Lifescan Health Checks

T

TitanTim

Elite
Hi all,

Saw an advert on the TV today by a company called Lifescan who do CT scans for the private individual.

http://www.lifescanuk.org/

You can choose indivdual scan checks, e.g. heart or lungs or a more thorough Vital Check which covers a multitude of body functions http://www.lifescanuk.org/our-health-checks/vital-check which is not cheap at just over a grand. Single checks for say the heart is a few hundred quid.

Seeing the ad kinda got me thinking now I've just turned 50 to maybe look at something like this which hopefully would be thorough if going for the vital check. I've never suffered any ill health and there is no family history of cancer etc and whilst I don't drink or smoke I wouldn't class myself as being particularly fit.

Does anyone have any experience of anything like this? Any views on it, money well spent or a complete waste?

Tim.
 
If I had more money than sense, it is something I would consider doing. The NHS is reactive, so having some sort of bench mark might be handy for the future.

I am sure your GP will be able to run some tests for you - bloods and up here we get our stools tested every other year as well.

Unless you feel unwell, or suspect something afoot, I think it will be money down the drain. But like I said, I don't think I could resist it if I had the spare cash sloshing around.
 
DumfriesDik said:
If I had more money than sense, it is something I would consider doing. The NHS is reactive, so having some sort of bench mark might be handy for the future.

I am sure your GP will be able to run some tests for you - bloods and up here we get our stools tested every other year as well.

Unless you feel unwell, or suspect something afoot, I think it will be money down the drain. But like I said, I don't think I could resist it if I had the spare cash sloshing around.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, kinda what I was thinking to be honest in that you could spend a grand and the scan reveals nothing lol but then in many ways you would hope it wouldn't. Unless you or the family have a history of ill health or your generally feeling unwell with no answers from your GP then it might be worth it. The only advantage I can see maybe is that it picks up early signs of potential ill health long before it became a serious issue which gives you the time to avoid future problems, I think this is where I can see its advantage over general GP checks that might not pick up early signs.

Tim.
 
Would you have to tell any life insurance/assurance companies that you have had the scan and share it with them? Maybe take a policy out before the scan?!
 
Companies such as Lifescan exist to make money from you, your health to them is secondary.

The NHS is the opposite way around.

Such companies play on people's fears and in some cases put fear where previously there was none.

All or the tests offered by Lifescan are available on the NHS
 
I'm having a CT scan next week on NHS, I get one every year as part of my cancer surveillance program. It's chest and abdomen in my case.

So far they have all come back clear (touch wood), great feeling when you get the result!
 
TR4man said:
All or the tests offered by Lifescan are available on the NHS
Click to expand...

You can't just rock up and ask for a CT scan though - you only get it if there's a reason, by which time it might be too late to do anything. Depending on what might be wrong with you of course.

Part of me is with DumfriesDik - if I had the money I would... But another part of me just doesn't want to know. My wife keeps bugging me to have the 40+ check at my GP... Maybe that will be my single new year resolution :D
 
Just not sure about those. My father in law did one, and he died 8 months later of cancer.

He was always worried about prostrate cancer, hence all the checkup, but he had stomach cancer within months of the check.

The tests are such a "moment in time" that I feel that it does not guarantee anything. I would imagine it is good for standard stuff such as blood pressure or cholesterol issues.

Oh - and Bing - Mrs Bing just wants you to get a subscription for Viagra ;)
 
Glad to hear you're doing ok John :thumbsup:

Bing is right in that you can't just ask for a scan on the NHS without some serious reason which is the reason I guess a company like Lifescan exists. Its a weird one as part of me thinks it's quite important for general well being and the simple curiosity if I'm going to be ok in years to come so this is would be good as a reality check albeit an expensive one. On the flip side it would be pretty nerve wracking, fear of the unknown and all that.

Hmmmm good feedback pvr think I'll put the money towards the next motor now :)

Tim.
 
TitanTim said:
Bing is right in that you can't just ask for a scan on the NHS without some serious reason.
Click to expand...

Yes, he is totally right, but my point is that if you thought you had some symptoms that you were concerned about, then you'd see your GP who'd then refer you.

You wouldn't think "I wonder if I've got cancer, I'll just fork out several hundred pounds on the off chance and trot along to a converted HGV trailer or a rented room somewhere" to satisfy your curiosity.

Companies like Lifescan put fear of the unknown and doubt into people's minds to make money from them. That is their sole purpose. It a nice little earner for them playing on people's fears.

