Crypto News: Are full-body MRIs worth the hype?

Hi folks, it's Kristen writing from my home turf of sunny Orange County, California. A reader this week asks whether whole-body MRIs are worth the hassle — or the price tag. But before we get to that ...

Climate dads want to save the planet.
Global food prices rose for the first time in three months.
The College Board says Florida's restrictions on teaching gender identity issues "effectively banned" an advanced high-school psychology course.

Recently there have been numerous ad campaigns on the benefits of whole-body MRIs, claiming that they can detect aneurysms and oncologic malignancies early and potentially save lives. The procedure is costly so not many people can afford it. Are these claimed benefits justified and scientifically sound? Anna, Larchmont, New York

Whole-body scans have become a trend in recent years, with buzzy, venture-backed startups touting their ability to detect the earliest stages of diseases such as cancer by imaging a person's entire body.

It's an alluring prospect. If you can catch disease early, it can often be much easier to treat. Of course, as many a trend, it also comes with an endorsement from celebrities including Paris Hilton and Cindy Crawford. All for the price of a few thousand dollars.

But much of the medical community is not exactly sold on this idea. I reached out to the American College of Radiology, the professional organization for radiologists, and their stance was pretty definitive.

"The ACR does not believe there is sufficient evidence to justify recommending total-body screening for patients with no clinical symptoms, risk factors or a family history suggesting underlying disease or serious injury," a spokesperson told me.

While the organization will continue to monitor any new studies on the practice, to date the organization says "there is no documented evidence that total-body screening is cost-efficient or effective in prolonging life."

More than that, they say, it can do harm by identifying nonspecific, potential problems in the body that lead to rounds of unnecessary testing and procedures, such as biopsies, for things that turn out to be nothing. Essentially, the risk of a false-positive, at least for now, outweighs any potential benefit. — Kristen V. Brown

A Bloomberg investigation found that one of the major distributors of abortion pills to low-income countries is buying a fifth of its products from a company with a record of making substandard drugs. DKT International, a Washington DC-based nonprofit, relies on Synokem Pharmaceuticals, headquartered in Delhi, as a key supplier.

But more than 30 samples of drugs made by Synokem — including generic abortion pills, an antibiotic and anti-seizure medicines — have failed quality tests conducted by Indian regulators and public health researchers since 2018, according to government records and data reviewed by Bloomberg.

What I saw when I looked inside my own body, from the New York Times.

Young mouse blood extended the life of old mice, reports the New York Times.

Scientists resurrect Neanderthal antibiotics, from Vox.

Ask us anything — well, anything health-related that is! Each week we're picking a reader question and putting it to our network of experts. So get in touch via AskPrognosis@bloomberg.net.