Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (490440)	6/24/2009 4:09:35 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1582684

Imaging has been criticized by experts as being overused, that traditional diagnosis is more effective. Imaging is most effectively used to confirm a diagnosis, not to fish for porblems that don't exist. You're FOS as usual. I don't know of any physicians who use CTs to "fish" for problems. If they're seeing a patient they suspect may have a head injury, maybe they order a CT. But it isn't like watching HOUSE on TV; they don't just use $5,000 CTs to "fish" for a head injury when there is no symptom or suspicion one has occurred. An insurance company isn't going to pay for a CT that isn't medically necessary. There are private imaging-only businesses springing up all the time. (Salt Lake City has three). The gullible, fear mongered public gets full-body imaged even when they have no complaint. I have never heard of any insurance reimbursing for it nor have I heard of a physician recommending it, other than in connection with the "executive physicals" offered to individuals who pay for these procedures out of their own pockets. I suppose there might be a situation where a physician would deem it to be useful, but in general, they are believed to be not cost-effective. Interestingly, Mayo clinic -- which has been cited as a model of cost-effective health care -- is one of the key proponents of full-body imaging in their highly profitable "executive physical" business. Surely, you have no objection to a person who WANTS to purchase such a scan out of his personal funds doing so?