WATCH this BEFORE You Get a Whole-Body MRI!

[@LarryMilligan]

Just curious what percentage of people would have to die from something that could be prevented by early detection, before screening is considered worth it.

[@britwhitis2813]

Exactly! I’d rather know that I’m perfectly healthy & safe in the end- cus THAT is money well spent, unlike the tens of thousands most ppl spend on multiple visits with numerous diff doctors, & all from being referred to ten different specialists for simple “abnormal bloodwork” but still have no diagnosis to show for it in the end except opinions/assumptions based on how extensive their knowledge base is or isn’t) than to live on completely blind to the possibility & not knowing, just to eventually die as a result of this “not being recommended” in preference for the longer, more expensive & extensive route that’s currently the routine way of doing things, & doesn’t yield productive results in the end anyways!

[@ddw3968]

Big Pharm would rather maintenance you

[@g.b.5206]

I wish they will be cheeper, I was in Turkey last week and a similar scan was 300 $ but here is 2500 it is just criminal

[@charlyostrowski7890]

****poison*****​@@ddw3968

[@jimrockford3268]

Doctors should NOT be basing their opinions on costs to patients. Everything in this video makes reference to cost. It is a fact that MRI full body screenings, without symptoms being present, save lives. When doctors say it is not worth it because the patient will have to spend money on potential further scans, the doctor is presuming that the patient has some sort of care about money. The entire argument becomes flawed, because it is a FACT that screening saves lives. Money is not in the equation. If you take the mention of cost out of this video, you are left with this...1 out of 100 or so scans have FOUND CANCER in people that had no symptoms. Who cares about the percentage or the cost to the patient. If the doctor's personal "opinion" is that he or she would not "personally" spend $2500 on a scan, so be it. Just don't press your financial beliefs on to a patient. The fact is preventative scans save lives. Whether it is 1 out of 10, or 1 out of 1000, it does not matter. Let the patient make the choice.

[@britwhitis2813]

🙌🏼🗣️🙌🏼🗣️🙌🏼

[@britwhitis2813]

🙌🏼🗣️🙌🏼🗣️🙌🏼

[@linus2020]

This is just stupid. So if you had to scan every single person in the United States to find one cancer, should we do it? Let everyone spend time and money, not to mention all the false positive and wild goose chases produced. What you people don’t understand is that there are not that many radiologists. Radiologists are a precious resource and they shouldn’t be pulled away to do elective studies that are not that useful statistically. More radiologists reading these elective scans means less radiologists reading scans on sick people. There’s more to it than just spending money on a 1/100 chance of finding a random cancer.

[@brinckau]

Money is not the only problem. Medlife Crisis has a video on the same topic, and his conclusions are the same, but only from a medical standpoint. It's not a good idea even if you can get it for free.

[@toddb930]

I wish my daughter would have done something like this. She died of cancer last year at the age of 36.

[@FamilyManMoving]

Sorry for your loss.

[@doesnotFempute]

I'm so sorry for the loss of your daughter. I'm only in my 30s, but have already lost friends to cancer. It's a horrible thing.

[@kingjdmi344]

So sorry to hear of your loss.

[@InoOrihime1]

I’m so sorry for your loss.

[@MiswakByNight.]

Rich people get this done yearly and they usually end up living into their 90s.

[@brinckau]

Rich people wear expensive watches and they usually end up living into their 90s. I will therefore buy a Rolex. Or maybe I should just learn about the difference between correlation and causation.

[@Bartolini1307]

@@brinckau yeah because investing in health and living longer doesnt have any link, are you stupid?

[@Huey-q9c]

Correlation should still be noted​@@brinckau

[@syusi]

@@brinckau❤

[@BlankBrain]

I had cancer, and it was observed after surgery. I had alternating CTs and x-rays every six weeks. After a year, it was suspected that a lymph node was malignant. I was scheduled for a biopsy. This was 2001, and I had read about PET. I brought it up to my doctor, and they checked with my insurance. The just happened to have a PET in a trailer parked outside the hospital. PET was quite new at the rime. I got the PET, and it showed the lymph node. I then had large doses of therapeutic radiation. Not a sign of it for 22 years now. It was a great relief to know that there weren't other malignant locations..

[@flovoices4u294]

We need this because docs cannot diagnose anymore unless it’s staring them in the face. No one is training good diagnosticians and even if they were, no one spends more than 10 minutes with you in office because they have 10,000 patients on their books. My sister has had a life long chronic problem that NO ONE can diagnose. The only thing left is a full body scan. But then the question is, will someone actually treat a cash patient? We think she has a dysautonomia, but we are guessing of course.

