3 ms·
> You'd have to be massively overexposed to CT or PET scanning to cause cancer The mean effective dose for all patients from a single PET/CT scan was 20.6 mSv.
by lostlogin 9mo ago
> You'd have to be massively overexposed to CT or PET scanning to cause cancer
The mean effective dose for all patients from a single PET/CT scan was 20.6 mSv. For males aged 40 y, a single PET/CT scan is associated with a LAR of cancer incidence of 0.169%. This risk increased to 0.85% if an annual surveillance protocol for 5 y was performed. For female patients aged 40 y, the LAR of cancer mortality increased from 0.126 to 0.63% if an annual surveillance protocol for 5 y was performed.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36856709/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36856709/
- ErroneousBosh 9mo ago> 0.126 to 0.63% So, a just-about-measurable increase, if you pick and choose your values carefully? You are not going to die from cancer caused by getting a PET scan. This will not happen. You're going to die of heart disease or as a not-too-distant second in a car accident.
- lostlogin 9mo agoThat data is for one scan, ever. Continuous scanning for months would give a dose many orders of magnitude higher.