←back to thread

Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

(arstechnica.com)
352 points keithly | 1 comments | 14 Oct 24 21:37 UTC | HN request time: 0.218s | source
Show context
agentultra ◴[15 Oct 24 13:41 UTC] No.41848509[source]▶
I am all for evidence-based medicine making its way into dentristry if it's lacking... but if you're someone who is worried about cumulative exposure to X-ray length radiation, what is the dosage? And can we compare it relative to to say, millimeter scanners at the airport or a domestic flight?

I was under the impression that the digital machines they use these days are:

1. localised 2. very, very low dose

replies(3): >>41849545 #>>41849555 #>>41849604 #
ericmcer ◴[15 Oct 24 15:23 UTC] No.41849555[source]▶
My dentist said something like "it exposes you to less radiation than eating a banana", but she also left the room when the machine was firing.
replies(3): >>41849748 #>>41850313 #>>41850584 #
1. Night_Thastus ◴[15 Oct 24 16:32 UTC] No.41850313[source]▶
I hate when people bring this up.

Yes, it's an incredibly small amount of radiation for you because you're only in there for one X ray maybe once a year.

For someone who operates the Xray maybe a half dozen times in a day (or more), every day, that number changes dramatically. It's still likely fine, but it's far better to be safe than sorry.