HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - NYT article on radiation mistakes/overdoses

AlaskaAngel · 01-25-2010, 04:12 PM

Hi StephN,

Personally I think just about anything would be an improvement in moving toward a better grasp of the hazards by everyone concerned.

But in going back to the original post (regarding machines and personnel carelessly or unknowingly giving excess doses), just using a supposedly accurate or roughly accurate count by type of procedure wouldn't help. The technician would just write down that number rather than the actual real dose that was given.

I think that if the designers of these machines are smart enough to figure out how to create a machine that does all these magnificent things, they are smart enough to devote some attention to making sure it measures how much is being given WHILE it is being given, including automatic bells and whistles that go off if it exceeds the safe amount, and even maybe something that triggers it to shut off if it approaches the maximum of the proper dose.

I do think a major part of the problem exists not only because of rogue excess doses, but because no one has consistently been tracking the doses. If they aren't currently collecting that data for patients, how accurate are their beliefs in what is too much or enough or too little?

On a practical basis, whatever it is really should be something that goes with the patient. Here (like every other tourist destination) we get patients from every mode of transportation (probable and improbable) and they don't carry squat with them for health records when they suddenly find their way to the radiology department.

If just individual areas of the body are receiving the radiation, then whatever the tracking device is, would have to be in each field of radiation that is exposed. But I believe it might be possible for the machine itself to measure a "spot" of the actual radiation that the machine is dispensing at the time it dispenses it no matter what part of the body is receiving it, and automatically record that on the digitized patient record for each exposure.

But it takes inventors and consumers (patients) to pursue it.

01-25-2010, 04:12 PM	#7
AlaskaAngel Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 2,018	Re: NYT article on radiation mistakes/overdoses - very scary Hi StephN, Personally I think just about anything would be an improvement in moving toward a better grasp of the hazards by everyone concerned. But in going back to the original post (regarding machines and personnel carelessly or unknowingly giving excess doses), just using a supposedly accurate or roughly accurate count by type of procedure wouldn't help. The technician would just write down that number rather than the actual real dose that was given. I think that if the designers of these machines are smart enough to figure out how to create a machine that does all these magnificent things, they are smart enough to devote some attention to making sure it measures how much is being given WHILE it is being given, including automatic bells and whistles that go off if it exceeds the safe amount, and even maybe something that triggers it to shut off if it approaches the maximum of the proper dose. I do think a major part of the problem exists not only because of rogue excess doses, but because no one has consistently been tracking the doses. If they aren't currently collecting that data for patients, how accurate are their beliefs in what is too much or enough or too little? On a practical basis, whatever it is really should be something that goes with the patient. Here (like every other tourist destination) we get patients from every mode of transportation (probable and improbable) and they don't carry squat with them for health records when they suddenly find their way to the radiology department. If just individual areas of the body are receiving the radiation, then whatever the tracking device is, would have to be in each field of radiation that is exposed. But I believe it might be possible for the machine itself to measure a "spot" of the actual radiation that the machine is dispensing at the time it dispenses it no matter what part of the body is receiving it, and automatically record that on the digitized patient record for each exposure. But it takes inventors and consumers (patients) to pursue it.