It's intoxicating to think that whole body scans for the entire world's population will be life saving.
What I'm going to tell you is counterintuitive. You don't want it to be true.... THIS WILL CAUSE NET HARM
You don't want it to be true. I get it. I don't want it to be true either. But it is fixed probability theory (Bayes Theorem), not a difference of opinion. It's not something where you can be "in one camp" or "in another camp." It's not philosophy. It's math.
Applying a full-body scan to an asymptomatic population is like waving a metal detector over a beach covered in bottle caps and saying, "I'm not in the camp that worries about bottle caps, we'll just shovel the entire beach into a lab and sort it out later."
You're looking for a ring... but in this case all the bottle caps look like rings.
The problem isn't the sensitivity of your detector; I don't care if it's the best most advanced detector ever made. it's the mathematical certainty that the junk drastically outnumbers the treasure.
When pretest probability is near zero, Bayes' theorem dictates that the Positive Predictive Value crashes to near zero. Even if a future machine achieves a hypothetical 99% specificity, testing for a disease with a 0.01% prevalence means a 1% PPV. For every 1 true cancer you catch, you get 100 false positives.
Because a full-body scan acts as dozens of independent tests, a standard 95% specificity per organ system mathematically guarantees a false positive rate over 60% per patient. You cannot "catalog and learn" your way out of that reality without subjecting millions of healthy people to real-world harm first.
We've seen this movie before. It isn't different now just "because AI" or because "we will have more and better data" or "we'll learn" our way out of it.
Math doesn't have philosophical camps. It's just... well, boring math.
Dr. Andre LaGerche presenting lab and echo data before and after a 24-hour outdoor track cycling distance world record.
I managed to find Strava data for that day…average power 246W over 24hours 🤯
@PerKarl14424229 Yes. Firstly, because of septal protodiasole, secondly because IVR is poorly delineated laterally, and both are relevant.
If you use Tei, i should be measured by Doppler flow, where all measures, at least in LV can be taken from one acquisition. But it is extremely load dependent
🔥Just published under #EHJCVI 🔥
✅ Principles of Exercise-Induced Pulmonary Hypertension
✅ Association with latest guidelines
✅ Practical guide for applying the mPAP/CO slope in clinical practice
@Ph_Bertrand@S_Dhont ➡️ https://t.co/TgySAuuGaV @bernhard_gerber@JGrapsa