"It’s too late for my sister. She died and suffered terribly." :(
I agree - as much as we all want to make it big, the desperation of trying to save your loved one is heartbreaking.
How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
41–50 of 84 posts
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#42This article is inspiring but it fails to mention that no studies have shown that the device actually works. The FDA approval process for medical devices is very different then from pharmaceuticals; to oversimplify, efficacy does not need to be demonstrated, only safety (i.e. the device is not toxic). Thus the fact that the device is FDA approved doesn't really mean much (although it sounds great). As with renewable…
I have long felt that there is a massive and well funded lobby for curing things, but an impoverished prevention programme. There is no real financial incentive to prevent cancer etc, but lots of money and glory for curing people who have got cancer. This applies right across medicine. Similarly there is a massive and well funded lobby for power production and very little for power efficiency, which effectively achie…
I believe that there is a serious incentive on prevention and efficiency. However, there is a much louder voice for curing and expansion. I can offer you two reasons why.
1) Lack of better knowledge in the past: For a long time people thought smoking was fashionable. Today we know it causes lung cancer, but it is now too late to tell all those people that have been smoking their entire life. This can be said about nearly everything in every other field. I would not say that we have better knowledge about many things now. Science is still not sure if eggs are good or bad for you, neither why many people develop lactose intollerance after their childhood. Because of that, prevention is pretty much a luck guess by now. We look at those who have survived and try to figure out why. Then we tell people to do that and see if it works, but there are so many factors that 'I' feel that prevention is in many cases just a gambling game.
2) Lack of knowledge of economy of scale. When the industrial revolution started, steam was on its heydays, and all that, the idea of recycling and efficiency didn't exist AT ALL. People really thought that Earth could take everything that was thrown at it and its resources would last forever. Only now, with a population of many billions that we are seeing that Earth is panting, trying to catch up with our wasteful ways. The idea of 'reduce, reuse, recycle' to save resources is very new and there is a lot of social and economical mommentum it needs to overcome before it becomes mainstream.
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
You sound like the doctors on the article that says that "it wouldn't work anyway". I understand that you have a far greater background than I have and I respect that, but you must keep your mind open. Most of the great anchievements of mankind 'wouldn't work anyway' in the minds of the specialists of the age. And they were wrong. With all due respect, you, giving you background on the matter, can find any technical…
Very valid points. I'm not saying this kind of work shouldn't be pursued, I just wanted to point out that it is premature to think of this device as a "breakthrough". As I said before, I hope it works, and new approaches are in general a good thing. I just think the way they are reported is more for entertainment purposes then spreading true knowledge. Technically, the idea of killing a tumor w/ a localized toxin is…
Now I can see your point. Thanks for the reply. However, this treatment is not only about localized toxin. It has a two-fold approach of both blocking the blood path the tumor is feeding of and using a localized chemo treatment. Wouldn't this approach be more effective than the actual ways?
I have another question. Since you claim that localized toxin causes the recurrence to be much more difficult to treat because the 1% that survives is resistant to chemo, wouldn't an unlocalized toxin be much worse because not only it would also not kill these 1% that was resistance, but also it would kill less of those 99% susceptible and would also kill some healthy cells, making the body weaker and the recurrence to occur sooner?
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
You would be right if it were an asthma or restless leg treatment. This is a cancer treatment. The worst case scenario is a slightly earlier death.
There are other treatments for cancer.
And very rarely they result in cure. Sometimes, they give you some years till recurrence kicks in. Mostly, they make your last years very miserable.
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#45I found this gem in the comments on that page: I appreciate the kind comments. If you or a friend / family member could benefit from the catheter, please do not hesitate to contact us on our website at www.vasculardesigns.com No one will be turned away if they can not afford the catheter. Robert Goldman
Unfortunately, they arrived one month too late.
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Nobel prize is usually awarded for basic science, uncovering the mechanisms of something, rather than engineering applications based on that science.
That changes over time. Nobel's intention was to give it to people that gave the greatest benefit to mankind during the year. A few prices in the later years have been directed toward less base-research like inventions. Also... why do people keep refering to the "The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel" as a nobel prize in economics? It's not one of the subjects that Nobel himself t…
I'd like to see how they apply this 'basic science' rule for the Peace Prize.
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Storage and use of electricity, the lightbulb, the personal computer, the telephone, and the cathode ray tube.
Plus radio, navigation, flight, supersonic flight, space flight, sattelites, computers that break the 1 GHz clock barrier (remember that one?). I daresay everything that was invented since the Greeks owned the world.
Not to draw it out much further, but I don't think a majority of domain experts in a field would (or have in the past) completely discounted the possibility of an invention or achievement. It's usually journalists, pseudo-intellectuals, or self-proclaimed experts who make these types of claims. Are you saying that leading physicists and engineers in the mid-20th century didn't think space flight and satellites were achievable?
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are other treatments for cancer.
And very rarely they result in cure. Sometimes, they give you some years till recurrence kicks in. Mostly, they make your last years very miserable.
And this one does the same, as it's just a more localized version of chemo.
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#49truly amazing. seems seriously unfortunate that it takes the FDA 7 years to approve a device like this. I wonder how much testing they actually spend and how much time is wasted in bureaucratic BS. regardless, the story is amazing and the device seems incredible
If it's important to you, why not ask and find out?
Re: How a software engineer invented a breakthrough medical device
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Nobel prize is usually awarded for basic science, uncovering the mechanisms of something, rather than engineering applications based on that science.
That changes over time. Nobel's intention was to give it to people that gave the greatest benefit to mankind during the year. A few prices in the later years have been directed toward less base-research like inventions. Also... why do people keep refering to the "The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel" as a nobel prize in economics? It's not one of the subjects that Nobel himself t…
Indeed, if you look at the very earliest Nobel prizes they were less focused on basic research. For example, the 1909 Physics prize to Marconi/Braun "in recognition of their contributions to the development of wireless telegraphy" or the 1912 Physics prize to Gustaf Dalen "for his invention of automatic regulators for use in conjunction with gas accumulators for illuminating lighthouses and buoys".