5 ms·
> This guy had MRI scans which don't rely on ionising radiation and have no known adverse effects. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412810 http://www.ncbi.
by throwaway47385 11y ago
> This guy had MRI scans which don't rely on ionising radiation and have no known adverse effects.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412810 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412810
Also, the price of a single scan is measured in thousands of dollars.
- sghodas 11y agoI skimmed that study, but it looks like all the samples they tested came from the same guy, and they didn't actually test putting people in MRIs.
- throwaway47385 11y agoYes, the authors did base their paper on in vitro tests from a single individual. Another group attempted to reproduce the results of Lee, et al by performing a similar in vitro experiment, but failed to detect any DNA damage.[1] Nevertheless, in an article commentary published by the European Society of Cardiology [2], DNA damage was detected in an in vivo study of Cardiac MR (CMR) imaging, and a precautionary approach to MR imaging is recommended. They admit, though, that the study could not differentiate between the effects of the contrast agent used in CMR, and the effects MR imaging alone. [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23679232 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23679232 [2] http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/34/30/2337 http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/34/30/2337