Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This article is really aimed at the more dubious tests (e.g. cholesterol) than doing yearly checkups per se.

I'd agree with the idea that some tests aren't as good as others, and we lump critical checkups (let's say cardiography) with more shakier ones, like waist circumference or cholesterol. Finding issue with the later falls a lot more into pop science than actual hard evidence based physical intervention.

Removing the pop science from the periodical checkups would definitely be a good idea, stopping yearly checkups altogether is throwing the baby with the bath water.




>Finding issue with the later [cholesterol checks] falls a lot more into pop science than actual hard evidence based physical intervention.

This statement is in opposition to the consensus of medical professionals. What reason is there for believing it?


cholesterol values are read as corrolated to deseases we want to prevent, but not as a issue themselves.

https://www.cdc.gov/cholesterol/index.htm

> Too much cholesterol puts you at risk for heart disease and stroke, two leading causes of death in the United States.

For instance if you have high cholesterol but clinically no artery or cardiac issues, lowering your cholesterol will essentially do nothing for you. Some doctors will follow the manuals and still have you lower your levels "just in case" (they'll want to lower a potential risk), but we're the entering the fuzzy part that has no consensus.

PS: what values are high is also actively debated, and ethnicity and other factors will affect what is "normal". That's another aspect where it's a lot more touchy/feely than a "your arteries are clogged" diagnostic.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: