Remix clone Hacker News

Stuff like this hits me in my health anxiety pretty bad, even if I know deep down that there's no point, on an individual scale, in worrying about this sort of thing; it's more of interest to clinicians for decision making. Still... I've had a couple CT scans with contrast in the past year, and that is probably somewhere around 20-25 mSv of radiation. In the grand scheme of things, it's really not that catastrophic of an amount, but it's a hell of a lot more than background radiation. Scary.

▲

consp 5 days ago | parent [-]

> but it's a hell of a lot more than background radiation. Scary.

Not if you fly decent distances a dozen times a year or more.

	▲	jchw 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Makes me wonder if 10 mSv all at once is worse than 10 mSv over the course of a year. It seems that airline crews are only expected to be exposed to a dose from between 2 to 9 mSv annually[1], which makes a abdominal CT scan with contrast seem especially bad. Of course, rationally speaking, I think at the individual level it's hard to really gauge this any more than any other residual risk factor. You could get very unlucky with cell damage from anything, more radiation just gives you more tickets to the lottery. I'm sure other factors play a role on an individual level and the risk to each person is not static. [1]: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9447865/#:~:text=Pi...