Website: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1921260,00.html
Summary:
Eben Harrell’s “Sudden Cardiac Death: Should Young Athletes Be Screened?” focus on the today’s athletes’ main concern, Sudden Cardiac Death (SCD). SCD is a sudden and fatal loss of heart function. Joggers to high school soccer players all athletes have higher chance of getting this condition. In this condition individual can die with no or little warning. British and Netherlands researchers have made the conclusion that in order to prevent this condition; all athletes should be tasted for heart abnormalities routinely by Electrocardiogram (ECG). The ECG test cost about $500 per test. And there are higher chances of getting false-positive results. But some sport cardiologists think this test is more cost-effective. Instead they recommend all athletes to be screened through physical and health questionnaire. And only use ECG for higher research. The non-ECG test have same rate of annual death as ECG test. When there is a false-positive result there are more expensive test and anxiety over if there is something wrong with their heart or not. But we should not put price on young athletes’ death.
Personal Response:
I believe that SCD is a condition that we should not ignore. It should be up to athletes themselves to decide whether they want to have an ECG test done or physical exam. But I think they should get physical exam done and, then only if necessary they should get ECG test.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Sudden Cardiac Death: Should Young Athletes Be Screened?
Posted by Karple at 11:11 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
A very interesting story. You migh want to try and combine some sentences. it read choppy. Also line 5 "individual" needs an s on the end. Line 8 you said " tasted " , it should be tested.
This poses an interesting question; "Should athletes be required for screening?" I think this begs the question of who has the rights to the athlete's body? The athlete himself, or maybe his sponsor? Maybe his teams' owner? I can see how an owner or sponsor may want to require such screenings because they want to protect their investment, but in the end it is the athlete who suffers the ultimate loss. I think it has to be the decision of the athlete himself. But...if he refuses to be screened will this hurt his chances of signing on with a team or a sponsor? Interesting.
Post a Comment