This is the reality. In fact, the situation is getting even more complicated as direct-to-consumer screening becomes more popular (e.g. full body MRI scans). Co

This is the reality. In fact, the situation is getting even more complicated as direct-to-consumer screening becomes more popular (e.g. full body MRI scans). Companies that are selling the health screenings are only incentivized to sell as many screenings as possible. Scans inevitably result in benign incidental findings far more often than they identify real health problems. Then the patient is directed to a specialist who is uninvolved with the screening company. The specialist is incentivized to aggressively investigate the finding out of fear of malpractice and due to pressure from the patient. Nobody has ever thanked their doctor for inaction. The end result far too often is a series of expensive and painful procedures with a large dose of anxiety. Of course screenings also save lives, but nobody is responsible for ensuring the benefits outweigh the harms at the macro level. I don't think any actor in that chain is malicious, it's just an example of poorly aligned incentives. Screening companies, doctors and patients all believe they are making the most optimal choice.