tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9551150.post6217852652110457784..comments2024-03-28T01:27:23.408-04:00Comments on Health Care Renewal: Cancer Screening, CT Scans, and Patent ApplicationsRoy M. Poses MDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00497209843184497847noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9551150.post-47309623187782529612008-03-13T13:38:00.000-04:002008-03-13T13:38:00.000-04:00Also check out the WSJ Health Blog:March 13, 2008,...Also check out the WSJ Health Blog:<BR/><BR/>March 13, 2008, 9:07 am<BR/><BR/><BR/>Medicare Will Keep Covering CT Heart Scans After All<BR/><BR/>Posted by Jacob Goldstein <BR/>High-tech scans are one of the fastest growing areas of health-care spending, and the feds have been trying for a while to figure out how to slow the growth. But Medicare just gave up on one cost-control measure.<BR/><BR/>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9551150.post-35428944770203573802008-03-11T10:29:00.000-04:002008-03-11T10:29:00.000-04:00It never ceizes to amaze me how all these screenin...It never ceizes to amaze me how all these screening-related papers that completely ignore lead-time bias and overdiagnosis get past peer reviews.<BR/><BR/>Anyone with an ounce of common sense and elementary ability to think logically regardeless of background can quickly understand what lead-time bias is and how ANY screening that detects cancer early would increase survival regardless of Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9551150.post-90680649916095021932008-03-11T09:37:00.000-04:002008-03-11T09:37:00.000-04:00One certainly has to look at this in the context o...One certainly has to look at this in the context of driving demand. Publication in a major medical journal will be picked up by the popular press and then held out as the gold standard of care.<BR/><BR/>The following notes the impact of drug advertising:<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>Drug Ads Lead to Patient Requests<BR/><BR/><BR/>By Julie Appleby,<BR/>USA Today<BR/>Posted: 2008-03-04 14:43:45<BR/>Filed Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9551150.post-38890839880188908702008-03-11T09:07:00.000-04:002008-03-11T09:07:00.000-04:00Thanks, Merrill. I added a reference to your post...Thanks, Merrill. I added a reference to your post in an addendum above.Roy M. Poses MDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00497209843184497847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9551150.post-87190002665233279192008-03-10T19:55:00.000-04:002008-03-10T19:55:00.000-04:00Thanks for calling attention to this story, which ...Thanks for calling attention to this story, which was covered in GoozNews <A HREF="http://www.gooznews.com/archives/000883.html" REL="nofollow">here</A> and <A HREF="http://www.gooznews.com/archives/000883.html" REL="nofollow">here</A>. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, where I work, has written letters demanding journals like NEJM and JAMA publish corrections with conflict of Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03761000500749152223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9551150.post-25429796955697170162008-03-10T19:47:00.000-04:002008-03-10T19:47:00.000-04:00providing new insight, indeed.once again, a direct...providing new insight, indeed.<BR/><BR/>once again, a direct hit by Dr. Poses.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9551150.post-8044804705669437772008-03-10T18:52:00.000-04:002008-03-10T18:52:00.000-04:00There may also be harm from the CT scans themselve...There may also be harm from the CT scans themselves, which would not have been picked up within the period of this study. <BR/><BR/>"There was a significant increase in the overall risk of cancer in the subgroup of atomic-bomb survivors who received low doses of radiation, ranging from 5 to 150 mSv; the mean dose in this subgroup was about 40 mSv, which approximates the relevant organ dose from Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com