The truth about full-body scans: Why celebs Like Jason Bateman are hooked
Key Takeaways
Full body scans are taking over the health and wellness space—as well as the celebrity world—with some people crediting them for catching cancer.
Experts say that the scans could benefit patients by increasing health awareness in general. Also, they might be a useful tool for people carrying the TP53 mutation, which elevates the risk of malignancy.
The scans don’t catch everything, though. They don’t use contrast (which is necessary to diagnose certain cancers) and they may give patients a false sense of security.
Celebrities like Maria Menounos, Taika Waititi, and Jason Bateman have been endorsing whole-body MRIs (WB-MRI) as a tool for health awareness and possibly even early diagnosis of certain cancers. Menounos told the world she was diagnosed with stage II pancreatic neuroendocrine cancer, which she was able to get surgery for early on, by getting a full-body MRI.
These pricy scans, as GQ says, are a sort of “wellness status symbol.” Prenuvo’s whole body scan (one 60-minute MRI), for example, costs $2,499.[ It includes the head, neck, chest, abdomen, pelvis, and legs but not the arms or feet. Another popular scan? The Ezra scan (a 60-minute MRI and a CT scan) clocks in at $2,695 AND covers the head, neck, lungs, heart, abdomen, pelvis, spine, hips, and knees. Ezra says it also assesses for body composition, MS, dementia, brain age, aneurysms, and coronary plaque (CAC). Both services utilize artificial intelligence (AI) tech.
So, are these scans for everyone?
First, these scans are prohibitively expensive for many people. Prenuvo, for example, isn’t covered by health insurance (although some FSA/HSA reimbursements may be possible). People are even flying overseas to obtain cheaper scans.[]
But more so, the science isn’t perfect. Richard Reitherman, MD, PhD, board-certified radiologist and medical director of breast imaging at MemorialCare Breast Center at Orange Coast Medical Center in Fountain Valley, CA, says these scans increase health awareness and dialogue around wellness, but that there are some key limitations.
A powerful perspective
“This technology has been around for a while,” Dr. Reitherman says. But typically, “you don't screen certain populations until they reach a certain risk, so what's happening here is you have sophisticated technology that is misapplied in many cases.” He says that these scans—given their popularity, especially on social media—could give patients a “fall sense of security.” For example, if a scan comes up negative, it’s not a free pass to assume everything is ok.
“It’s this idea of sexy technology. You sit there and you get beautiful scans which are colorized,” Dr. Reitherman explains. “But they don’t use contrast so they can miss breast and prostate cancers—and you need contrast [to diagnose] those cancers. And I’m a big advocate for MRI—it’s the best test for breast cancer, but these scans don’t use contrast.”
These whole-body MRIs, like Prenuvo, don’t use contrast dyes. Dr. Reitherman says it’s likely because they don’t have physicians or phlebotomists on-site (which would also drive up the cost) during the scan to administer the dye or monitor the patient for contrast reactions. While a radiologist interprets the scans, they’re not there while the patient gets the scan.
“For the four major cancers, the scan may find them in an advanced stage but probably not at an early stage,” he says. These include breast, lung, colon, and prostate. For example, he says, “There’s no validation of screening with MRI for lung cancer.”
What happens is that if anything—even benign issues—pops up on the scan, “you’d take these scans to a physician to do more tests,” he says. And it would cost even more,” Dr. Reitherman says. “20 years ago we had full-body CT scans without contrast. They didn't work out,” he adds. Research published in 2019 in the Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging found that the scans sometimes lead to false positives as well.[] These false positives can prove tricky for patients, says Anne Peled, MD, breast cancer surgeon: “While the idea of a full-body scan to detect cancer or other medical conditions before they might actually show up with symptoms is very exciting, at this point the risk of false positives or incidental findings that may not ever cause any harm is very high, which means many people who get these scans will end up undergoing additional testing including potentially invasive tests like biopsies that are essentially unnecessary.” For full body scans like these to really work, Dr. Reitherman says, you’d need to conduct them in a medical environment with contrast dye rather than in a boutique imaging center without contrast.
Other issues? He notes the pages and pages of disclaimers these centers may provide that patients likely won’t read. He’s also concerned that if the test comes back negative for anything notable patients won’t go see their doctors, or skip any age-related screening recommendations they should be minding.
But they may be helpful for certain patient populations. Dr. Reitherman says that these full-body scans could be effective as a cancer screening tool for carriers of the TP53 mutation. This mutation puts carriers at an additional elevated risk of malignancy. In fact, 2024 research published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine noted, “WB-MRI is an effective cancer screening tool for TP53 mutation carriers. While these findings suggest the potential for WB-MRI to contribute to early cancer detection in this high-risk population, further research and the standardization of protocols internationally are warranted to optimize its clinical utility.”[] Dr. Peled agrees. “For people who are at baseline elevated risk of certain cancers due to family history or genetics, this risk may be worth it—particularly as the overall likelihood that they have a type of cancer when they get the full-body scan is much higher, making the test more effective and relevant in their case,” she says.
More screening options
Dr. Reitherman recommends that all people—whether they use these scans or not— “review their family histories of cancer and cardiovascular disease as well as other risk factors that would make screening tests more personalized.” He also recommends genetic counseling and testing to detect potential risk status. “Individuals with higher risks will benefit more from screening tests than the general population,” he notes.