爱康国宾旗下西三旗门诊部存在医师多执业机构未备案、健康体检报告缺项、医废收集记录不规范等问 题，已被下达监督意见书，责令整改。 12月13日，女律师张晓玲女士质疑体检中心爱康国宾"误检"、"漏检"索赔案曝出最新进展。根据北京市 卫生健康委员会出具的一份答复意见书（市卫健信答【2025】11017），经多轮调查核实，爱康国宾旗 下相关门诊部等机构在核心体检业务中未发现误检漏检、数据造假等重大违规情形，但部分机构存在医 废管理不规范、医务人员备案不全等问题，已依法受到相应处罚。 今年早些时候，张女士称自己十年体检都未检出异常，但突然被确诊患癌症晚期。这场持续半年的纠纷 始于2025年7月，张晓玲女士通过一体化平台、中央巡视组等渠道投诉，认为爱康国宾旗下机构及相关 医院存在漏诊重大疾病、体检数据造假、肿瘤标志物检测不合规等问题，相关行为导致其耽误治疗并造 成终身残疾，诉求包括吊销机构体检资格、医师执业证书及移交公安追究刑事责任等。 北京市卫健委在意见书中的答复显示，经查，北京爱康国宾西内门诊部、西三旗门诊部均将血液样品送 至通过质量认证的北京爱康国宾中关村门诊部北京地区中央实验室进行CEA等肿瘤标志物检测，该实验 ...

12月13日，红星新闻记者从张晓玲律师处获悉，她针对爱康国宾的投诉在近日收到北京市卫健委邮寄的 答复意见书。意见书中提到，爱康国宾有将血液送到实验室进行癌胚抗原检测，未发现临床实验室数据 及体检结果造假情形。爱康国宾一门诊部因医废暂存间不符合卫生要求被警告并罚款2000元。 张晓玲向红星新闻记者提供了盖有北京市卫健委公章的答复意见书和北京市卫健委向她邮寄的快递单 据。红星新闻记者也在北京市卫健委官网看到该处罚公示，该公示发布于11月14日，处罚时间为11月13 日，北京爱康国宾西内门诊部有限公司因"医疗废物暂时贮存地点不符合卫生要求"被处以警告和罚款。 卫健委答复： 爱康一门诊部因医废暂存不符卫生要求被罚2000元 此前备受关注的患癌女律师投诉爱康国宾"体检10年未提示癌症"事件出现最新进展。 记者联系爱康方面询问对此事的回应，截至发稿尚未收到回复。 此前报道 未发现体检结果造假，检测结果可溯源 红星新闻记者在意见书中看到，北京市卫健委回复了张晓玲的多项诉求。 对于张晓玲对爱康国宾癌胚抗原（以下简称CEA）检测的质疑，意见书中提到，CEA属于非器官特异性 肿瘤相关抗原，CEA增高常见于结肠癌、直肠癌、胃癌等多 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the crisis faced by companies like Xibei and Aikang Guobin, highlighting that the root of the crisis is not about right or wrong, but rather a misalignment in understanding between the companies and the public [1][2]. Group 1: Industry Standards vs Public Perception - In the medical examination industry, the standard is to "screen for abnormal indicators," not to "diagnose diseases," leading to a disconnect when consumers expect cancer detection [3]. - In the restaurant industry, Xibei's explanation that "central kitchen pre-processing does not equal pre-made dishes" fails to resonate with consumers who equate anything not freshly cooked as pre-made [4]. - This misalignment indicates that while industries have their own standards and terminologies, consumers lack the time or interest to understand these details [6]. Group 2: Defensive Reactions and Crisis Amplification - The misalignment could have been mitigated through patient explanation and communication, but both Aikang Guobin and Xibei opted for litigation as a response [7]. - For Xibei, the issue of "pre-made dishes" is not just a labeling problem but affects the entire supply chain and cost structure, necessitating a strong defense [8]. - Aikang Guobin views its examination services as "screening," not "diagnosis," and feels compelled to defend against public misconceptions that could undermine its business model [9]. Group 3: Public Sentiment and Perception - Public perception of pre-made dishes is simplistic, often siding with figures like Luo Yonghao, which indicates that Xibei underestimated consumer expectations for transparency in the food industry [10]. - In the Aikang incident, the lawyer's status as a cancer patient garnered public sympathy, making the company's litigation appear as "bullying the weak," overshadowing any professional arguments [11]. - Companies often perceive public questioning as a commercial threat, while the public desires a more open response to their concerns, leading to potential backlash if the boundaries between defense and public education are blurred [12]. Conclusion - The events involving Aikang Guobin and Xibei illustrate that in today's media environment, a company's "standard answer" may be perceived as the "wrong answer" by the public, highlighting a common challenge across industries [13]. - It is more effective for companies to establish effective communication and reduce cognitive gaps before crises arise, rather than responding defensively during a crisis [14]. - Ultimately, gaining public trust is essential for success in any industry [15].