Granted this 2009 article below is new and not officially approved yet, but based on the fact that the EPA office staff wrote back to me that its Federal Guidance and Protection Diagnostic Radiology Report (FGR 9) is thirty years old. Or at least twenty years out of date according to other scientific documentation in BEIR VII since 1990 and needs updating and revision because it does not take all the CT/PET scans fully into account. And a EPA working group with the Interagency Steering Committe on Radiation Standards (ISCORS) plans to discuss the need for reference levels and dose optimization, new dose metrics, guidelines and standards to reduce unnessessary radiation exposure due to increasing medical use. I wonder if any of it has been implemented yet?
Because this article below is so scary, please don't share it with anyone who needs an immediate diagnostic CT or PET scan to save their life unless you are sure doctors will approve a more expensive MRI scan instead. Some doctors think the MRIs show too much "tiny" detail of possible lumps that may never need to be treated in the person's lifetime. Please try to remember the balance and duality of risk vers reward. Its like flipping a coin, heads you win, tails you lose. The luck of the draw. For example, we all love to watch the Olympic winter sports, yet at the same time thousands more young people are taking extreme risks of possible physical or emotional injury while practicing their sport and hoping someday to compete to win a gold metal and the highest honors. Only a very few ever acomplish their goals without significant physical or psychological wounds as they actually risk their life for extreme sport. Everything in life has an up side and a down side, we all need to try to go with the flow up to some point beyond which we may falter or sacrifice too much of oursleves to recover our balance.
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Radiology/DiagnosticRadiology/17530
