New York Man Sues MRI Company After Stroke Despite ‘Healthy’ Scan

A man from New York City is taking legal action against the MRI company Prenuvo after suffering a debilitating stroke less than a year following a costly whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan that indicated he was in good health. Sean Clifford, aged 35, paid approximately $2,500 for the scan, which failed to detect significant narrowing in his proximal right middle cerebral artery, a common area for strokes.

Clifford’s stroke occurred in the same location where the scan had overlooked a narrowing of around 60 percent. This oversight has left him paralyzed on his left side and permanently disabled. He is now highlighting the limitations of such scans, which are often marketed as comprehensive health checks that can identify serious conditions ranging from tumors to brain aneurysms.

The lawsuit, which was filed in September 2024, has been approved to proceed by a judge. Prenuvo, which has gained endorsements from various celebrities including Paris Hilton and Cindy Crawford, released a statement asserting their commitment to addressing allegations seriously and focusing on providing safe, high-quality care to patients.

Concerns Over Whole-Body Scans

The case has sparked renewed debate within the medical community regarding the efficacy of full-body scans. Critics argue that these procedures may create a false sense of security for patients. According to Dr. Mirza Rahman, a physician and former president of the American College of Preventive Medicine, the concern lies in whether radiologists have adequate time to analyze the extensive data generated by such scans thoroughly.

Dr. Rahman emphasized, “Do the radiologists have sufficient time to carefully look at the bones, the vessels, the organs, and all the other information that is generated by such scans?” This question underlines the crux of the issue, suggesting that the thoroughness of these scans may not match the expectations set by their marketing.

The Broader Implications

Full-body MRI scans are controversial, as some medical professionals suggest they can lead to unnecessary follow-up tests based on false alarms. In Clifford’s situation, the missed detection of critical arterial narrowing raises significant questions about the reliability of high-cost imaging procedures that are marketed to consumers as preventive health measures.

Clifford’s experience serves as a reminder that while advanced imaging technology has the potential to identify health issues, it is not infallible. The implications of this case may prompt individuals to reconsider the necessity and reliability of such scans in the context of their health care decisions. With the growing trend of preventive health screenings, the outcome of this lawsuit could influence how these services are perceived in the future.