Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ijustlovemath 755 days ago
Not to mention that MRIs represent a significant portion of a person's yearly allowable radiation dose. Not worth it to irradiate people without having a reason.

There's also a recent trend in some medical diagnostics of having a lighter touch, instead of running all the tests and potentially drawing the wrong conclusion from heaps of data.

2 comments

There is no ionizing radiation in MRI. Only strong low-frequency magnetic fields.
You're thinking of CT scans. MRIs use Magnets and Radios to make Images, not radiation. you're thinking of CT scans, which use X-rays. we can't get random MRI scans done because they're very expensive.
> we can't get random MRI scans done because they're very expensive.

How come then that outside of Western Europe and US it costs $100-200? Or is it because the MRI machines were amortized in EU/US first?

The R stands for Resonance, not for Radio.
Since it's a resonance of radio-frequency waves, the parent's not really in error.
And why is that? How does resonance alter the fact that the radiation is non ionizing and therefore not cancer causing.
The comment you're replying to isn't debating that point, I think. They're saying "you got the precise acronym wrong, but what you did write is still technically correct".