Should you get a full-body MRI?

Summary

Podcast Summary: What's That Rash? – Should You Get a Full-Body MRI?
ABC Australia | May 19, 2026
Hosts: Dr. Norman Swan (C) & Tegan Taylor (B)

---

Episode Overview

This episode tackles the increasingly popular but controversial topic of full-body MRI scans. Prompted by listener Beth's question about the efficacy and safety of such scans, the hosts dissect the pros, cons, and evidence behind whole-body MRIs as a health screening tool. The discussion covers medical, financial, psychological, and societal implications, ultimately guiding listeners toward an informed decision.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. What Is a Full-Body MRI?

[02:09 – 03:52]

• MRI stands for Magnetic Resonance Imaging, which uses powerful magnets to create detailed images of internal body structures.
• Benefits: Non-invasive and doesn’t use ionizing radiation (unlike CT or X-rays).
• "You do an MRI of your body...it gives you an amazing picture of the inside...without using X-rays." – Dr. Norman Swan [02:42]

Caveat:

• Many "full body" MRIs don't scan literally the entire body—often stopping mid-thigh or ankle.
  "A lot of these full body MRIs are not actually full body MRIs." – Tegan Taylor [15:21]

---

2. The Appeal and Rise of Commercial Full-Body MRIs

[04:25 – 06:34]

• Growing market: Private clinics offer scans for about $3,000 each, heavily advertising on social media.
• Attractive as a “one-stop shop” for health checks, particularly for anxious or health-conscious individuals.
• "It feels like only good things can come of this. I’m either clear or I find something that I wouldn’t have found otherwise before it’s a problem. What could be bad about that?" – Tegan Taylor [06:45]

---

3. Limitations and Risks of Screening with Full-Body MRIs

[07:46 – 10:42]

• Incidentalomas:

  • Scans often reveal incidental findings ("incidentalomas")—harmless anomalies that may lead to unnecessary follow-ups, anxiety, and potentially harmful interventions.
  • "You end up with surgery or treatment to your thyroid for something that might never have turned into cancer." – Dr. Norman Swan [07:51]

• False Negatives and False Reassurance:

  • Scans can miss real disease (false reassurance), causing people to ignore symptoms inappropriately.
  • "Radiologists are not perfect. Even with artificial intelligence helping...things do get missed." – Dr. Norman Swan [09:15]

• Downstream Costs:

  • Investigating findings typically shifts costs to taxpayers or health insurance systems, not just personal expense.
  • "The taxpayer’s paying for it, or your health insurance is paying for it...you are generating increased costs to the health system." – Dr. Norman Swan [08:52]

• Health Anxiety:

  • Evidence on whether MRIs increase or decrease health anxiety is mixed; for some, scans provide peace of mind, for others, new worries.
  • "There is a little bit of evidence that it settles some people’s minds. But...it’s a reassurance maybe at that moment in time." – Dr. Norman Swan [11:29]

---

4. Does Early Detection with MRI Really Save Lives?

[11:49 – 13:18]

• The hosts discuss "lead time bias": Early detection may only increase the time spent knowing about a condition—without affecting the ultimate outcome.
• "For some tumours, there’s very little evidence that early detection makes a difference to overall survival." – Dr. Norman Swan [11:50]
• Example: Removing early pancreatic cancer may not extend life compared to later diagnosis; rather, it extends time spent living with the knowledge of cancer.

---

5. Examples of Low-Value Care: MRI Results vs. Symptoms

[13:30 – 15:41]

• MRIs can show abnormalities unrelated to symptoms (e.g., knee osteoarthritis findings in asymptomatic people), leading to overtreatment.
• Diagnosis of common conditions (like osteoarthritis) is more reliably done by history/exam, sometimes simple X-ray—not MRI.
• "If you’ve got knee pain and you go and have an MRI scan, you’re going to see stuff which is actually normal." – Dr. Norman Swan [14:03]

---

6. When Can Full-Body MRI Be Useful?

[15:41 – 16:33]

• Rare scenarios, e.g.:
  • Cancer of unknown origin: Oncologists may use whole-body MRI or PET scans to try to locate the primary tumour.
  • "That’s one of the few instances where a whole body MRI might help." – Dr. Norman Swan [15:53]

---

7. Societal, Financial, and Ethical Considerations

[16:33 – 19:48]

