The principle of "three early" refers to early detection, early diagnosis, and early treatment, which is a key strategy to improve the cure rate of cancer and improve patient prognosis. With the continuous improvement of tumor screening methods, more and more tumors can be detected at an early stage. There are currently many erroneous statements circulating on the internet about tumor screening, such as "one examination can screen for all cancer risks", "only one drop of blood is needed to screen for cancer clinically", "X-ray examination can 'detect' early lung cancer". In daily life, it is common for some "miracle doctors" to exaggerate the effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment, and the more difficult the disease, the more daring they are to treat it. Little did they know, there are also "miracle doctors" in the field of physical examination, especially in tumor screening. However, what they boast about is not drugs or treatment methods, but the sensitivity of tumor screening. Although various claims may sound absurd, it is not uncommon to see "miracle doctors" who make a fortune by boasting about them. Doctors from some medical institutions, as well as physical examination salespeople shuttling around the community, all like to use this type of rhetoric. There are also some highly secretive "miracle doctors" in the field of physical examination, whose methods are difficult to prevent. For example, some nodules are mostly benign, some tumor markers have no specificity, and normal people may also exceed the standard. These so-called "abnormalities" only need to be observed and regularly rechecked, but the "miracle doctors" in physical examinations treat the small probability as the large probability and describe the tumor as very dangerous and terrifying. Once the parties involved are scared by these claims, they will proactively request various expensive disease screening tests. Proving the existence of something is relatively simple, but proving its non existence is much more complex. To completely rule out the possibility of cancer, many large-scale examinations are usually required. Although the parties involved often cannot find any problems in the end, they have spent a lot of money on medical examinations, and the examination institutions have earned a lot of money as a result. Compared to physical examination institutions, hospitals have more comprehensive management of examination items. For example, when doctors in hospitals perform large-scale examinations on patients, they must ensure that the patient has indications, otherwise it is considered an over indication examination and will be regulated as an over examination. In addition, doctors must consider the positivity rate when conducting examinations. If the examination results are always "okay", the doctor's positivity rate indicator cannot pass, and peers or relevant departments may question the doctor's professional level as a result. However, physical examination institutions do not have such constraints. Medical examination doctors have many special characteristics, and there is a possibility of conducting large-scale examinations at will. For example, a physical examination is nominally aimed at healthy individuals who do not have indications. If the examination result is "okay", it is considered normal, while "okay" is an exception. The examining doctor can prescribe the examination at will without worrying about being constrained or held accountable. In recent years, some large-scale examinations with narrow clinical applications (such as PET-CT examination, etc.) have been promoted as universal examination items by some medical institutions because of this. The lack of management norms in medical examination institutions, especially the lack of control over inspection items, is an urgent problem that needs to be solved. Exposing commonly used language in the field of physical examination can help the public see the essence of exaggerated promotion of cancer screening and other projects. But to address the chaos of physical examinations, we need to start from the institutional level. The design of physical examination packages by examination institutions should vary from person to person, not only avoiding a one size fits all approach, but also avoiding conducting a "complete set" of examinations. In addition, restrictions should be placed on some large-scale inspections conducted by medical institutions, and efforts should be made to strengthen the management of propaganda that exaggerates the effectiveness of medical examinations, such as the sensitivity of tumor screening. Only in this way can we avoid the emergence of many "miracle doctors" in the field of physical examinations, and deceive the public by creating a fear of cancer and other means. (New Society)