[@kellyname5733]

I have heard 'cash pay patients' can and should negotiate a lower cost for the scan. Easy peezy for the facility to not to have to try to bill insurance.

[@FamilyManMoving]

My mother had a baseline scan of her torso due to stenosis. She had a follow-up about five years later and they saw a "little thing" on her lung. Fast forward and it was malignant. It was about 1cm, and they got it out. Docs said that by the time it would have become symptomatic she'd have been stage 3/4, and at her age that would have been lights out in a year. The fact the docs could say definitively (at least as close as you can get with these things) that the mass was not there previously, meant they were comfortable being aggressive in getting it out. They said it might have saved a lot of stress, and perhaps improved her outcome if the mass had time to spread. I'm no hypochondriac, am in good health, but started blood and general health checkups at about 47 - right after my mother found out. Found some areas that could use a tune-up (hormones) - and adjustments made a radical difference over the next few years. I'm getting a full-body MRI not to find anything today (I hope), but as a baseline to determine if that "little thing" they find in a few years was always there. If so, they can then nuke it from orbit with confidence. It's spendy, but I am fortunate enough to be able to afford it.

[@redline4824]

If all 160,000 of your subscribers took an MRI, those studies are saying that 3,200 would have something found? That seems worth it!

[@ChristyRisingerMD]

You initially would think so, but the ongoing testing is so burdensome and MOST of what they find is not anything at all - it just causes a lot of stress and ongoing testing. BUT, this is such a personal decision! It is really based on your own ability to tolerate risk. I just want people to know what they are going into before they get it so they can go in informed. Thanks for watching!

[@Don.Challenger]

Noting that: Of those subscribers (who at the start had no symptoms or history of detectable illness but were willing to undergo the complete MRI) some 50,000 (30%) would be subject to the cost and trouble of up to 4 to 6 subsequent visits for tests over the following year to arrive at those 3,200 significant/worthwhile detections. Also consider most of those hospital visits would involve the logistical time and expense of other family members accompanying the patient. For some it might be worth it.

[@britwhitis2813]

@ChristyRisingerMD you didn’t state this in your video though, that’s the problem a lot of ppl are having here, it seems. Maybe edit this video to add this in- that you believe it’s such a personal decision, and just want them to be aware of the circumstantial considerations first before diving in, etc.- rather than using your MD status as a way to elevate your own personal beliefs/opinions, & potentially influence viewers’ own decisions- especially the ones that COULD benefit from such a screening- not to have it done in the end, all because “a doctor doesn’t recommend it”. That would be the smart move.

[@CoolKidsSJJE]

If we werent always brushed off by our drs we wouldnt need this. In South Korea they can get them yearly. Here we have to go to dr multiple times before basic tests are approved

[@LiveLoveLaughEveryday]

I'd rather be on the cautious side.

[@bobcocampo]

What is your opinion on MRI to screen visceral fats?

[@cindytaylor698]

I saw those comments. I knew that some people were not hearing what you were actually saying. Thanks for this clarification and your thoughtful videos. They are appreciated. ❤

[@ChristyRisingerMD]

Thanks for your kind comments!

[@joost298]

Thx dr. what would you say if money is no problem. Do it or not? thx

[@syusi]

Thank you for your cogent perspective. This tipped the scale for me against an elective scan. I’m an anxious person (why else would I even be considering this?!) and realize the stress of discovering I have an ‘incidentaloma’ would probably kill me.

[@mzeye]

My mom passed away, she had plenty drinks, cat scans etc, they said a biopsy was needed she was scared. Passed a year later. We need better testing

[@noneofyourbuisness5885]

She didn't get the biopsy? What drinks? What cancer or sickness did she die from a year later? My sis was also afraid of needles in particular and let whatever she had eventually taken her life with the help of getting COVID.

[@hjewkes]

Amongst people paying for an elective scan, i can’t imagine that going to additional follow up scans is a significant barrier. I’m honestly surprised the need for invasive biopsy is so low (2%) and that the cancerous outcome of these biopsies is so high (50%+). I always worried that 95% rate of finding something meant a lot of invasive biopsies and procedures. This video sort of convinced me that these arent a bad idea lol

[@yskmac1]

The main problem I have about waiting till you have symptoms to get something like a full body scan is that all too often by the time you're symptomatic, the disease has progressed significantly and is in its advanced stage. We all know that many types of cancers do not cause symptoms in their early stages. I mean, we tell people to screen for things like breast, colon, prostate, etc... even if you don't have symptoms, so why not screen your entire body? If it wasn't for the cost and if insurance covered a whole-body scan like they do colon cancer screening for example, perhaps it would make sense, especially for that 1-2% that end up finding cancer via the scan.

