290 | SQU Medical Journal, May 2011, Volume 11, Issue 2 Sir, I would like to congratulate you on your a timely editorial in the February issue of SQUMJ1 which has strangely coincided with a clinical review by Davies et al. recently published in the British Medical Journal.2 According to Davies et al., an estimated 30% of imaging may be unnecessary. Some of the most relevant issues have been brought by Prof. Lamki including the massive increase in the number of procedures performed, and the need to educate both physicians and patients. The arguments in favour of imaging are growing as it is non-invasive compared to surgical procedures and thus increases patient satisfaction, etc. Medical imaging and nuclear medicine is also the most sought after specialty in Oman, India and even Western countries for postgraduate studies. This development is at the expense of bedside clinical examination which is becoming a forgotten art at the expense of technology and high radiation exposure. We do not hear any more of McBurney and Murphy in morning meetings, but only that (computed tomography) CT abdomen ruled out appendicitis and so on. This wake-up call is necessary not only for Oman, but also for the rest of the world, as the risks of radiation exposure are underestimated by both patients and physicians. Vaidyanathan Gowri Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology College of Medicine & Health Sciences Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman Email: gowri@squ.edu.om References 1. Al Lamki L. Radiation exposure from medical imaging - A wake up call for Oman. SQU Med J 2011; 11:1-4. 2. Davies HE, Wathen CG, Gleeson FV. The risks of radiation exposure related to diagnostic imaging and how to minimise them BMJ 2011; 342:d947 doi: 10.1136/bmj.d947 Cite this as: BMJ 2011; 342:d947. SQU Med J, May 2011, Vol. 11, Iss. 2, pp. 290, Epub. 15th May 11 Received - 12th Mar 11 <≈^√ç˛÷<öÜ√j÷]