• The major harms of full-body MRI are indirect: unnecessary follow-ups, anxiety, overtreatment, and societal cost.
• Even doctors seldom opt for such scans themselves.
• "It'd be interesting to see how many doctors would have it done on themselves. My hypothesis would be very few. There's no way I would have one done on me." – Dr. Norman Swan [16:53]
• If proven beneficial, there would be arguments for subsidizing and expanding access, but current evidence does not support this.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "Full body MRI as you'll discover...is not necessarily a full body MRI..." – Dr. Norman Swan [02:19]
• "Nobody tells you about those stories, but they tell you about the findings of something that could have saved their lives." – Dr. Norman Swan [07:59]
• "You're just living with the knowledge you've got ovarian cancer rather than having cured it." – Dr. Norman Swan [12:49]
• On personal preference:
  "There's no way I would have one done on me...I'd rather spend it on an economy airfare to Europe." – Dr. Norman Swan [17:05, 17:54]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• What is a full-body MRI?: [02:09–03:52]
• The appeal and market for commercial scans: [04:25–06:34]
• Risks and limitations, incidentalomas: [07:46–10:42]
• False reassurance and missed diagnoses: [08:51–10:42]
• Lead time bias and early cancer detection: [11:49–13:18]
• Low-value care and unnecessary treatment: [13:30–15:41]
• Where full-body MRI could be useful: [15:41–16:33]
• Harms, societal cost, and doctor attitudes: [16:33–17:54]
• Should this be accessible for all?: [18:05–19:48]
• Bottom line for Beth: [19:48–19:57]

---

Bottom Line for Listeners (Especially Beth)

[19:48–19:57]

• If you wish to get a full-body MRI, make sure you're aware of the risks: false positives, incidental findings, overdiagnosis, and downstream costs—not only to you, but to the health system.
• "Go with our blessing if you want to do it. Just listen to us about what the risks versus benefits are and you make up your own mind." – Dr. Norman Swan [19:50]

---

Tone & Style

• The hosts use a conversational, witty, and evidence-based approach, gently steering the audience toward skepticism about routine full-body screening but acknowledging personal choice.

---

Conclusion:
Full-body MRIs are technologically impressive and enticing, but scientific evidence does not support their use for routine screening in asymptomatic people. They carry risks of unnecessary anxiety, overtreatment, and financial/social cost, with little to no proven benefit for the general population. In rare, specific medical scenarios, they can have a role, but for most, traditional evidence-based screening and symptom monitoring remain the best path.

Transcript

[A]

If you've ever blasted synth beats from your boombox or burned CDs for your besties, this one's for you. As people get older, much like their music tastes, their health needs change. AG1 is the simple daily health drink designed to deliver over 75 essential daily nutrients in pre and probiotics to support energy, digestion and mood so you can make the most out of every decade and dance break. Learn [e-mail]

[B]

ABC Listen, podcasts, radio, news,

[A]

music and more hey there, Sana Khadar from All in the Mind here. If you're a true crime fan, you should check out our new series Forensic. It's all about the psychological tools and tricks that are used to investigate crime. Want to hear more? Search for all in the Mind on ABC Listen or wherever you get your podcasts.

[B]

Are you a selfie kind of guy, Norman? Are you the kind of guy that takes selfies a lot?

[C]

No. I mean, my arm isn't long enough.

[B]

That's why you need the selfie stick. You need the extendable stick. And when you go to all of your different overseas locations that you're always traveling to, you can get yourself in front of the you don't like photos of your own of yourself?

[C]

No, no, I'm sufficiently unselfconscious. I don't mind that. But the it's hard to be in the media if you don't. But look, I just feel like a complete idiot doing selfies all over the

[B]

place, so you're probably not interested in today's episode of what's that Rash? Which is really the ultimate selfie, a selfie of the inside of you.

[C]

The full body mri.

[B]

That's what we're talking about today on what's that Rash?

[C]

The podcast where we answer the health questions that simply everyone's asking.

[B]

Beth is asking about Full Body MRIs. Beth writes, I keep seeing ads for Full Body MRIs. As an avid health report listener, I know you guys are dim on these sorts of things, but surely if I had something lurking in my body, it's better for me to know about it and then make an informed decision about what to do about it. What am I missing here?

[C]

Well, missing is the operative word, as we'll find out.

[B]

Well, indeed. A little bit of foreshadowing there, but okay. I guess a good place to start is if you're not getting the ads that Beth is getting. What is a full body mri?

