Eric

Yeah, the Grail test.

Yeah, the Grail test.

Yeah, the Grail test.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Well, the problem is it's being marketed for people age 50 and older. That's wrong because most people age 50 are not at risk for cancer. And so they're going to get a test that is either a false positive or false negative. So it has little value unless you know you're at increased risk. And so another one that's being used totally improperly is a total body MRI scan.

Well, the problem is it's being marketed for people age 50 and older. That's wrong because most people age 50 are not at risk for cancer. And so they're going to get a test that is either a false positive or false negative. So it has little value unless you know you're at increased risk. And so another one that's being used totally improperly is a total body MRI scan.

Well, the problem is it's being marketed for people age 50 and older. That's wrong because most people age 50 are not at risk for cancer. And so they're going to get a test that is either a false positive or false negative. So it has little value unless you know you're at increased risk. And so another one that's being used totally improperly is a total body MRI scan.

No, no.

No, no.

No, no.

You don't want to do that because what happens with these, it's never been validated that it helps people to get accurate diagnosis of cancer. Again, it might be okay if you're at significant increased risk. What I would say is if you had a genetic protein and other family history and multiple dimensions of your data,

You don't want to do that because what happens with these, it's never been validated that it helps people to get accurate diagnosis of cancer. Again, it might be okay if you're at significant increased risk. What I would say is if you had a genetic protein and other family history and multiple dimensions of your data,

You don't want to do that because what happens with these, it's never been validated that it helps people to get accurate diagnosis of cancer. Again, it might be okay if you're at significant increased risk. What I would say is if you had a genetic protein and other family history and multiple dimensions of your data,

The problem with the blood test that your husband ordered is that maybe four or five per thousand will have an abnormal reading of a microscopic cancer. And out of those, half of the five per thousand will have already advanced cancer. The problem with the MRI is false positives. If you did the MRI after you had an abnormal blood test- Yeah. That might be okay, sure.

The problem with the blood test that your husband ordered is that maybe four or five per thousand will have an abnormal reading of a microscopic cancer. And out of those, half of the five per thousand will have already advanced cancer. The problem with the MRI is false positives. If you did the MRI after you had an abnormal blood test- Yeah. That might be okay, sure.

The problem with the blood test that your husband ordered is that maybe four or five per thousand will have an abnormal reading of a microscopic cancer. And out of those, half of the five per thousand will have already advanced cancer. The problem with the MRI is false positives. If you did the MRI after you had an abnormal blood test- Yeah. That might be okay, sure.

But you don't go ahead and have a total body MRI just because you're going on a fishing expedition because you could wind up having all sorts of biopsies.

But you don't go ahead and have a total body MRI just because you're going on a fishing expedition because you could wind up having all sorts of biopsies.