Would you say that, on the whole, physicians will make judgements that are approximately as accurate given new data about paroxysmal a-fib as they did before ha

Would you say that, on the whole, physicians will make judgements that are approximately as accurate given new data about paroxysmal a-fib as they did before having this new data? Are they already condemning people to unnecessary treatment on the off-chance that treatment is helpful? Is there scope here for the AMA to refine procedures to suggest holding off on medication when a condition is only discovered by a persistent monitoring system such as Apple Watch? Even if the over-medication issue increases, are the live saved via early detection of equal value to the lives damaged by unnecessary medication? If there are more lives saved than damaged, is there a net benefit to society, or are we only interested in the lives lost through action and not at all concerned about the lives lost through inaction?