Think you have a problem, then see your doctor.
 
Bing said:
TR4man said:
All or the tests offered by Lifescan are available on the NHS
Click to expand...

Part of me is with DumfriesDik - if I had the money I would... But another part of me just doesn't want to know. My wife keeps bugging me to have the 40+ check at my GP... Maybe that will be my single new year resolution :D
Click to expand...

Bing, get to see your Doctor :poke: :poke: , we have MOT's on our cars so why not our bodies. I went on my over 40's and now over 50's checks, nothing untoward was found.
We have free yearly checks at now, I go every time, if something is found, I can act on it quickly and hopefully get it sorted, like I would on the MOT for a car :thumbsup:
 
Bing said:
My wife keeps bugging me to have the 40+ check at my GP... Maybe that will be my single new year resolution :D
Click to expand...

Do it. They are well worthwhile

Then when you are over 55, as I am, you can also look forward to the joys of regular bowel cancer screening too. :roll:
 
Problem is for me is I don't have that much confidence in your high street GP to pick up anything important, isn't the point of something like a CT Scan is to pick up on potential problems very early on that your GP wouldn't be able too and most likely miss? afterall he or she doesn't have access to such equipment or the necessary knowledge? My GP couldn't even diagnose a bust ankle and 3 toes and just said it was sprained and the usual advice take Ibroprofen :?

Tim.
 
TitanTim said:
Problem is for me is I don't have that much confidence in your high street GP to pick up anything important
Click to expand...

This is sadly true, a good friend of mine has just been diagnosed with prostate cancer. He had to point out to his GP that his PSA levels were abnormally high in a recent blood test, the GP had missed it.
 
A program on Radio 4 was dicussing this a few weeks back, IIRC the doctors on the program said the radiation dose from a CT scan is very high (100's of times more than an X-ray) and isn't actually recommended if you don't have a specific problem to identify. May do you more harm than good if you don't need it.
 
As stated, such companies exist to make money from your anxiety.

The diagnostic sensitivity of such tests markedly decreases when patients are not pre-selected based on recognised clinical risk. As such, important diagnoses may not be detectable at the time of the investigation (as per PVR's example).

Similarly, an abnormality on a scan may be suspicious for a diagnosis if it correlates with clinical findings and risk, but be of no significance if no such correlation exists. This makes accurate reporting a minefield.

Many fatal conditions are not more curable through earlier diagnosis and treatment. An earlier diagnosis may simply lead to you having the diagnosis for longer before you die at the time you would have anyway. This is lead-time bias and is responsible for the apparent increase in life expectancy through early detection of some conditions.

A total-body CT is not a benign investigation, the radiation exposure is significant. If your scan is clear today, when will you have the next scan? One year? Five years? Radiation exposure never goes away and the cumulative dose will be enormous, perhaps precipitating the very diagnosis that you're trying to evade.

The tests they offer may not be the best for diagnosing a given condition, just tests deemed to be acceptable by patients (not embarrassing or painful) and by doctors (low risk of harm from that test ie non-invasive). Many malignancies require tissue samples (biopsy or excision of the suspicious area) to confirm a diagnosis, unless they are already fairly advanced. An angiogram and stress echocardiogram will yield far more information about the state of your myocardium and coronary arteries that an exercise ECG and a few blood tests. A colonoscopy will reveal the polyp that is about to become an invasive malignancy. However, I doubt these companies would perform such invasive investigations on the worried well who have no significant risk factors for fear of the adverse effects and complications that might stem from an "unnecessary" test.

Were such investigations of benefit to the herd (ie the whole country through disease reduction / prevention or in terms of health economics) or to the individual patient, then they would be available through the NHS. Of course on occasion an asymptomatic patient may have a serendipitous test that saves their life, but such patients will be rare.

I strongly support health promotion and appropriate screening programmes, and would encourage most blokes to see their GPs more often as we have a habit of ignoring symptoms that may be indicative of significant ill health. I'd also encourage people to take up the opportunities offered by the NHS, whether that is a Well Man / Woman screening programme at a fixed age, routine breast screening etc, or surveillance specifically tailored to you or your family such as regular colonoscopies in families with a history of young-onset colonic carcinoma.

Lastly, there's good evidence that a "normal" result from a health screen reinforces unhealthy behaviour patterns. So the smoker with a cough who has a normal chest CT will continue to smoke and the obese person suspected to be diabetic yet found to have a normal blood sugar will continue to eat all the pies....
 
