Disclaimer: medicine isn't my background, so the following comment could be partially or entirely groundless. --- So I just took a crack at the concept PDF an

Disclaimer: medicine isn't my background, so the following comment could be partially or entirely groundless. --- So I just took a crack at the concept PDF and the rest of the literature on the site, and there's nothing that I can find which mitigates the risk of flagging a slow-growing or self-regressing tumor as something worthy of attention. I say this because mammogram recommendations were only recently changed due to the potential adverse health risks stemming from treating tumors which might never progress to a severity warranting treatment [1] as well as tumors which might spontaneously regress [2]. If some of the newer oncology theories suggesting high tumor occurrence and anti-cancer immune responses are correct (my google-fu didn't help me here, so someone else might want to help me with the source), then as a result of Grail, you might start having a bunch of people freak out and undergo unnecessarily heavy treatments for tumors which might otherwise never become cancerous. That said, I could be entirely wrong, and I wouldn't be surprised if they're specifically working on mitigating this risk as one component of making this screen viable. [1]http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/features/new-mammogram-screening-guidelines-faq?page=2 http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/features/new-mammogram-sc... [2]http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=773446 http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=77344...