The fact that the media influences people's perception on things is a fact known by both the outlets and the persons who watch TV daily. Still, it would appear that not many filter the information they get from their television sets, in that they tend to do exactly what they are told by various anchors. The same holds true for newspapers as well. As a result, doctors say, patients are prone to getting more exposed to radiation after news programs and various daily papers tell that a disease is on the rise, or other such information.

While trying to keep healthy, people actually tend to get intoxicated with unnecessary doses of radiation, just to make sure that whatever disease is circulating the country at one point is not affecting them. But the problems are not the conditions themselves, but the fact that the media presents them like they are life-threatening. Of course, this worked just fine in the case of the anthrax attacks of 2001-2002, but it has no relevance when a lesser epidemic hits the nation.

According to estimates from the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, American citizens are exposed to six times more radiation coming from medical procedures now than they were in the 1980s. Yet, medical conditions have rarely increased in the number of cases, so the only explanation is that outside factors have influenced the popular perception on diseases. People are far more likely now to go and get an X-ray than they were 20 years ago, oblivious of the risks involved.

Most individuals think that this procedure has no side effects, but few know that you have to let at least 3 months pass between one X-ray and the next, regardless of the organ that is being checked. Emergencies are naturally excluded, but routine check-ups should be carefully arranged within the course of a year, so as to prevent useless contamination.

“Adding up all the doses and then spreading out the total over the entire population, no matter a person’s age, occupation, location, or health status is not appropriate for assessing risk to the general population,” Mayo Clinic professor of radiological physics Cynthia McCollough shares.

“It’s true that the number of CT scans rose, but there’s a tremendous benefit – they either confirm or rule out medical problems. For one patient, there is a tangible benefit as long as the exam is ordered correctly, and the downside risk of cancer is extremely small,” Richard Morin of the Mayo Clinic in Florida tells LiveScience.