Thanks so much for the comprehensive reply. I didn't realise the exposure to radiation was so high :o so you can go to have a scan with nothing really wrong with you and expose to potential nasties, hmmmm no thanks. I think the responses are enough to say only have it done if absolutely necessary.

Tim.
 
BMWZ4MC said:
As stated, such companies exist to make money from your anxiety.

The diagnostic sensitivity of such tests markedly decreases when patients are not pre-selected based on recognised clinical risk. As such, important diagnoses may not be detectable at the time of the investigation (as per PVR's example).

Similarly, an abnormality on a scan may be suspicious for a diagnosis if it correlates with clinical findings and risk, but be of no significance if no such correlation exists. This makes accurate reporting a minefield.

Many fatal conditions are not more curable through earlier diagnosis and treatment. An earlier diagnosis may simply lead to you having the diagnosis for longer before you die at the time you would have anyway. This is lead-time bias and is responsible for the apparent increase in life expectancy through early detection of some conditions.


A total-body CT is not a benign investigation, the radiation exposure is significant. If your scan is clear today, when will you have the next scan? One year? Five years? Radiation exposure never goes away and the cumulative dose will be enormous, perhaps precipitating the very diagnosis that you're trying to evade.

The tests they offer may not be the best for diagnosing a given condition, just tests deemed to be acceptable by patients (not embarrassing or painful) and by doctors (low risk of harm from that test ie non-invasive). Many malignancies require tissue samples (biopsy or excision of the suspicious area) to confirm a diagnosis, unless they are already fairly advanced. An angiogram and stress echocardiogram will yield far more information about the state of your myocardium and coronary arteries that an exercise ECG and a few blood tests. A colonoscopy will reveal the polyp that is about to become an invasive malignancy. However, I doubt these companies would perform such invasive investigations on the worried well who have no significant risk factors for fear of the adverse effects and complications that might stem from an "unnecessary" test.

Were such investigations of benefit to the herd (ie the whole country through disease reduction / prevention or in terms of health economics) or to the individual patient, then they would be available through the NHS. Of course on occasion an asymptomatic patient may have a serendipitous test that saves their life, but such patients will be rare.

I strongly support health promotion and appropriate screening programmes, and would encourage most blokes to see their GPs more often as we have a habit of ignoring symptoms that may be indicative of significant ill health. I'd also encourage people to take up the opportunities offered by the NHS, whether that is a Well Man / Woman screening programme at a fixed age, routine breast screening etc, or surveillance specifically tailored to you or your family such as regular colonoscopies in families with a history of young-onset colonic carcinoma.

Lastly, there's good evidence that a "normal" result from a health screen reinforces unhealthy behaviour patterns. So the smoker with a cough who has a normal chest CT will continue to smoke and the obese person suspected to be diabetic yet found to have a normal blood sugar will continue to eat all the pies....
Click to expand...

A very interesting reply. This is something I've been wondering as after an angiogram and echo stress cardiogram for AF they've found 2 leaking heart valves, some CHD and enlargement of my aortic valve which I'm pretty upset with as I'm not overweight, always been very very fit, and only smoked for a couple of years as a teenager, so at 49 it's quite hard not to get quite down in the dumps. Up until your post I would have assumed that an early scan at around 40 yrs old would have found something but seems not, I take what you say, it makes sense even though it's little comfort.
 
John, your AF was the warning that something was amiss. If you look back over the preceding few years, in retrospect you may now recognise a modest and insidious reduction in your exercise tolerance and perhaps early fatigue - all of which it's easy to blame on the passage of time and so ignore. A standard echo before the onset of your AF may have revealed the valvular abnormalities, but only in the right hands and likely only once the valves had started to leak. I'm not sure that your treatment pathway would have differed if a diagnosis was made before the onset of AF, but I'm not a cardiologist and things may have changed since I graduated.

The driving force for all of your cardiac problems is likely the valvular problem. Did you have Scarlet Fever / Rheumatic Fever as a child or young adult as this can lead to such problems years later. It certainly doesn't sound like lifestyles choices have had any causative role.

I know it's hard to see the up side, but the onset of AF has given you the early warning that led to you presenting before your heart muscle was severely damaged. It sounds like you've been thoroughly investigated, rather than just started on rat poison and something to control your heart rate. I presume the cardiologists will monitor your heart function for any progression and treat the valves when they need to?

Best wishes, Richard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom