10 Comments
User's avatar
Cheryl Wischhover's avatar

This was great! I have wondered about these services and what the catch is. Thanks for illuminating that. The no-chest scan is telling. Plus MRI with contrast is often better for seeing vascular stuff and tumors so a dry MRI that skips parts of the body seems ridiculous if it’s supposed to be offering peace of mind. Anyway! Can’t get enough of reading about scamsssss

Paul von Zielbauer's avatar

Cheryl, I agree about the contrast. Even if it was offered, I wouldn't have done it twice so close together, though. I think this is mostly a story of selling hard into huge demand, or ginning it up and then selling into it, more than a sound idea for better medical care.

James H. Stein, MD's avatar

I have to admit it - I really admire your spleen. I don’t say that very often, but my personal and professional opinion is that you have a very nice spleen.

Paul von Zielbauer's avatar

Dr. Stein, thank you. I’ve worked really hard on my spleen, including 2 years of spleen squats. So I’m glad the work is paying off. Thanks for noticing.

Andy Revkin's avatar

Personally I'd be more interested in a PET scan (picked up my thyroid cancer when I went in for a lung nodule that turned out to be nothing)?

Paul von Zielbauer's avatar

You're right, Andy. But I couldn't find anyone to pay for that one.

But, jokes aside, I'm glad you got it and it helped you.

RJ's avatar

Appalling. Whether viewed as “tech” or as “healthcare”, I am mortified that this is allowed to continue. A full body MRI without the chest? Nowhere is apparent any measure of accuracy or how well small detail is imaged. Both sensitivity of machine and accuracy of radiology interpretation are important. This seems pretty flimsy cardboard between your pocket and their money magnet. How do we get better regulation of this?