
Several months ago, I read an article about the virtual colonoscopy.
One
danger that you did not mention (unless I missed it) is the radiation
exposure that happens when a virtual colonscopy is done. I don't have
the article in front of me but I seem to recall reading that it
produces what
I consider to be dangerous levels of radiation. A regular colonoscopy
causes NO radiation exposure. You may want to do a google search on
this subject before you consider it. Perhaps someone can compare the
radiation exposure produced by a virtual colonscopy compared to a
standard dental
X-Ray.
Jason

Jason...you need new glasses. I very deliberately addressed the danger of
radiation associated with catscans in my previous post and even compared a
chest catscan to a flat view chest x-ray. I get the feeling you only read
what you want to sometimes :-) . And the radiation levels in catscans are
way beyond the minuscule levels in a dental x-ray. Now I will tell you the
same thing I told "ugg" - you need to study radiation and radiation
poisoning, and look at some of the articles by the leading medical
physicists in the world, da da da da. I repeat catscans have large levels
of radiation, and the more often you have them the higher the risk of
developing cancer later on, or some other malady caused by damage to an
organ(s).

Pete


.

Quantcast