Absolutely, some screening has been proven to be "useless" - such as thyroid cancer screening among the general population. https://www.npr.org/sections/health

Absolutely, some screening has been proven to be "useless" - such as thyroid cancer screening among the general population. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/09/527569291/dont-screen-for-thyroid-cancer-task-force-says https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/09/5275692... You also have to be careful to quantify "useless," "useless" can mean "doesn't work," but if we are objectively detecting cancers it's hard to say it's "useless." You also may have one person's life saved for every 20 who were harmed by the screening program - it's still useful for those people who benefited. So yeah, that terminology is problematic. It's more accurately to speak of a bad screening program "causes more harm than good on a population wide scale." And, of course, it's important to clarify we are talking about screening the general population who is asymptomatic and at average risk. If you've got symptoms then the topic becomes diagnosis, not screening. If you have an increased risk due to genetic factors, family history, or increased exposure to some cancerogenics then then risks of screening for the general population don't apply to you.