From: Peter Attia To: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Subject: Re: This is the technique Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:26:48 +0000 That's a huge difference but not actually the driver. It's time. MRI requires much more time. The gap is narrowing every day. I can give you all numbers if you like. Peter Attia, M.D. I Attia Medical, PC The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information, including patient information protected by federal and state privacy laws. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. On Feb 19, 2016, at 3:57 AM, jeffrey E. <jeevacation®gmail.com> wrote: is the cost difference the machine cost? On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Peter Attia < > wrote: Mammo is controversial b/c of both the false positive and false negatives. The former can result in unnecessary biopsies and even procedures, but the latter is the real issue in "young" women (those with glandular breast tissue). The only place MRI fails is with lesions purely calcified, but it's not clear these lesions matter. So I'm not sure if MRI will ever fully displace mammo since it's so cheap, but I think it would be crazy not to add MRI to mammo (and PSA) for those who can afford it. Peter Attia, M.D. Attia Medical, PC The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information, including patient information protected by federal and state privacy laws. It is intended only for the use of the personfs) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibite