With respects to diet and activity, there is a grade C recommendation to provide counseling to patients without risk factors[0] and grade B for those with risk factors[1]. Both (as with all USPSTF recommendations) have associated evidence summaries and provide rationales for the strength of the recommendations.
[0] https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme...
[1] https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme...
You wake up in the morning and have a piss. Your piss is measured for various chemicals from simple ions to proteins. It detects you have too much sodium so it communicates to your food dispenser and your bacon ration is reduced. (Yes that's from The Island.) You then get dressed in front of a camera which counts your moles and freckles. It sees a new one so you get a notification that your Touch Grass(TM) session is shortened.
When you get to work your workstation monitors your alertness to ensure you sleep enough. It detects your attention drifting 5% more than tolerated so another notification comes in letting you know Lights Out(R) is now 15 minutes earlier.
You attend a social gathering after work but your purchase of an alcoholic beverage is denied because a blood test last week showed a liver enzyme was elevated 1% out of the baseline range.
"liver enzyme was elevated 1% out of the baseline range" is medically meaningless but let's pretend the patient is cirrhotic so your hypothetical is valid, this individual has a constitutionally protected right to be an idiot and continue drinking themselves into death.
You get tested every few years and adjust diet/supplements/exercise based on the findings.
> It’s data driven.
Good.
> You get tested every few years
Not always good. Many screening tests just increase unnecessary procedure except in very specific situations. Eg MRI screening generates a ton on unnecessary biopsies and associated complications, stress.
The data says when screening is appropriate, so as you say, use the data.