[C]

The idea here is that you go into an MRI machine and by the way, a full body mri as you'll discover in a minute is not necessarily a full body mri, but we'll come back to that in a moment. But the idea is that you do an MRI of your body, and an

[B]

MRI is magnetic resonance imaging. Let's take it right down to the cellular level. What we're even subcellular. What is an mri, actually? How does it look inside you?

[C]

Basically, an MRI machine exerts a very powerful magnetic field in the body, and the molecules twist under the magnetic impulse, which is why it's called magnetic resonance. And different tissues twist at different rates. And you're able to, through complex software, analyze that and pick up really very detailed pictures of the inside of your body without using X rays.

[B]

And the benefit of that is you're not then exposed to the radiation that could cause damage to your tissues. If you were having an X ray or a ct. Yeah.

[C]

And it's not necessarily always better than a ct, but it does give a lot of information. And by the way, even MRIs for something like monitoring cancer when you're having cancer treatment are not necessarily the best imaging either, because they will just show up a lump. And then you need a PET scan to see whether or not it's an active lump or a lump where it's cancer, for example, that's already effectively treated. So different benefits from different types of scans. But the MRI gives you an amazing picture of the inside of the body in different slices. So imagine a slice, horizontal slice through your body, or vertical slices through your body, and from that you can build up a composite picture.

[B]

We've talked about this before. The idea that the older you get and the more family history you accumulate, or the more medical history you accumulate, the more reasons why maybe doctors want to look inside your body just regularly to check. I know for me, I'm like, how do I fit into my schedule? Skin checks, mammograms, cervical screens. I need to have regular colonoscopies because I have a family history of bowel cancer. Like, sometimes it feels like just being wheeled into a single machine and just getting them to just have a look at everything all at once. It's a very appealing prospect.

[C]

It's hugely appealing, which is why it's big business both here and overseas. And the fact is that the screening programs that you're talking about. Well, first of all, your colonoscopies are actually surveillance rather than screening, because you've got a high family history, and that's very different. Have been the result of many years of research to show that you can safely do a test, say, the Faecal occult blood test, the little poo test on the cardboard, or the cervical screening. Now, looking for HPV in the cervix and breast mammograms. Those have been studied to see whether or not the benefits outweigh the risks. And the risks are missing cancers and over diagnosing cancers and doing it at a cost that's affordable for the nation. And so you want a cheap, effective, reasonably accurate test that really doesn't diagnose the condition. And that's a key here, is you're not diagnosing anything through screening. You're just finding an increased risk. So, for example, if you show blood on your bowel cancer screen, that doesn't necessarily mean that you've got bowel cancer, but it means you're a higher risk and you need further testing. And so MRIs do not fit into this because they have not shown a benefit for mass screening, that the benefits outweigh the costs and the risks.

[B]

I do want to get into a bit of a breakdown of that in a minute, but to sort of talk about what Beth is seeing. The market here is that there are MRIs around, and you can pay to have a full body MRI scan. I went through, I put in a fake phone number to sort of get a sense of how much it costs. The one that is closest to me is a $3,000 scan. And that's like you say, just like a first step to see if anything's there.

[C]

So you're now getting all this on your Instagram feed as well. You've entered the jungle.

[B]

I only did it the other day, so maybe the algorithm hasn't caught up with me quite yet. But now I'm worried I'm gonna get these same ads, but I've definitely heard people talking about them as well. And so they are something that is much more available if you can afford it than it ever was before. And so I suppose if you can afford it, you go, well, why not?

[C]

That's right. So we are not here to tell you don't do.

[B]

Kind of sounds like you are.

[C]

Well, not really. I mean, you just need to know the risks versus the potential benefits.

[B]

It does feel like something that the risk feels low. So, like, okay, I know you are about to disabuse me of these ideas, but as a. The closest thing to a punter we have in this conversation, Norman, if I'm seeing something like this, I'm like, okay, cool. If I've got three grand kicking around in my bank account, which I don't, I can kind of go well, it's all upside for me. Either I have this scan and they find nothing and I'm healthy and amazing, or I have this scan and they find something and I can get it treated. And when you hear people tell stories about this sort of thing, you only ever hear these people who are like, the scan saved my life. I spoke to a woman a while ago, it found an aneurysm. You hear from other people that they have like an accidental scan that discovers that they also some bladder cancer or something in their kidney. And it feels like only good things can come of this. I'm either clear or I find something that I wouldn't have found otherwise before it's a problem. What could be bad about that?

