Scott says something like, let’s assume we aren’t living in reality when he says “We’ll very optimistically assume that after enough tests, the smartest doctors can distinguish cancers that should be treated and cancers that shouldn’t be treated with 100% accuracy”.
We do have studies that looked at how survival rates change after various cancers screenings. To ignore that randomized studies and make arguments based on what spherical cow analysis suggest, is not a good basis for making simplified claims.
We might not have the big studies for full body scanning for cancer detection, but the results of the studies for cancer screening we do have can only be explained with doctors making many bad treatment decisions or there be other negative effects that come from cancer screening tests.
Scott says something like, let’s assume we aren’t living in reality when he says “We’ll very optimistically assume that after enough tests, the smartest doctors can distinguish cancers that should be treated and cancers that shouldn’t be treated with 100% accuracy”.
We do have studies that looked at how survival rates change after various cancers screenings. To ignore that randomized studies and make arguments based on what spherical cow analysis suggest, is not a good basis for making simplified claims.
We might not have the big studies for full body scanning for cancer detection, but the results of the studies for cancer screening we do have can only be explained with doctors making many bad treatment decisions or there be other negative effects that come from cancer screening tests.