> if the prior probability of disease is such that the outcome of the test doesn’t meaningfully change the likelihood, it’s bad for the patient to create a situ

> if the prior probability of disease is such that the outcome of the test doesn’t meaningfully change the likelihood, it’s bad for the patient to create a situation where for legal purposes I must now act as though the probability is much higher than it is. I don't disagree. I was claiming that both patients and doctors are caught in this trap, i.e. doctors are legally liable for not offering, or recommending, treatment that isn't warranted.