Wealthy People Are Getting Full-Body Scans. Early Detection or Unnecessary?

Re:Wealthy People Are Getting Full-Body Scans. Early Detecti... by cyberax on Friday August 25, 2023 @10:20PM (#37269355)

> What was often excluded in the noise was that if it were mandated for all girls as some states were recommending, it would be so expensive that funding for other health programs would need to be reduced.

This is an argument from scarcity. If you have a severely limited amount of a resource, it makes sense to sacrifice some people, so that more people can receive life-saving care.

If the resource is not scarce, then this simply doesn't apply. These days HPV vaccine (in Europe) is around $30, so it makes sense to just vaccinate everybody.

> Preventive medicine is good - to an extent. Beyond that it is bad.

Nope. It's always good, but sometimes it's too expensive.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wealthy People Are Getting Full-Body Scans. Early Detecti... by BeetleB on Saturday August 26, 2023 @01:25AM (#37270161)

> These days HPV vaccine (in Europe) is around $30, so it makes sense to just vaccinate everybody.

These days it's likely a very different from 2007 when it was being debated.

There argument wasn't that no one should get Gardasil. Just that it would hurt the health of the society if it was mandated for all. Obviously if you had the money it's good to get it

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wealthy People Are Getting Full-Body Scans. Early Detecti... by cyberax on Saturday August 26, 2023 @01:55AM (#37270254)

Yes, and this argument indeed holds in the case of extra MRI screenings. We simply don't have enough MRI units to screen everybody every year.

On the other hand, the quantity of MRI units is not fixed. We can always build more, they are just inherently very expensive. And if you can afford an MRI scan from your personal disposable income, then what's the problem?

[ Parent | on HN ]