|
|
|
|
|
|
by michaels0620
5298 days ago
|
|
|
Part of the problem is not just the cost of things like full body scans but the interpretation of the results. From what I understand, these scans tend to turn up all sorts of things that may or may not be anything serious; but all of which, once found, requires follow up. This is exacerbated by malpractice lawsuits "But there was a spot on the scan 12 months ago, why didn't you do anything!". It wouldn't surprise me if doctors would be willing to use such technology even if it became cost feasible. |
|
|
It's really worse than that. Most of the tests they end up doing with they spot some kind of abnormality have some risk associated - x-rays increase your risk of cancer, for example, and anything that penetrates the skin carries some statistical risk of infection.
Where I live there are companies offering these full-body scan deals, where for an exorbitant amount of money they run your entire body through an MRI machine and then have someone look at the results. What they're finding is the risks associated with the follow-on tests (xrays, biopsies, etc) outweigh the risk that you'll miss something curable. In other words, statistically you're actually shortening your life by having one of these scans.