4 ms·
You are deep in the cope here. There is no world in which biopsies cause more harm than detecting every cancer at stage 1 prevents. > Not to mention the huge
by MagicMoonlight 8mo ago
You are deep in the cope here.
There is no world in which biopsies cause more harm than detecting every cancer at stage 1 prevents.
> Not to mention the huge cost that would divert money from shareholders
Ah, that explains it
- dogmatism 8mo agoI’ll give you a counter example. I had an MRI of my neck for unrelated reasons. It found a thyroid nodule with suspicious characteristics. Incidentally I had had an MRI of the same areaa few years before and it wasn’t there. So I had a biopsy. Which was equivocal also. So I had it out which involved removing half my thyroid. Turns out it was a cancer but like the least serious kind, in fact the classification of it as actual cancer has gone back and forth over the years But my other half of my thyroid couldn’t produce enough thyroid hormone, and now I have to take thyroid replacement the rest of my life to start alive Also the surgery affected my voice and I sound like RFK jr now. I clearly suffered some harm, and even after having the thing out, it’s unclear if that was beneficial at all. A large proportion of these kind of tumors quit growing and never do anything bad. But some do. So who knows. Was the tradeoff worth it? I don’t think it’s possible to say