This seems like a repetition of the same point seven times. Let me try to rephrase your seven assumptions into a single, strong argument: "Doctors and patients

This seems like a repetition of the same point seven times. Let me try to rephrase your seven assumptions into a single, strong argument: "Doctors and patients treat intervention as the default response to medical issues, but there are situations where intervention is (on average) neutral or harmful." This is true. It is not a strong argument against medical scans however[1]. For instance, the result of the scans could be analyzed by a third party who isn't the patient or the doctor. Issues could only be passed along to the doctor if it will lead to a statistically better outcome for the patient. [1] It might be a strong argument given a sufficiently weak culture, for instance one that is unable to provide legal immunity to the statistics-running third party. If your argument is, "We suck so bad we can't do 'statistics', so putting our heads in the sand is actually the best outcome we can get", you can just say that directly. EDIT: Changed "can't" to "can". Thanks kgwgk.