It’s about the examination that should lead to more benefit for the injury – Geifel Dagblad

Hans Strom is right In that we use proven healthcare experience when patients must be treated for disease where there is no scientific evidence.

The problem is that he then confuses this with the scan. Screening differs markedly from other health care in that it involves examining healthy people who do not show symptoms. The purpose of cancer screening, for example, is to detect small malignancies early. Unfortunately, you also find a lot of small, benign changes at the same time and when they are small, it is difficult to distinguish them from malignant ones.

As a result, many people have to undergo investigations, sampling and even treatment of changes that they could never have bothered if they were not detected during the examination and this not only causes anxiety and discomfort, but sometimes also causes complications. The number of benign changes also increases with age.

The fact that there are both low and high age limits for different types of screening is not about stinginess or age discrimination, but it must be scientifically ascertained that screening does more good than harm. And as I said, there are hundreds of cancers and other diseases that we could also screen for today if only there was scientific backing for them.

Of course, major associations should be allowed to sue their members, but in this case a call for more research into older age groups would have been more positive. I totally agree that there is a need.

Ole Haller