Coriolus posted:
CONCLUSION: "sodium [¹8F]fluoride PET/CT might be useful in the evaluation of the atherosclerotic process in major arteries, including coronary arteries. An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21946616
Sodium Fluoride = bad
You should probably try READING what you link to?
Naw - you didn't bother to read it the first time around so a second time isn't going to do any good. Here, let me help you:
Quote:
METHODS:
We retrospectively reviewed the imaging data and cardiovascular history of 61 patients who received whole-body sodium [¹8F]fluoride PET/CT studies at our institution from 2009 to 2010. Fluoride uptake and calcification in major arteries, including coronary arteries, were analyzed by both visual assessment and standardized uptake value measurement.
Since you're new to this whole "reading for comprehension" thingie I'll break it down further:
It was a study of various means of doing PET/CT scans using different chemicals, rather than radioactive isotopes. Translated, that means they were performing PET and CT scans on people who had had their ENTIRE FRIGGEN BODY injected with various chemicals used as imaging enhancing agents - in this case, flouride.
Would you like to fail again? (Y/n)
-----signature-----
* First rule of a gun fight: Have a gun.
|
"Any sufficiently advanced idiocy is
indistinguishable from trolling." -- Arthur C Clarke
