<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title> &#187; scans</title>
	<atom:link href="http://medicalconsumers.org/tag/scans/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://medicalconsumers.org</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:23:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='medicalconsumers.org' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://medicalconsumers.org/osd.xml" title="" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://medicalconsumers.org/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>CT Scans—Lots of Radiation, Little Research</title>
		<link>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/05/18/ct-scans%e2%80%94lots-of-radiation-little-research/</link>
		<comments>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/05/18/ct-scans%e2%80%94lots-of-radiation-little-research/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2009 00:17:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>medconsumers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[osteoporosis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scans and X-rays]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Screening]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[children]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CT scans radiation exposure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[heart scans radiation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knee doctors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knee surgery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lifetime cancer risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[radiation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scan vs x-rays]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[screening scans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medconsumers.wordpress.com/?p=2091</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No one would deny that CT scans are an excellent diagnostic tool that may well have saved many lives.  The problem is the complete lack of information.  As often happens in the U.S., enthusiastic reception of a new technology—by doctors and consumers alike—precedes the science that would identify those people for whom the benefits outweighs the risks. <img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=medicalconsumers.org&amp;blog=7088906&amp;post=2091&amp;subd=medconsumers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/05/18/ct-scans%e2%80%94lots-of-radiation-little-research/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Maryann</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Radiation dose of cardiac CT scans</title>
		<link>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/04/15/radiation-dose-of-cardiac-ct-scans/</link>
		<comments>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/04/15/radiation-dose-of-cardiac-ct-scans/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>medconsumers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Heart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scans and X-rays]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Screening]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cardiac scan radiation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cardiac scans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CT scans radiation exposure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knee doctors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knee surgery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[radiation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[radiation exposure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medconsumers.wordpress.com/?p=2102</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A CT scan of the coronary arteries is a good diagnostic tool, but it involves a large dose of radiation. To determine how much radiation is involved in cardiac CT scans (also known as computed tomography angiograms), researchers accessed data from 1,965  CT scans of the coronary arteries performed in 50 hospitals around the world.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=medicalconsumers.org&amp;blog=7088906&amp;post=2102&amp;subd=medconsumers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/04/15/radiation-dose-of-cardiac-ct-scans/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Maryann</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Acute low back pain and imaging</title>
		<link>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/01/15/acute-low-back-pain-and-imaging/</link>
		<comments>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/01/15/acute-low-back-pain-and-imaging/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:38:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>medconsumers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scans and X-rays]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[back pain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medconsumers.wordpress.com/?p=2056</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[People with acute low back pain do not benefit from immediate x-rays or high-tech imaging techniques like CT scans because these diagnostic procedures do not lead to reduced pain, improved function, or a better quality of life.  <img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=medicalconsumers.org&amp;blog=7088906&amp;post=2056&amp;subd=medconsumers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/01/15/acute-low-back-pain-and-imaging/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Maryann</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Arthroscopic Surgery for Knee Arthritis</title>
		<link>http://medicalconsumers.org/2008/10/01/arthroscopic-surgery-for-knee-arthritis-mostly-useless/</link>
		<comments>http://medicalconsumers.org/2008/10/01/arthroscopic-surgery-for-knee-arthritis-mostly-useless/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:06:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>medconsumers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Chronic Conditions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scans and X-rays]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surgery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alternative to knee surgery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arthritis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knee arthritis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knee doctors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knee osteoarthritis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medconsumers.wordpress.com/?p=1187</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Arthroscopic surgery is no better than conservative treatment for people with knee osteoarthritis. This was shown in a 2002 clinical trial, and now a new trial has produced the same result. Will it change anything? Will people be told that surgery provides no advantage over drug treatment and physical therapy? Are there any exceptions?
<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=medicalconsumers.org&amp;blog=7088906&amp;post=1187&amp;subd=medconsumers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://medicalconsumers.org/2008/10/01/arthroscopic-surgery-for-knee-arthritis-mostly-useless/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Maryann</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>MRI Scans and Mastectomies</title>
		<link>http://medicalconsumers.org/2008/09/01/mri-scans-and-mastectomies/</link>
		<comments>http://medicalconsumers.org/2008/09/01/mri-scans-and-mastectomies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:11:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>medconsumers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scans and X-rays]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Screening]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surgery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mammography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medconsumers.wordpress.com/?p=1168</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, made news last spring at a meeting of cancer doctors when a Mayo Clinic oncologist reported that the use of this diagnostic technology appears to increase the number of women who are choosing mastectomy over breast-conserving surgery.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=medicalconsumers.org&amp;blog=7088906&amp;post=1168&amp;subd=medconsumers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://medicalconsumers.org/2008/09/01/mri-scans-and-mastectomies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Maryann</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
