Peter Attia· MD
in order for a screening test to be useful it has to catch a significant fraction of the first type of stage one the stage one that doesn't have micro metastases because which the surgeon can cure
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
in order for a screening test to be useful it has to catch a significant fraction of the first type of stage one the stage one that doesn't have micro metastases because which the surgeon can cure
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
the stage one lung cancer patients where the cancer cells have not left the lung there's that's where they are that's the only place they are and the surgeon removes the tumor and the patient is cured that's one type of stage one lung cancer patient the second type of stage one on cancer patient looks the same has exact same ct scan has the same surgery but already has microscopic cells in the liver and the brain that we don't know about their stage one we call them stage one because that's all we can see but so stage one is actually heterogeneous there's two subtypes of it
Whole-body MRI screening in healthy adults produces more incidentaloma harm than cancer-mortality benefit.
Starting colonoscopy screening at 45 (vs 50) prevents enough early-onset cancers to justify the population cost.
Multi-cancer liquid-biopsy tests like Galleri detect early cancers at a stage that meaningfully improves survival.