Jump to content

Is it me?


aurora06

Recommended Posts

Or does the argument against the use of the spiral ct scan for screening seem circular. I read the paragraph in the study that stated The study did not prove that finding the cancers early saves lives...it cannot conclusively show whether screening saves more lives than doing nothing. It cannot be known whether early screening with the spiral ct scan saves lives unless they start USING them to screen and they won't use them to screen unless it can be shown to save lives. Seems awfully circular to me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just you. I agree with you. These are thousands of lives at stake and they are wanting to check a box on a form...typical government bureacracy gone too far.

There can't be a control group for everything we do. Don't we implement new ideas within corporations and see what the results are and compare to the past. What's wrong with comparing to the past rather than waiting 10 years to do something we know intuitively HAS to save lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal take on the research, from my own experience, is that when everything is said and done it will be shown that spiral CT screening CAN detect more small/early LC's - however, it will not translate into a true change in survival rates until they have the technology to DO something about the findings. Unfortunately, even when small tumors/nodules are discovered, (peripherally - central tumors can be dx'd by bronchoscopy) they (supposedly) can currently do NOTHING with them, except wait & watch 'til they get large enough to biopsy. Until there are safer surgical biopsy alternatives available to sample sub-centimeter nodules, we will probably be stuck with simply watching these nodules, 'til they are of a more operable size, and subsequently, then visible on chest xray, anyway... :roll:

Aaaargh!!! The above is simply my opinion based on frustrating experience... :shock: I'm still an advocate of spiral CT screening, though. 8)

Yours in HOPE!!

Stacey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting then, after the xray detects something THEN a ct scan is done and not the other way around. So to me, that would mean the ct scan may pick up something that the xray does not. They had mom get the ct scan after the chest xray. So maybe critics are sidestepping the real issue which is they wouldn't know what to do if something very small showed up. I guess they could keep an eye on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So to me, that would mean the ct scan may pick up something that the xray does not. They had mom get the ct scan after the chest xray. So maybe critics are sidestepping the real issue which is they wouldn't know what to do if something very small showed up. I guess they could keep an eye on it.

Bingo!!! Xrays do not reliably show nodules smaller than 1cm...my xray showed nothing, and it was taken two weeks prior to my first CT which showed 4 nodules! However, no docs I've seen feel that my nodules are "resectable" or able to be biopsied, as yet. So, yes, they keep an eye on it.... :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get what you're saying and I agree. We don't have an early detection screening for LC, and a spiral CT is the best option we have....yet the circular arguments continue.

There's the arguments you've listed, then the one about how much routine CTs for everyone would cost.......WHAT? Compare a $300 CT scan a year with 11 months and 21 days of lung cancer treatment (for my dad, that was roughly $260,000)

I've heard physicians say...now these are physicians mind you, say that people get a false sense of security with a CT or x-ray. While they may opt to have it done routinely, if made available, "smokers" will think that since they got a "clean" scan, that it is OK to continue smoking... huh? (so what, still catches the cancer early)

THEN I've heard the argument about whether being exposed to ct's are safe...HELLO? (It's safer than the cancer that may be growing inside of you...)

THEN the argument about the "false" or inconclusive results and the complications that arise after ....Duh! (That's what second and third opinions are for and where the saying applies- better safe than sorry)

How many early stagers found their cancer early by a fluke CT scan from an accident or injury unrelated to LC or from testing due to a previous condition or cancer?....MANY. CTs work.

I applaud the studies that are being done to try to prove ct scans are a useful tool in early detection and I give a standing ovation to other research facilities trying hard to find a lung cancer specific early detection testing....

Keep making NOISE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.