Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013) • Hacker News Board

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#11

Post by achr2 » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 3:26 PM UTC

mysterypie wrote: post #9

achr2 wrote: post #7

Anaesthesiologist seems like one of the first doctors that could be entirely replaced with a robotic system. They are basically there to monitor and asses multiple vital factors, which seems entirely appropriate for a control system.

Pharmacist is the medical job that is already completely obsolete and could be eliminated if not for unions and inertia. Pharmacists almost never do compounding anymore. They just take pills off a shelf and hand it to you. If manufacturers and doctors could agree on standard drug regimens, counting out pills would be unnecessary as well (or could be replaced by minimum wage labor or robotic/vending machine-like devic…

Good point. From what I've heard, many hospitals have already gone this route internally with automated drug dispensers. Publicly, this might take a lot longer since there is an ageing population that is simultaneously more reliant on pharmaceuticals and very adverse to change and technology.

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#12

Post by Moshe_Silnorin » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 3:27 PM UTC

achr2 wrote: post #7

Anaesthesiologist seems like one of the first doctors that could be entirely replaced with a robotic system. They are basically there to monitor and asses multiple vital factors, which seems entirely appropriate for a control system.

Anesthesiologists are immune from automation due to rent-seeking via licensure.

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#13

Post by sargun » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 3:29 PM UTC

Kenji wrote: post #10

mikeash wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it could be demonstrated to be safe, I have trouble seeing any downside to your idea!

Probably because anaesthesia has significant risks, and even if it was safe, most people would spend the first few hours on arrival puking (a very common side effect of anaesthesia).

Even at that, you have to be able to evacuate a commercial airliner in ~90 seconds. How do you fix this?

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#14

Post by maxerickson » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 3:36 PM UTC

mysterypie wrote: post #9

achr2 wrote: post #7

Anaesthesiologist seems like one of the first doctors that could be entirely replaced with a robotic system. They are basically there to monitor and asses multiple vital factors, which seems entirely appropriate for a control system.

Pharmacist is the medical job that is already completely obsolete and could be eliminated if not for unions and inertia. Pharmacists almost never do compounding anymore. They just take pills off a shelf and hand it to you. If manufacturers and doctors could agree on standard drug regimens, counting out pills would be unnecessary as well (or could be replaced by minimum wage labor or robotic/vending machine-like devic…

Machines already count the pills.

(top search result: http://kirbylester.com/kirby-lester-products-and-technology.... )

Pharmacists are still well paid, which implies they are doing something of value (even at big chain stores they have good salaries).

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#15

Post by pkaye » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 3:46 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #14

mysterypie wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pharmacist is the medical job that is already completely obsolete and could be eliminated if not for unions and inertia. Pharmacists almost never do compounding anymore. They just take pills off a shelf and hand it to you. If manufacturers and doctors could agree on standard drug regimens, counting out pills would be unnecessary as well (or could be replaced by minimum wage labor or robotic/vending machine-like devic…

Machines already count the pills. (top search result: http://kirbylester.com/kirby-lester-products-and-technology.... ) Pharmacists are still well paid, which implies they are doing something of value (even at big chain stores they have good salaries).

The pharmacy degree is very difficult to get from what I understand (years of effort and limited opportunity) plus each pharmacy is required to have one on staff. So one aspect is a supply/demand. Secondly they take on some legal responsibilities so if things get screwed up they are at fault. They are there as a safety check and to resolve any ambiguities in the prescription. Much of this is being automated by computers now. Lastly they give out advice. You don't want to read a 5 page list of rare side effects...

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#16

Post by Moshe_Silnorin » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 3:49 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #14

mysterypie wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pharmacist is the medical job that is already completely obsolete and could be eliminated if not for unions and inertia. Pharmacists almost never do compounding anymore. They just take pills off a shelf and hand it to you. If manufacturers and doctors could agree on standard drug regimens, counting out pills would be unnecessary as well (or could be replaced by minimum wage labor or robotic/vending machine-like devic…

Machines already count the pills. (top search result: http://kirbylester.com/kirby-lester-products-and-technology.... ) Pharmacists are still well paid, which implies they are doing something of value (even at big chain stores they have good salaries).

