3 ms·

Checkups save lives. It's a bit ridiculous to speak of needing evidence for that. Catching cancer early is of great importance. Hence the yearly breast contro

Checkups save lives. It's a bit ridiculous to speak of needing evidence for that. Catching cancer early is of great importance. Hence the yearly breast control checks. The question is one of cost benefit in this regard and wether the annual checkups proposed can be more efficient regarding types of tests and demographics

glfharris 3y ago
It's not as simple as you're suggesting. Take cancer screening for example. Doing more investigations and more procedures for things that weren't going to become problematic puts people at risk for the complications of those procedures. Screening programmes need to be carefully thought out, not only from a cost-benefit, but from an actual risks vs benefits perspective.
- lol768 3y ago
  Which is why in other countries, such as the UK, the NHS will look at the potential for preventing disease/extending QALY based on peer-reviewed evidence, the risks of harm and overall cost-effectiveness before then coming up with a model for the whole population when it comes to screening which targets patient demographics most likely to benefit. The following conditions are pro-actively screened in this way: - Abdominal aortic aneurysm - Bowel cancer - Breast cancer - Cervical cancer - Diabetic eye screening Patients with early symptoms of e.g. skin cancer can get moles checked out free of charge, and the yearly dental & vision check will screen for conditions like oral cancer and glaucoma. The harm of something like a yearly colonoscopy in the general asymptomatic population would far exceed the potential benefits.
  - DanBC 3y ago
    Yes, and the screening committee publish their methodology and evidence. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/uk-national-screening-committee/about https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/uk-national-scre...
- jiggywiggy 3y ago
  Wasn't that my point?
  - pessimizer 3y ago
    > Screening programmes need to be carefully thought out, not only from a cost-benefit, but from an actual risks vs benefits perspective. vs. > It's a bit ridiculous to speak of needing evidence for that. So from my perspective, you were saying the opposite, and using an argument I've heard before about the power of prayer.
loeg 3y ago
> Checkups save lives. It's a bit ridiculous to speak of needing evidence for that. This is a silly attitude. Maybe you should do some salutations to the sun god Ra if evidence isn't significant. > Catching cancer early is of great importance. Hence the yearly breast control checks. Breast cancer screening isn't annual (in women or men).
- jiggywiggy 3y ago
  Large scale meta studies dont provide any form of substantial evidence, they point to vague correlations, from which you can look for causation. Feel free to do salutation to the false god of large scale metastudies :). Here you already know causation. Early diagnosis is proven of great benefit for many diseases. It's more effective to specially study different groups of people and see what does and doesn't work. Btw here breast cancer is biannual indeed, annual if you had it. Might differ per country.
- laratied 3y ago
  Many people really do want a form of shamanism still with their medical care. The shaman does their useless ritual once a year and people are satisfied they are protected from black magic until the next annual checkup.
DanBC 3y ago
> Catching cancer early is of great importance Is it? There's lots of stuff (including lots of cancers) where finding it early doesn't have much impact on all cause mortality.

glfharris 3y ago

It's not as simple as you're suggesting. Take cancer screening for example. Doing more investigations and more procedures for things that weren't going to become problematic puts people at risk for the complications of those procedures. Screening programmes need to be carefully thought out, not only from a cost-benefit, but from an actual risks vs benefits perspective.

lol768 3y ago
Which is why in other countries, such as the UK, the NHS will look at the potential for preventing disease/extending QALY based on peer-reviewed evidence, the risks of harm and overall cost-effectiveness before then coming up with a model for the whole population when it comes to screening which targets patient demographics most likely to benefit. The following conditions are pro-actively screened in this way: - Abdominal aortic aneurysm - Bowel cancer - Breast cancer - Cervical cancer - Diabetic eye screening Patients with early symptoms of e.g. skin cancer can get moles checked out free of charge, and the yearly dental & vision check will screen for conditions like oral cancer and glaucoma. The harm of something like a yearly colonoscopy in the general asymptomatic population would far exceed the potential benefits.
- DanBC 3y ago
  Yes, and the screening committee publish their methodology and evidence. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/uk-national-screening-committee/about https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/uk-national-scre...
jiggywiggy 3y ago
Wasn't that my point?
- pessimizer 3y ago
  > Screening programmes need to be carefully thought out, not only from a cost-benefit, but from an actual risks vs benefits perspective. vs. > It's a bit ridiculous to speak of needing evidence for that. So from my perspective, you were saying the opposite, and using an argument I've heard before about the power of prayer.

loeg 3y ago

> Checkups save lives. It's a bit ridiculous to speak of needing evidence for that. This is a silly attitude. Maybe you should do some salutations to the sun god Ra if evidence isn't significant. > Catching cancer early is of great importance. Hence the yearly breast control checks. Breast cancer screening isn't annual (in women or men).

jiggywiggy 3y ago
Large scale meta studies dont provide any form of substantial evidence, they point to vague correlations, from which you can look for causation. Feel free to do salutation to the false god of large scale metastudies :). Here you already know causation. Early diagnosis is proven of great benefit for many diseases. It's more effective to specially study different groups of people and see what does and doesn't work. Btw here breast cancer is biannual indeed, annual if you had it. Might differ per country.
laratied 3y ago
Many people really do want a form of shamanism still with their medical care. The shaman does their useless ritual once a year and people are satisfied they are protected from black magic until the next annual checkup.

DanBC 3y ago

> Catching cancer early is of great importance Is it? There's lots of stuff (including lots of cancers) where finding it early doesn't have much impact on all cause mortality.