Whoa, whoa, whoa, slow down.
SELECTING people for testing based on their personal medical history and their family history is the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of mass screening.
And then, if you choose a treatment after being FULLY informed of the risks, known harms, and the likelihood that it may OR MAY NOT help - if the companies didn't suppress any studies showing the harm or inefficacy of their products, or if you chose the treatment after those studies came to light - if you and/or your doctor carefully sifted through the available research papers and evaluated them for bias, including the bias implicit in what's even being studied - if you were able to disregard the human propensity that we ALL have to disregard sometimes huge risks when trying to avoid a known loss - then that's not being "duped" (your word, not mine, in any event).
I just started reading this book, Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior, by Ori Brafman and Rom Brafman. I sure wish I'd read it two months ago. Y'know, we're all human, and to acknowledge making a decision based on emotion and innate, genetically encoded human psychology rather than reason (as I just did) is not an insult.
/back to topic: one thing that that article doesn't even address is that osteopenia isn't even a condition. All it is, is having a measured bone density one standard deviation below the mean for a 30-year-old female. BY DEFINITION, 16% of young women are "osteopenic." With the natural progression of bone loss, 50% of older women are "osteopenic." Y'know, I'm probably going to get old. I'm definitely going to die. The same is true for every single person here.
I just deleted two more paragraphs of ranting
I've made my points. I never said anything insulting about the choices that ANYONE has made about her own health. I'm just urging people to MAKE an informed CHOICE.
Speed comes from what you put behind you. - Judi Ketteler