[C]

So if it's 3,000 bucks out of your own pocket, then you'd say, well, okay, you roll the dice. But when you hear these stories, you don't hear the stories of people who found what's called in medicine an incidentaloma. In other words, you find something that's meaningless. The classic one is do a lung scan looking for lung disease, and it picks up the thyroid gland along the way and they find a nodule on the thyroid. And that nodule may actually mean absolutely nothing. But you end up with surgery or treatment to your thyroid for something that might never have turned into cancer. Then there will be a complication rate with that surgery which you would not have otherwise been exposed to. So nobody tells you about those stories, but they tell you about the findings of something that could have saved their lives. And. And no doubt there are those instances there. Let's just take a helicopter view. You pay $3,000. You think, why not? Well, if they find something and they've got to investigate, you're not paying out of your own pocket for that investigation.

[B]

Oh, we are.

[C]

The taxpayer's paying for it. Or your health insurance is paying for it and therefore everybody else in your health insurance system is paying for it. Because once you find something that testing is therefore on the public purse in one way or another. So you are generating increased costs to the health system and increased costs to yourself. Because you might be going through all that for nothing. Because it was nothing. There was no issue there. Then nobody tells you about the things they miss on an MRI scan so that you come out with false reassurance. Well, I've had an MRI scan. I've got blood in my poo. It didn't show anything. I'm not going to do anything about this symptom because my MRI scan was clear. Well, you can miss things. Radiologists are not perfect. Even with artificial intelligence helping them with the diagnostic process, things do get missed. And that's not incompetence on the part of anybody. Things get missed, things develop between scans. So it's well known that in between breast screens, women can develop breast cancer. When you go back and look at their breast screen, you can't see a cancer and it's developed very quickly. So you get false reassurance. And that could be life threatening in itself is that you ignore a symptom that you otherwise might have taken action on because you think your MRI is clear. Other tests do the same thing. You go and have one of these cardiac stress tests as part of an executive screen and they're negative. And you have chest pain the next day and you think, well, it can't be my heart because my stress test was negative. It doesn't protect you against future episodes of heart attacks, for example. And so it is with MRIs. So you've got to. As long as you walk in with your eyes open, this just tells you what you're like to some extent at that moment in time. It doesn't predict the future and it puts you at risk of unnecessary testing. And yes, there's a small chance that they might find something that will change your life.

[B]

When you're talking about the fact that it might miss something, that just makes me go, well, okay, I'll have more, I'll have more $3,000 MRIs. Like, both ends of this pendulum feel like they're sort of saying the opposite thing. It might catch something that you don't need it to catch, or it might not catch any. Like, well, you haven't reassured me. I'm still now more nervous about my health than ever.

[C]

Well, that's the other side of it is does it create health anxiety? And the evidence on this is actually mixed. So you'll hear a lot of people in the screening community who don't like the idea of whole body MRI thing or it creates unnecessary anxiety. The evidence on that is actually not that strong because, you know, somebody like Beth is saying, well, I'm prepared to take that. I'm not necessarily going to be more anxious than I otherwise am. And therefore it's up to me as an adult. I can go through it and it's not necessarily going to make me more or less anxious. And there is a little bit of evidence that it settles some people's minds. But as I said before, it may settle your mind unreasonably because it's not A reassurance for the future. It's a reassurance maybe at that moment in time.

[B]

What if it comes back and it

[C]

does find something like cancer, for example?

[B]

Correct.

[C]

So the problem with early detection of cancer, well, it sounds great and we'd all like that to happen. There is a phenomenon called lead time bias. So for some tumours, there's no evidence, or very little evidence that early detection makes a difference to overall survival. So let's say you find an early pancreatic cancer, you operate, you remove it and you have 10 years of survival when the statistics would suggest the five year survival is X percentage, and you've beaten the odds on that. The problem is you might have lived from that moment where you had your MRI scan. You might have lived 10 years anyway. It's just that you've lived 10 years with the knowledge you've got pancreatic cancer and it might have been diagnosed later in your life, but it's not made any difference to your survival. So in other words, later diagnosis and treatment may give you the same survival that you otherwise would have. Dust your head in a bit. Because we've been trained to think that early detection is good for you, as it is in many situations, and it may end up being good for you in pancreatic cancer. But you've got to watch this lead time bias and it's been notorious in ovarian cancer, for example, early detection of ovarian cancer. People say, oh, this is fantastic, this is what we've got to do. And it may well end up being so. But the evidence at the moment tends to suggest there's lead time bias, that you're just living with the knowledge you've got ovarian cancer rather than necessarily having cured it.

