Should tobacco companies pay for smokers’ CT scans to screen for lung cancer?

November 3, 2009

According to a potential ruling in Massachusetts, tobacco companies will have to pay for smokers’ screening CT scans.

The Boston Globe (via Doug Farrago) writes that the decision “would allow thousands of other Massachusetts smokers to join the lawsuit, which covers people 50 or older who have smoked at least one pack a day of Marlboro cigarettes for at least 20 years,” and, “if a jury sides with the smokers, Philip Morris could be required to pay for each patient’s low-dose computed tomography scan, which can detect early-stage lung cancer.”

Now, I’m all for penalizing tobacco companies, but there some unintended consequences here.

First, there is no evidence that CT scans for early detection of lung cancer saves lives. In fact, the USPSTF doesn’t recommend it.

Second, what happens if the CT scan detects all sorts incidental findings, like benign masses that necessitate further workup? Indeed, a lung biopsy may be needed to definitively exclude cancer, which itself can lead to bleeding, infection, or other complications.

Would the tobacco companies pay for the additional tests that stem from the screening CT scan? If not, this decision will only further fiscally burden our health system.



Related posts:

  1. CT scans and lung cancer screening
  2. Should tobacco companies pay for screening tests?
  3. Lung cancer CT screening produces false positives and isn’t ready for prime time
  4. A genetic test to identify smokers who will develop lung cancer
  5. CT scans and lung cancer screening redux
  6. How does cancer screening cause harm?
  7. "A CT scan in hand is far better then no CT scan or biopsy at all"


KevinMD.com on Facebook


  Follow on Twitter   Subscribe



{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Nuclear Fire November 3, 2009 at 8:04 am

“Everbody’s a victim. We’re becoming like the USA.” – The Proclaimers.

2 BookstoreMD November 3, 2009 at 9:52 am

Tobacco companies should pay for all healthcare related cost of smoking.

3 me November 3, 2009 at 10:26 am

nice! fully reimbursed ct scans for the docs, money for the lawyers involved in this lawsuit, and even less personal responsibility for the american patient. everyone wins! …except the tobacco industry.

name another country for me where something this ridiculous would happen.

4 R Watkins November 3, 2009 at 10:40 am

Smokers should pay for all healthcare costs related to smoking.

5 Nuclear Fire November 3, 2009 at 11:06 am

Harper’s has an excellent website regarding the public knowledge on the dangers of smoking back in 1857-1912. An interesting historical read and a strong indictment against those who claim “we didn’t know” smoking was bad until just recently.

http://tobacco.harpweek.com/

6 Young Doc November 3, 2009 at 12:37 pm

There is pretty poor evidence that early detection of lung cancer even improves outcomes. Screening CTs are not indicated no matter who is paying for them. This is a giant scam on the part of the trial lawyers who get to recoup the percentage of an even larger ridiculous payout.

7 Happy Hospitalist November 3, 2009 at 1:30 pm

Young doc is correct. Not only that but you’ll find thousands upon thousands of incidentalomas that have no clinical relevance, but will lead to biopsies, anxiety and expense all of which was completely unnecessary.

Why stop at CT scans of the lung? Smokers are at a higher risk of GI tract cancers and pancreatic cancers and bladder cancer. Shouldn’t all smokers also have free upper and lower endoscopy, CT scan from head to toe and cystoscopy too?

This is unbelievable.

8 DrV November 3, 2009 at 7:25 pm

I want the Frito-Lay company to cover my CABG

9 Marcy November 4, 2009 at 9:25 am

I want land-o-lakes to pay for my liposuction!

10 Doc Stone November 4, 2009 at 8:44 pm

Since all of my health problems are weight related, shouldn’t Krispy Kreme pay for my healthcare?

11 MatthewBowdish November 4, 2009 at 10:32 pm

I agree that this is a bone-headed idea given the outcomes don’t seem to show benefit.

However, I like the idea that smokers could eventually be required to pay for their increased health care costs via higher prices for tobacco. There is no reason an employer should pay for their employees’ tobacco-related disease, as is the case now, especially if they can’t fire the employee for engaging in such risky behavior.

Why not charge the tobacco companies for screening & treatment of tobacco-related diseases? Phillip-Morris, Reynolds American, etc, would then pass these levies on to consumers (remember, there is no tax on companies, only consumers/consumption) in the form of a “user fee.” Therefore, societal costs are reduced and personal responsibility is promoted.

12 Kok Siong Chen November 11, 2009 at 1:31 am

In my opinion, no matter who will pay for the CT-scan, the best way is to stop from smoking. Everyone should know smoking is not good for health and it will induce lung cancer.

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post: Does the tort-based medical malpractice system improve patient care?

Next post: H1N1 vaccine adverse events, and how to reassure patients

Site Meter