Comments regarding: "Occupational exposure to high-frequency electromagnetic fields and brain tumor risk in the INTEROCC study: An individualized assessment approach"

Prospective Study of Low- and Standard-dose Chest CT for Pulmonary Nodule Detection: A Comparison of Image Quality, Size Measurements and Radiation Exposure

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively and accurately analyze the out-performance of low-dose chest CT (LDCT) vs. standard-dose CT (SDCT).

METHODS

The image quality, size measurements and radiation exposure for LDCT and SDCT protocols were evaluated. A total of 117 patients with extra-thoracic malignancies were prospectively enrolled for non-enhanced CT scanning using LDCT and SDCT protocols. Three experienced radiologists evaluated subjective image quality independently using a 5-point score system. Nodule detection efficiency was compared between LDCT and SDCT based on nodule characteristics (size and volume). Radiation metrics and organ doses were analyzed using Radimetrics.

RESULTS

The images acquired with the LDCT protocol yielded comparable quality to those acquired with the SDCT protocol. The sensitivity of LDCT for the detection of pulmonary nodules (n=650) was lower than that of SDCT (n=660). There was no significant difference in the diameter and volume of pulmonary nodules between LDCT and SDCT (for BMI <22 kg/m², 4.37 vs. 4.46 mm, and 43.66 vs. 46.36 mm³; for BMI ≥22 kg/m², 4.3 vs. 4.41 mm, and 41.66 vs. 44.86 mm³) (P>0.05). The individualized volume CT dose index (CTDI_vol), the size specific dose estimate and effective dose were significantly reduced in the LDCT group compared with the SDCT group (all P<0.0001). This was especially true for dose-sensitive organs such as the lung (for BMI <22 kg/m², 2.62 vs. 12.54 mSV, and for BMI ≥22 kg/m², 1.62 vs. 9.79 mSV) and the breast (for BMI <22 kg/m², 2.52 vs. 10.93 mSV, and for BMI ≥22 kg/m², 1.53 vs. 9.01 mSV) (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that with the increases in image noise, LDCT and SDCT exhibited a comparable image quality and sensitivity. The LDCT protocol for chest scans may reduce radiation exposure by about 80% compared to the SDCT protocol.

Conflicts of Interest and Misleading Statements in Official Reports about the Health Consequences of Radiofrequency Radiation and Some New Measurements of Exposure Levels

Official reports to governments throughout the Western world attempt to allay public concern about the increasing inescapability of the microwaves (also known as radiofrequency radiation or RF) emitted by “smart” technologies, by repeating the dogma that the only proven biological effect of RF is acute tissue heating, and assuring us that the levels of radiation to which the public are exposed are significantly less than those needed to cause acute tissue heating. The present paper first shows the origin of this “thermal-only” dogma in the military paranoia of the 1950s. It then reveals how financial conflict of interest and intentionally misleading statements have been powerful factors in preserving that dogma in the face of now overwhelming evidence that it is false, using one 2018 report to ministers of the New Zealand government as an example. Lastly, some new pilot measurements of ambient RF power densities in Auckland city are reported and compared with levels reported in other cities, various international exposure limits, and levels shown scientifically to cause biological harm. It is concluded that politicians in the Western world should stop accepting soothing reports from individuals with blatant conflicts of interest and start taking the health and safety of their communities seriously.