[B]

So pivoting a bit away from cancer, the other sorts of things that these kind of scans are looking for are things like musculoskeletal defects, neurodegeneration as well. Can you talk to me about the idea of low value care?

[C]

So low value care is where you're intervening and it's costing a lot of money without necessarily any benefit to the individual or the community at large. So my favorite example of this is in fact from an MRI study. So this was an MRI study of people with no history of osteoarthritis in their knee. I think from memory, they were in their 50s and they did an MRI of one knee. And what they found was that it's almost normal in your 50s to have an MRI scan of the knee that looks like World War Three, you know, you've got torn meniscus, you've got ragged edges to your cartilage and so on. So then they went back and looked at the symptoms of people. Did they have knee pain? And there was no correlation between their knee pain and their MRI scan. Which means if you go in for, if you've got knee pain and you go and have an MRI scan, you're going to see stuff which is actually normal. It looks terrible, but sends you off for treatment when you might otherwise not need it. So if you've got osteoarthritis of the knee, it's not an MRI you need. It's either your GP doing a really good history and saying, yep, that's what you've got. There's no red flag signs here. You've not got a fever, you're not losing weight, you've not got bruising. This is osteoarthritis in the knee. And if you really want to know, I'm going to send you for a standing, a weight bearing knee X ray. So you just stand in front of an old fashioned X ray machine and do a standing X ray of your knee. That's what you do to diagnose osteoarthritis of the knee. And whether or not you need surgery is about your symptoms and how bad your symptoms are and how much you're disabled by that. And the same with the spine. You go and you've got a sore back, they do an MRI of the spine. You'll find a lot of people have spines that look terrible, but they don't relate to your spinal pain. If you are going to have spinal surgery, yes, your surgeon might do an mri, but that's part of their surgical planning.

[B]

It's funny that you use knee osteoarthritis as an example there, Norman, because as you hinted at before, a lot of these full body MRIs are not actually full body MRIs. And they actually finish, some of them finish around the mid thigh or sometimes down to the ankles. So if you did have something happening in your knee, you're not necessarily going to find it out from this, from this thing.

[C]

He was robbed.

[B]

So for all that you said, we're not here to warn people away from having a full body mri. It definitely seems like the vibe of the discussion. Norman, is there ever a reason why something like this would be useful?

[C]

Well, I'm a little bit out of date in this, but you could imagine, for example, some people have what's called a primary of unknown origin in Other words, they've got cancer and you can't find the primary. And my understanding is that some oncologists will do a whole body MRI to see if they can find or a whole body PET scan to see whether or not they can find the primary tumour, because that could change the treatment. First of all, you could remove the primary tumour, but secondly, you can get a biopsy and find out what kind of tumour it is and therefore what the most effective treatment is. I think that's one of the few instances where a whole body MRI might help.

[B]

So when we're talking harms here, we're not really talking about harms from the scan itself. Maybe a little bit of harm to your bank balance, given that they are about three grand. We're talking more about indirect downstream harms. That is actually really hard to know from me as an individual whether I've been harmed or not. It's more like a snapshot of society that we get.

[C]

That's right. I mean, it'd be interesting to see how many doctors would have it done on themselves. And my guess would be my hypothesis would be very few. There's no way I would have one done on me.

[B]

You wouldn't be curious to know what's going on inside?

[C]

No, I'll just.

[B]

You already know what the inside of your knees look like.

[C]

That's right, yeah, my knees screwed and, you know, that's up to me to get sorted. But do I want anything else? You know, I'll do my bowel cancer screening, you know, and I'll watch for other symptoms and new symptoms, you know, and you could come back and say, oh, well, why didn't you? If you'd had an old body MRI, you know, 10 years from now and I've got pancreatic cancer, why didn't you have it done? Even then I wouldn't necessarily regret it because I wouldn't be sure that it would have made a big difference to my outcome. So I'm actually comfortable in that decision. But if Beth wants to have it done, I mean, she might be lucky and they'll find something that makes a big difference. I just couldn't be bothered with the anxiety, unnecessary testing, the time taken out of my life for very little benefit and the money out of my pocket. I'd rather spend it on an economy airfare to Europe.

