The points made in the debate are well-founded and make good sense, but the article deals specifically with pathology management. The article ignores the trend to use techniques with relatively high radiation exposure both in medicine and dentistry, especially in young cohorts of patients, sometimes when no pathology is present (eg full view CBCT for adolescents in some orthodontic practices and teaching institutions), and when less or no radiation exposure is needed . Often, tissues with high sensitivity to radiation are being exposed in our young patients. Since there is no central registry for tracking the number and types of radiation exposures patients have had, I suggest that any study on the effects of radiation in regard to cancer incidence will have a significant margin of error falsely downplaying the impact of radiation on the incidence of cancers. Is it not time that we in the health professions monitor the radiation exposure patients receive with a central registry?