Precisely - since mammography is the standard "counterintuitive Bayes rule" primer, I remembered those numbers don't support wider screening. I'm not discounti

Precisely - since mammography is the standard "counterintuitive Bayes rule" primer, I remembered those numbers don't support wider screening. I'm not discounting the possibility of a useful role for Watson in wider screening, but it's not clear to me where it would be. If it happens after any kind of extensive examination, doctor-hours are being committed regardless and there's little gain. If it happens at a population-level screen like mammograms and colonoscopies, "almost as good as oncologists" isn't enough to add any value.