[B]

As if you've ever travelled economy in

[C]

your life, if indeed an economy airfare costs that, given the current crisis in the Middle East. But anyway, another story.

[B]

I guess the flip side of this is if there is a benefit, should it only be within the realm of people who can afford a $3,000 scan? If there's truly a benefit in having scans like this, should they not be more available, more affordable?

[C]

If there was truly a benefit, then yes, and the price would come down. But nobody's proven that there's truly a benefit. There's a lot of harms and not much, if any proof of benefit. There's the odd anecdote of people who've benefited and I'm not decrying the anecdote because they would genuinely benefit. But if you're going to offer the community, at what age does it start at a full body mri? When are you. What age do you start getting enough abnormalities there of significance that make it worth starting? So that's controversial. For example, with bowel cancer screening, we're now down to 45 and it probably should actually be even earlier than that given early onset cancer. So do we start whole body MRIs at the age of 30 because of early onset cancers and how often do you do them? There was a whole debate early on with mammography screening for breast cancer. How often do you do breast mammograms? How often do you do cervical screens? Now we're at 5 yearly, but it's taken us a while to get to to five yearly scans. And what's the protocol for finding something? So for example, the most recent screening to be introduced for cancer is CT of the lung for people who are smokers. Not everybody, but just people who are smokers. Very closely defined because those are the people shown to be of benefit. But it took 20 odd years to actually get to that point to show that there was more benefit than harm from doing a CT in those people. Much more harm from doing it in the general population.

[B]

So what's our bottom line for Beth?

[C]

Beth? Go with our blessing if you want to do it. Just listen to us about what the risks versus benefits are and you make up your own mind.

[B]

Well, Beth, thank you so much for the question. You can send us your questions. We are that rashbc.net au it's also where you can send us your feedback.

[C]

So what feedback do we have, Tegan?

[B]

Well, we spoke last week about progressive exercise. The idea of sort of building. Helen has written in saying, I really relate to Ryan's about progressive exercise after 40. I'm 48 now and look at the rows of dumbbells and they are not at all in my future. Helen says your listeners are probably more likely to be at the gym as they get older because we can't help but try to take on your evidence based advice. So just a shout out to your episode. Thank you. I'll try more reps and add a bit of weight where I can to stay strong. Helen finishes Happy squatting.

[C]

Yeah, happy squatting to you. I mean there is a point I didn't make during that episode that I probably should make is that as you get older you lose muscle. So it's a fight against time. And whilst the question that we had was am I going to end up sort of Mr. Universe here because I'm just constantly progressive, the answer is for most of us it'll be a big success with progressive exercise if we just build up a little muscle rather than losing it. And that requires progression.

[B]

Well on that, Stephen says I'm 63 and six years into a 30 minute six days a week routine that I've made more challenging by eliminating breaks and increasing reps. Stephen says, I feel like age is slowly doing the job of the increasing bit difficulty. That's recommended.

[C]

Well done Stephen.

[B]

And Wendell has emailed us to say, oh, we get a 2 for 1 deal from Wendell this week. Wendell says in last week's episode Ryan mentioned it being hard to get out of bed due to age when he doesn't exercise. Well, I've been a long term exerciser but have just just started on moderate weights. I only just realized when you said it on the podcast about struggling to get out of bed that my aches and pains that snuck up on me each night have been far less frequent since I've started doing the weights.

[C]

Well done.

[B]

Definitely not a placebo because I only just realized while listening to your podcast. Interesting byproduct of progressive exercise.

[C]

So what's the two for one with Wendell?

[B]

So Wendell also wants to talk about yawning, which we did a couple of weeks ago now. It was part of our live show. Wendell says I listen to your podcast on my daily 5k walk with earbuds in my ears. I was listening to the yawning one with absolutely no urge to yawn and wondering why everyone was yawning. Well, it looks like you might be able to add me to your N equals more than one now when my ears saved me from yawning because that was the question we got last week is whether noise canceling headphones might stop you from yawning. So Wendell's where n equals 2 now

[C]

Norman, it's weird stuff.

[B]

Don't forget, send us your emails that rashbc.netau see you next time.

[C]

See you then, Sam.