Flutterby™! : Cancer screening efficacy

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Cancer screening efficacy

2009-07-22 15:51:14.570287+00 by Dan Lyke 1 comments

One of the hardest parts about talking about alternative health care is trying to sort out the actual useful and proven bits of conventional health care from the misinformation and shysterism that pervades health suggestions. The New York Times has a good little article on how most cancer screening is actually counter-productive.

[ related topics: Politics Health Consumerism and advertising ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2009-07-22 17:31:47.18413+00 by: m

Modern health care professionals as well as patients tend to improperly over rate relatively rare risks, and underweight common risks. This is a general human failing, not specifically health oriented. We might like to deny it, but there is a lot of superstition surrounding modern technology.

The most important factors in extending life are cheap and relatively easy, but have little cachet.

  1. Use a seat belt.
  2. Exercise and keep your body fat within reasonable limits.
  3. Don't smoke, don't drink too much.

Yet I see individuals who violate two or three of the above, who get absolutely crazed over an estimated one in a billion chance (with a three orders of magnitude safety factor built in) of developing cancer as the result of exposure to some pesticide.