3 ms·
This is not the first time studying such effects, which is why they can be confident that is the cause. Similar results were found in some post Chernobyl studie
by boomboomsubban 6y ago
This is not the first time studying such effects, which is why they can be confident that is the cause. Similar results were found in some post Chernobyl studies, and the risk/reward of regular screening for many ailments is a constant debate in medicine.
- hef19898 6y agoBut aren't the Chernobyl studies hindered by the fact that a large portion of the liquidators aren't tracked at all? That is my understanding, for what's it worth.
- boomboomsubban 6y agoThose would not be relevant to such tests, where the samples would be something like "every grade four student in a region."
- hef19898 6y agoBut they would be relevant in determining the total health impact of the accident, wouldn't it?
- boomboomsubban 6y agoWhich I'm not discussing, I'm only discussing that an increase in testing leads to an increase in diagnoses.
- hef19898 6y agoNumber of diagnosis =\= number of disease cases
- boomboomsubban 6y agoYes, an increase in testing results in both an increase of false positives and an increase in treatment for non detrimental cases. I don't see what that has to do with anything else you've mentioned. edit ohh, I think you're trying to say that missing those people would somehow contaminate the sample? They would not be in the sample group even if records were more diligently kept. The studies I'm discussing are testing something else.