Disclaimer: medicine isn&#x27;t my background, so the following comment could be partially or entirely groundless.<p>---<p>So I just took a crack at the concept PDF and the rest of the literature on the site, and there&#x27;s nothing that I can find which mitigates the risk of flagging a slow-growing or self-regressing tumor as something worthy of attention.<p>I say this because mammogram recommendations were only recently changed due to the potential adverse health risks stemming from treating tumors which might never progress to a severity warranting treatment [1] as well as tumors which might spontaneously regress [2]. If some of the newer oncology theories suggesting high tumor occurrence and anti-cancer immune responses are correct (my google-fu didn&#x27;t help me here, so someone else might want to help me with the source), then as a result of Grail, you might start having a bunch of people freak out and undergo unnecessarily heavy treatments for tumors which might otherwise never become cancerous.<p>That said, I could be entirely wrong, and I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised if they&#x27;re specifically working on mitigating this risk as one component of making this screen viable.<p>[1]<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.webmd.com&#x2F;breast-cancer&#x2F;features&#x2F;new-mammogram-screening-guidelines-faq?page=2" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.webmd.com&#x2F;breast-cancer&#x2F;features&#x2F;new-mammogram-sc...</a><p>[2]<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;archinte.jamanetwork.com&#x2F;article.aspx?articleid=773446" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;archinte.jamanetwork.com&#x2F;article.aspx?articleid=77344...</a>