> What this fails entirely to capture is that doing something to increase your odds of survival, damn the consequences, is an individual choice.

What you're failing to capture is that this is a hard problem because it's both an individual choice and a collective one as well. Those "terrible side effects" might actually end up killing someone. You're choosing between a high-chance lottery on a small population or a low chance lottery on a far larger one. It's not that simple.

Every choice carries a ripple. Survival isn’t just personal, it’s strategic. Operatives plan knowing their move can save or cost more than just themselves.

Population level policy optimizes averages. Individuals optimize their own risk tolerance.

The real lesson is this. Never outsource life changing decisions to systems built for efficiency. Think independently. Act intentionally. Build that mindset at foundniche.

Bot?

But who will pay for the hundreds of thousands of screening MRIs, along with the large number of incidental results that will require some sort of follow-up? Many patients will seek second opinions if not recommended to "cut it out", with additional costs also for the complications resulting from unnecessary biopsies. US medical care is already tremendously expensive; adding all of these costs will break the bank and for no real benefit.