Pharmacists are a protected class of workers. Legally mandated if you open a pharmacy. Thus, the fact that they are well-paid isn't evidence of anything, as it would be in a free market.

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#17

Post by mysterypie » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 3:51 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #14

mysterypie wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pharmacist is the medical job that is already completely obsolete and could be eliminated if not for unions and inertia. Pharmacists almost never do compounding anymore. They just take pills off a shelf and hand it to you. If manufacturers and doctors could agree on standard drug regimens, counting out pills would be unnecessary as well (or could be replaced by minimum wage labor or robotic/vending machine-like devic…

Machines already count the pills. (top search result: http://kirbylester.com/kirby-lester-products-and-technology.... ) Pharmacists are still well paid, which implies they are doing something of value (even at big chain stores they have good salaries).

I mean completely automated with no human except for the customer. Customer feeds in his prescription and gets back a container of drugs and a receipt and printouts of side effects to be aware of.

Regarding well paid: That's just union (licensing agency) controlling the supply of pharmacists. Look at the airline industry: United Airlines pilots who started in the 1970s with powerful unions still make $300k a year. Newly hired pilots today make $25k now that the unions lost their stranglehold.

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#18

Post by verdex_blarg » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 4:11 PM UTC

sargun wrote: post #13

Kenji wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because anaesthesia has significant risks, and even if it was safe, most people would spend the first few hours on arrival puking (a very common side effect of anaesthesia).

Even at that, you have to be able to evacuate a commercial airliner in ~90 seconds. How do you fix this?

Each person sleeps in a coffin that is also an autonomous vehicle. When the emergency alarm is raised (and the plane is on the ground), all of the coffins get dropped off the bottom of the plane and they all drive their individual passengers off to safety.

EDIT: Heck, I don't see why you couldn't also put a parachute on the thing.

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#19

Post by ones_and_zeros » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 4:11 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #14

mysterypie wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pharmacist is the medical job that is already completely obsolete and could be eliminated if not for unions and inertia. Pharmacists almost never do compounding anymore. They just take pills off a shelf and hand it to you. If manufacturers and doctors could agree on standard drug regimens, counting out pills would be unnecessary as well (or could be replaced by minimum wage labor or robotic/vending machine-like devic…

Machines already count the pills. (top search result: http://kirbylester.com/kirby-lester-products-and-technology.... ) Pharmacists are still well paid, which implies they are doing something of value (even at big chain stores they have good salaries).

Pharmacists are well paid and will continue to be well paid because they, as a profession, do things engineers don't:

- Create industry groups that advocate for the profession as a whole, using their seat at the table to influence policy makers

- Oversight over education institutions to ensure quality of graduates

- Collectively organize to ensure fair base pay, sane work schedules, and safe work environments

Re: Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)

#20

Post by ovi256 » Tue, Nov 01, 2016, 4:17 PM UTC

mysterypie wrote: post #17

maxerickson wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Machines already count the pills. (top search result: http://kirbylester.com/kirby-lester-products-and-technology.... ) Pharmacists are still well paid, which implies they are doing something of value (even at big chain stores they have good salaries).

I mean completely automated with no human except for the customer. Customer feeds in his prescription and gets back a container of drugs and a receipt and printouts of side effects to be aware of. Regarding well paid: That's just union (licensing agency) controlling the supply of pharmacists. Look at the airline industry: United Airlines pilots who started in the 1970s with powerful unions still make $300k a year. Ne…

Philip Greenspun makes a compelling argument that the new pilots making $25k and working the longest hours under the worst condition is a desired side-effect of union negotiations. The senior pilots, controlling the union and thus its negotiating policy, improve their outcome as much as possible. The junior employees are only nominally represented by the union, and their welfare is not a objective of the negotiations.

Source: http://philip.greenspun.com/flying/unions-and-airlines