Sanjay Mehta, M.D.

And the same thing applies. That's on the diagnostic side. On the therapeutic side where I am, our machines are called linear accelerators, and there's a similar progression.

And the same thing applies. That's on the diagnostic side. On the therapeutic side where I am, our machines are called linear accelerators, and there's a similar progression.

As we've been able to focus the beams more and more precisely, it's a modulation of the beam, meaning you have a lot of photons being showered in the general vicinity of a patient, but you're blocking out everything except for a small area to treat. And the same way the newer machines do definitely have a lower exposure to the room in general.

As we've been able to focus the beams more and more precisely, it's a modulation of the beam, meaning you have a lot of photons being showered in the general vicinity of a patient, but you're blocking out everything except for a small area to treat. And the same way the newer machines do definitely have a lower exposure to the room in general.

Not at all. Not in the least. I would certainly not skimp on dental x-rays, mammograms, if it's someone that needs cardiac workups and things like that. The risk-benefit ratio is so heavily in favor of doing these studies that I don't even think twice about them. I think part of this comes from, you know, I've been doing this 25 years now. I have so many patients.

Not at all. Not in the least. I would certainly not skimp on dental x-rays, mammograms, if it's someone that needs cardiac workups and things like that. The risk-benefit ratio is so heavily in favor of doing these studies that I don't even think twice about them. I think part of this comes from, you know, I've been doing this 25 years now. I have so many patients.

By the time they come to me as a cancer patient, they've been through so many CT scans. And nowadays we do PET scans. We follow up with annual PET scans after the fact, which are not only the CT, but you've got a radioactive isotope that's being injected into them. And we just really don't see.

By the time they come to me as a cancer patient, they've been through so many CT scans. And nowadays we do PET scans. We follow up with annual PET scans after the fact, which are not only the CT, but you've got a radioactive isotope that's being injected into them. And we just really don't see.

Now, there are certain situations where you are giving, for example, an intravenous therapeutic dose of radiation, say for thyroid cancer or things like that. There's certain new theranostics that are out there. In those situations, you have to be concerned because they can get into the multiple, into a sievert range.

Now, there are certain situations where you are giving, for example, an intravenous therapeutic dose of radiation, say for thyroid cancer or things like that. There's certain new theranostics that are out there. In those situations, you have to be concerned because they can get into the multiple, into a sievert range.

But when you're in these millisievert ranges, it's so important to do these studies. The benefits of mammograms are so proven. Dental x-rays, I don't really think twice about them. Okay.

But when you're in these millisievert ranges, it's so important to do these studies. The benefits of mammograms are so proven. Dental x-rays, I don't really think twice about them. Okay.

I think it can be in that range, yes. I think that's exactly right. So PET CTs are relatively new, but up until maybe a decade ago, the PET scan was independent of the CT. They would do them separately.

I think it can be in that range, yes. I think that's exactly right. So PET CTs are relatively new, but up until maybe a decade ago, the PET scan was independent of the CT. They would do them separately.

But the data is so much better when you have the anatomical CT data overlay with the PET that whatever that extra dosage is, I think it's well worth it in terms of the resolution of what we're able to see and what we're able to gain from that information. Okay.

But the data is so much better when you have the anatomical CT data overlay with the PET that whatever that extra dosage is, I think it's well worth it in terms of the resolution of what we're able to see and what we're able to gain from that information. Okay.

Breast and prostate are the number one and number two, depending on what patient population you're talking about. Prostate may even be a little bit higher.

Breast and prostate are the number one and number two, depending on what patient population you're talking about. Prostate may even be a little bit higher.

And this goes back to the 80s when the trend from doing a Halsteadian type of radical mastectomy was falling out of favor and the randomized data was obtained in the 80s showing that a lumpectomy, breast conservation, which is lumpectomy followed by radiation, has the same outcomes in terms of overall survival as a full mastectomy. That's when breast really took off in the 80s.

And this goes back to the 80s when the trend from doing a Halsteadian type of radical mastectomy was falling out of favor and the randomized data was obtained in the 80s showing that a lumpectomy, breast conservation, which is lumpectomy followed by radiation, has the same outcomes in terms of overall survival as a full mastectomy. That's when breast really took off in the 80s.