Young boy overdosed with cancer-causing CT scan*

Saturday Oct 17, 2009 (foodconsumer.org) -- The New York Times on Oct 15 reported a two-and-half-year old boy in California was subjected to a brain CT scan for more than one hour,  compared to two to three minutes needed for a normal CT head scan.

Raven Knickerbroker, then an x-ray technologist at Mad River Community Hospital in Arcata, California reportedly activated a CT scan 151 times on the same spot of the head of Jacoby Roth.

Jacoby was sent to an emergency room after his falling off his bed and complaining of neck pain. The emergency room doctor ordered a TC scan.

Investigators said in state records that Ms. Knickerbroker did not stop the procedure after the boy was irradiated with high doses of x-ray, until Mr. Roth, the boy's father, suspected the procedure took too long and there might be something wrong.

X-ray radiation used in medical diagnosis and treatment is known to be a human cancer-causing agent.  It has been recognized as a carcinogen by the U.S. National Toxicology Program. Expsoure to any dose of such radiation increases cancer risk.

Experts expect that Jacoby is now at much higher risk of cancer than his peers because of the exposure to x-ray radiation. The boy's family has hired a lawyer to file a lawsuit against the hospital and Ms. Knickerbroker for the accident.

It takes many years for cancer to develop and because of this, the hospital and the radiation technologist likely will not be found liable for the increased risk of cancer.

Don L. Stockett, the lawyer representing the family, was quoted by the times as saying "The problem with this case is that the parents are subjected to worry for the rest of their lives."

"They're always going to have to worry for years - forever - because every time the child sniffles they instantly start thinking maybe this is the start of something really bad."

Ms. Knickerbocker was reportedly contesting the state’s revocation of her license and she complained that she suspected that the x-ray machine was malfunctional and she asked for help, but no one responded.

A state investigator was cited as concluding that even if the machine worked as claimed, she should have stopped the test.

By David Liu - davidl @ foodconsumer dot org and editing by Rachel Stockton - rachels at foodconsumer dot org