[@reality-winner5759]

Make a video against mammograms then so you're consistent

[@alphacentauri8083]

Breast cancer, colon cancer, prostate cancer fall in the top five causes of deaths from cancer so it warrants screening. We have hard data which indicates the onset of these cancers by age in addition to other risk factors. Full body MRI's on the hand belong to the "throwing spitballs against a wall and hoping something will stick" approach. The same thing applies to your car. If I plug in a diagnostic code reading scanner to a perfectly functioning care there's a good chance that a bunch of error messages will pop up on the reader that actually don't mean $hit. Talk to any mechanic.

[@Don.Challenger]

So you are saying that typically the whole body MRI scan (when no current symptoms or history exist) is an out of pocket payment and then if something is found (which it commonly does whether significant or not) you then need follow-up testing a good number of times and therefore need a health insurance plan that allows and pays the bulk of that cost without depleting your other coverage levels when at the end clinical findings requiring actual treatment are infrequent or rare. Is that the summary?

[@martinrosemary5654]

I had Thyroid cancer, and have to do ultrasound every year, doas it mean i sm predisposed to cancer?

[@joshstewart1649]

I’d rather have the stress of a false positive than not get a scan and find something when it’s too late.

[@louisevad6091]

With all due respect Dr. My question is ... instead of a noninvasive mri for artery damage you would prescribe a statin that has side effects because of high cholesterol?

[@ChristyRisingerMD]

I love coronary calcium scores for the person trying to decide if a statin is worth it (usually with 10-year risk of 7.5% or higher). A whole body MRI is not the same thing.

[@matt-g-recovers]

But Isn't the early detection of cancer the best way to keep it from killing you? consider the individual for just a second vs a study of faceless scores of people. If you or a loved one were told that you would have a fighting chance if caught before metastatic spread but now you are doomed to a 100% cancer death. would you advocate for the screening?

[@JoannaTremlett]

Consider if they find an incidental finding that might never cause you any problems but theb causes you great anxiety and fear.. I thinknif someone is having one privately they should be offered councelling first for this. I have an incident rathyke cleft cyst found ,its in a good place, not causing me any issues and might sit there my whole life with no problems. An optician who I go to every 12 months would have picked it up at some point of it grows. Now I live in fear, every headache ..is it growing ..is this the start ... wish I'd never had a brain mri .

[@amaliafernandez538]

Ten years ago, I had my first mammogram and found out I have dense breast tissue. When I asked my doctor for an MRI, she told me, "No, you don't want to open a can of worms-it could be a false positive." I have two friends who had the same issue and ended up finding out they had stage 3 cancer after two clear mammograms. "You don't want false positives" shouldn't stop you from pursuing extra tests. Better to be safe than sorry. Information is power, and if nothing's wrong, great. But if it means catching something early, it's worth it. I've decided to take charge of my health and be my own advocate.

[@alphacentauri8083]

The same applies to that coveted yearly physical that has become a sacrosanct ritual. Getting a yearly physical does not reduce mortality at all but it's a solid revenue generating source for the medical industry. Think of all the false positives and fishing expeditions generated by yearly physicals that turn out to be false positives. People in Western Europe don't do anywhere near the amount of screenings that Americans get and yet their life expectancy is higher than that of Americans.

[@kathylarson7601]

What is the average for the initial scan?

[@mikekaraoke]

I think there is pros/cons is getting a full body at once-just do it a bit at a time maybe every 6 months or a year! Also in UK as you know we have the NHS so wouldn't come out of your pocket-unless your rich or really rich and just went priv! Have you ever been to the UK, and if so whereabouts?

[@lauralaplace9945]

I think there is someone probably close to me in the family that’s sick and hasn’t said anything . It’s the total silence I don’t like . Then a phone call .

[@619patrickmickey]

What she is saying is that people, please don't get and stay healthy and be health conscious. We need you to be sick so we can keep our jobs. Early detection 😢 , that could pinpoint something going on inside your body that we would take years to find.

[@jamesbow5916]

I've seen this same attitude from doctors toward the galleri test (blood test to detect cancer signals). Why is it that doctors think somehow that their degree gives them insight into psychology? Let the patient decide if they want to open a can of worms of a potential false positive. So many doctors think they are answering this question: "Is this test a test that should be taken by everyone?" vs "Is this a test that could teach me something about my health?" They also can't seem to differentiate their thinking away from the costs to society should this test become pervasive. The question that all of us are asking is this: "Is this a test that could teach me something about my health?" If the answer is yes, then it is up to me if I think the price is worth it, and if the stress and anxiety of the false positives are worth managing myself through. Can you image a doctor putting out a video titled: "Watch this BEFORE you get a personal trainer!" My gosh, they could hurt you. They could push you too hard! They could cost too much money! Society can't cover the cost if EVERYONE got a personal trainer! That is the mentality of getting from this video. For me, the possibility of catching a cancer early vs late is well worth $2500 and any stress I put myself through.

