David Foster was diagnosed with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma in April 2005. Translation: stage four kidney cancer and the sixth deadliest form of cancer. Not a great disease to acquire. Also not the end of the world. Just ask David who is busy working as a National Strategic Advisor in Augusta, Georgia, headlining within the independent magazine community, hanging out with dog Gracie, and documenting his journey in a blog he calls David Foster's Kicking Kidney Cancer's Arse.

He's no wimp, this guy. Just read his June 23 post, titled May kill me, but it ain't gonna beat me. He didn't let that hard-nosed kid Jerry whip him when he was eight -- he smacked him so hard in the lunchroom, Jerry was left stumbling and bleeding -- and he won't let cancer bully him either. Still, David admits: he is sick. He explains it all in a post he calls Mr. Foster, are you really sick?

David got an e-mail one day. It read, Mr. Foster, are you really sick? I read your blog and you don't sound sick.

It seems screening for lung cancer doesn't save lives and it doesn't prevent advanced disease. But it does lead to potentially unnecessary and harmful treatment.

This isn't the final word on the use of CT scans to screen smokers and former smokers for the disease. But right now, the hope some experts had for the special X-rays to detect tiny lung abnormalities has been diminished by a large study that is still in the works. And until conclusive evidence says the screening is useful, the American Cancer Society will not endorse the test.

While CT screening did increase diagnosis and treatment -- those screened were three times more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer and 10 times more likely to have lung surgery than predicted -- study co-author Dr. Peter Bach of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York says, "We don't see a trace of evidence that a single life was saved, that a single case of advanced cancer was avoided."

And because CT scanning led to more biopsies and surgeries, patients were put at risk for complications such as lung puncture, bleeding, and infection, according to Bach, whose work is published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

"Getting screened for lung cancer with CT scanning is not only unproven, it's potentially a risky endeavor," he said.

Until an effective screening tool emerges -- possibly still years away -- experts say there is one surefire way to protect yourself from lung cancer. Stop smoking.

It has just recently been discovered that CT scans for children have been inappropriately used in two Ontario hospitals. As a result, some children have received excessive doses of radiation, putting them at greater risk of developing cancer later in life.

Staff at the two hospitals -- Peterborough Regional Health Centre is one -- reported that in close to 50 percent of selected cases, the appropriate equipment settings were not used.

Herein lies the problem -- developing organs are more susceptible to damage, and giving a small child an adult dose of radiation in a CT scan delivers the same amount of radiation as 4,000 traditional X-rays. Research shows that increased exposure to radiation over time can cause radiation-induced cancer.

CT scans are valuable diagnostic tools because they create 3-D images of organs, offering a better view of head injuries, chest trauma, cancer, and fractures. So they should not be disregarded -- but clearly, hospitals need to improve the management of all scanning procedures.

In Ontario, a diagnostic image safety committee has already been formed. The goal of this committee is to develop standards and do a better job of tracking radiation levels.

Experts are encouraging Ontario parents to refrain from worry unless their children have received many CT scans. And all parents are encouraged to speak up before their children receive CT scans. "Is my child receiving a pediatric protocol?" is all it takes.

Dr. Chandra Belani, Professor of Medicine and Oncology at the University of Pittsburg Cancer Institute, is a leader in the study of lung cancer. During a podcast interview, Belani shares some thoughts on the state of lung cancer -- currently the most common cause of cancer death in the United States.

Belani reveals that progress in the areas of lung cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment can best be described as modest. There has been some progress -- and there are many on-going studies in these areas -- but there are no major breakthrough stories. Belani says there has been modest progress in diagnosis with the use of CT scans and PET scans -- and a combination of the two. There has been modest progress in chemotherapy treatment options. There has been no significant advance in detection -- and prevention is mostly in the hands of each individual since 90 percent of lung cancer cases are related to smoking.

Belani shares that true achievement would come with the discovery of a biomarker to detect lung cancer early and to lower overall mortality rates. He would also like to determine why he is seeing an increase in lung cancer cases among non-smokers.

The bar is being raised, says Belani. But it's slow going.

According to researchers, a new blood test can accurately detect early stage non-small-cell lung cancer, the most common type of lung cancer, with 90 percent accuracy. This advancement in lung cancer diagnosis has the potential to eliminate the sometimes inaccurate test results reported with CT scans. After a CT scan, biopsies are often required to confirm the presence of lung cancer. The accuracy of the blood test reduces the number of biopsies done in the need to confirm detection of lung cancer. Another benefit of the blood test is that it can detect non-small-cell lung cancer years before traditional X-ray tests can.

The blood test to detect non-small-cell lung cancer is licensed to 20/20 GeneSystems. Additional clinical studies will be done to confirm the accuracy of the blood test, and if it proves to be as accurate as the initial studies have indicated, this blood test will become the first blood test to predict cancer since the introduction of a prostate specific antigen blood test, PSA, to detect prostate cancer.

This research is published in the Journal of Thoracic Oncology.

Whoever stumbled across this discovery is a genius! First let me say there is nothing that will knock the breath right out of you than being told a test for cancer has come back positive. False-positive results are determined when the second follow-up test reveals the first test is an error in diagnosis. I am certain the first reaction is relief -- and then a sort of aggravation that you had to be put through the harrowing emotions of a cancer diagnosis in the first place.

False-positives can happen for a number of reasons, but one of them involves body heat generated by brown adipose tissue, or brown fat, which can mimic cancer during a PET/CT scan. The current solution is the use of valium and beta blockers during the scan, and studies have shown it reduces reading error by 30 percent. However -- and here is where the whoever thought to do this is a genius comes into play -- the simple use of a warm blanket is more than twice as effective as the administration of drugs in preventing the uptake of tracer by brown fat in the body. According to the researchers, everyone has brown fat, but it is more common in slender women.