I’ve written posts on the subject of the “revolutionary” ultra fast CT scan, the snap shot of the heart that would finally put an end to invasive diagnosis methods such as cathaterization. In those posts you may remember that the problem was that the reports were only marginally accepted in the medical community and that most positive results led to exactly what they were trying to do away with, cathaterization to confirm or discount the findings of the scan. What seems like an honorable goal of early detection of heart disease and prevention of heart attacks, is clouded by an increase in unnecessary invasive procedures

Now, as if it were new news, comes an article from the University of South Carolina extolling the virtues of the CT scan without any acknowledgment of the so far inherent inaccuracies of the technique.

One of the issues from a life insurance perspective is that the test, with its’ inherent inaccuracies, can leave a cloud over an applicant’s purported cardiac health. Some companies, inspite of followup cardiac evaluation have a problem letting go of the fact that there might be, just might be a problem. Fortunately there are some companies we have worked with who are a bit more studied on the subject and seem to be able to move beyond the test.

One of the problems, as I see it, with the ultra fast CT scan is that it has become a money making machine for those that like to prey on people’s fears. It is marketed on television and radio as the quick, easy and inexpensive way to ensure that you don’t have heart disease. Unfortunately it is also a great way to throw your cardiac health into question as the test is far from definitive in it’s results.

Bottom line. Before you decide to pony up the hundreds of dollars for the panacea of an ultra fast CT scan, study what you are about to do. The jury is so far out on this subject and until all the questions are answered, a prudent approach to considering the ups and downs of the test is wise.