[@yoreljm]

I don’t understand this video. Is she saying don’t do the scans because you might find something (that needs to be followed up on)??!!

[@faithpatriot1]

If someone wants to pay it, then they should pay it. If it shows something and it winds up being nothing, then great. I’d rather do it and go through the stress for a little bit then not know and be blindsided later on.

[@Kevin-iy9rl]

Great video, it's always nice to hear both sides of views on procedures and this certainly made me think about it from a different perspective. I am going in to asses bones, joints, muscles etc.. from years of competitive sport which are now starting to cause issues (minor) in every day life. Would a whole body MRI be worthwhile for these ailments?

[@lauralaplace9945]

My Mother went through hell back and forth . 2007

[@SagrarioBañares]

how much mri full body

[@MindBlowingXR]

Thanks for the great video! I had a pheo removed in 2011, but not sure I was genetically tested to see if it was the hereditary kind. But still I'm very tempted to get a full body MRI.

[@ALi-bn6bf]

Very helpful information. Thank you.

[@AXNJXN1]

Well done and well SAID Dr.!! I appreciated this recap and though I've never seen the other one, I concur with you on this!! Just live your life!!

[@ChristyRisingerMD]

Thank you for watching!

[@yoreljm]

Doctor = “it’s only one percent risk”; patients = “am in that 1 percent?”

[@lauralaplace9945]

I know something is going on inside my body there is no doubt .

[@SamDodoBus]

If 16% were false positives... That means 1766 of the 5300 tested actually had something ? This is huge. 5300 people, if 1/3 found they had something that's 1766 ppl, if of those 1766 only 16% are false positive, that means 74% are positives. 84% of 1766 = 1484. So 1484 of 5300 person had a problem... great. Or am I wrong in the math ? That would mean 28% of chance of finding a real problem if you undergo an MRI.

[@JoannaTremlett]

I had a brain mri at the same time as a neck mri and I wish I hadn't. I picked up a rare brain cyst that if it grew an optician would have picked it up anyway .now I am anxious all the time and worry its growing and my lifenjad changed forever .the consultant was too quick to say..well let's get you in for the brain at same time may as well. People can live their whole life's with brain cysts and never have any problems .

[@reality-winner5759]

I bet she supports mammograms though.....a MRI type imaging scan for preventatives measures

[@amandapecora5148]

They check for more than cancer.

[@spacecatboy2962]

whats the best way to see brain trouble or neck problems

[@rik112]

Very well done Christy. Reviewing the evidence and then putting it into terms of what it means is very helpful and useful for anyone considering a whole-body MRI. I was interested in doing it, but after watching your and other's videos, I don't think I will move ahead.

[@melissamezger1790]

Thanks for another great video!

[@ChristyRisingerMD]

Thank you for watching! I appreciate it.

[@lauralaplace9945]

I just don’t understand .

[@spacecatboy2962]

does MRI hurt your balls

[@ChristyRisingerMD]

It should not, unless there is metal inside them. There is no radiation with MRI which is why its such an incredible tool.

[@spacecatboy2962]

@@ChristyRisingerMD do you have to drink or be injected with dye for MRI

[@mikekaraoke]

@@spacecatboy2962 Drink with dye, you being serious??

[@spacecatboy2962]

@@mikekaraoke yeah

[@starrvalley12]

Dr's need to be trained in a whole new way.

[@lauralaplace9945]

Weak brain leads to a weak body.

[@theblockchainclub1]

And dont forget the (x-ray) radiation 😉

[@soccersprint]

Can she make bake?she look swwweeetttt

[@CoolKidsSJJE]

This entire video is a dr frustrated she cant brush off all of us at once 🤣🤣 We all must be too stupid to get information about our own bodies

[@alexandriamancheck3474]

I am just happy to get a mri for a particular area, stenosis. Great information, as usual. Thank you, Dr. 🦅

[@ChristyRisingerMD]

MRIs are an incredible resource when they are used for a particular problem for a particular part of the body. Thanks for watching!

[@babut4059]

After what your were telling us about Covid, I stopped following you. Thank God, I didn't listen to your advice on Covid vaccine.

[@elco1980]

Yet here you are commenting so there goes your claim that you stopped flowing her lol.

[@619patrickmickey]

I just don't like this video .0002% If you can and plan to afford doing this once a year for the rest of your life to see the changes from within, why not.

[@bobcocampo]

What is your opinion on MRI to screen visceral fats?