Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 126 posts

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#111

Post by heisenzombie »

RC_ITR wrote: post #109
kube-system wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cancer via ionization is not the only damage that can be imparted on to human cells. It is quite plausible that we will discover new things that are dangerous in the future (to varying degrees), as we once did with x-rays.

Yeah, but we knew X-Rays were dangerous even then. We just thought it was ok in small doses (scientists were regularly burning themselves with X-Rays in the 19th century even). Correct me if I’m wrong, but mainstream science doesn’t really follow the same pattern of “bad for you but ok on small doses” (historically the most dangerous viewpoint to have) for mm-waves.

Well, you could definitely burn yourself with a powerful mm wave generator; but I'm not sure if that really says anything about safety.

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#112

Post by Digory »

wrycoder wrote: post #13
andybak wrote: post #6

I'm 49 and I'm sure I remember there still being machines in stores when I was 7 or 8. Is that possible? I don't recall them actually in use - but they were visibly present. (I'm in the UK) EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoe-fitting_fluoroscope#Regul... Looks possible.

There was one in a store we used to visit in the late ‘40s. It wasn’t a shoe store - more of a small department store. I’d stand on the thing, stick the fronts of my shoes into the two holes, lean over and look through the viewport (which was rather like an old stereopticon), push the button and wiggle my green toes. The clerks never bothered me. I think I knew enough to keep the time short. I don’t remember if it ha…

An older relative’s oncologist told him these machines were probably behind an increase in thyroid cancers of kids from the 50s.

Hard to prove the causation decades later, but that was the working assumption.

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#113

Post by fennecfoxen »

smaddox wrote: post #110
fennecfoxen wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do need to understand that there was a point in history when Science™ and Progress™ turned into the things that brought us world wars and atomic bombs.

Atomic bombs, yes. World wars... I guess you could make that argument, but it's a stretch. There were basically world wars in antiquity. Atomic bombs also pretty much put an end to world wars.

> There were basically world wars in antiquity

World War I saw the advent of chemical warfare with mustard gas. World War II saw European cities razed by carpet-bombing, even leaving atoms aside.

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#114

Post by jacobwilliamroy »

ineedasername wrote: post #88
phkahler wrote: post #61

Next time you need an X-ray ask the doctor why that costs more than a pair of shoes. I mean they used to include one free with a pair.

Many things would be much cheaper if all safety protocols were removed. Cars are a great example: Safety features may add around $2k annually [0], though they've helped prevent a few hundred thousand deaths since 1980 roughly cutting in half the per-capita automobile fatalities. As it is, they cost about $44 billion annually [2] which means in addition to lives saved, the reduction in deaths save us up to $44 billion…

Car safety is an example of government regulation. Full stop. No free market anything involved. If the market was free, then it wouldn't be regulated. You're doublespeak-ing.

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#115

Post by ineedasername »

jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #114
ineedasername wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many things would be much cheaper if all safety protocols were removed. Cars are a great example: Safety features may add around $2k annually [0], though they've helped prevent a few hundred thousand deaths since 1980 roughly cutting in half the per-capita automobile fatalities. As it is, they cost about $44 billion annually [2] which means in addition to lives saved, the reduction in deaths save us up to $44 billion…

Car safety is an example of government regulation. Full stop. No free market anything involved. If the market was free, then it wouldn't be regulated. You're doublespeak-ing.

Are you saying there is no such thing as a free market? Or simply that it's not a "pure" free market? I'd go with the later.

Whatever you want to call the part of the economy that functions in part on competition between businesses, that competition has played a part in car safety. When businesses are marketing safety features, they are competing on safety features rather than (just) price or other factors. Those are market forces, whether or not they meet a specific definition of free market.

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#116

Post by [deleted] »

ineedasername wrote: post #115
jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car safety is an example of government regulation. Full stop. No free market anything involved. If the market was free, then it wouldn't be regulated. You're doublespeak-ing.

Are you saying there is no such thing as a free market? Or simply that it's not a "pure" free market? I'd go with the later. Whatever you want to call the part of the economy that functions in part on competition between businesses, that competition has played a part in car safety. When businesses are marketing safety features, they are competing on safety features rather than (just) price or other factors. Those are…

[deleted]

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#117

Post by [deleted] »

ineedasername wrote: post #115
jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car safety is an example of government regulation. Full stop. No free market anything involved. If the market was free, then it wouldn't be regulated. You're doublespeak-ing.

Are you saying there is no such thing as a free market? Or simply that it's not a "pure" free market? I'd go with the later. Whatever you want to call the part of the economy that functions in part on competition between businesses, that competition has played a part in car safety. When businesses are marketing safety features, they are competing on safety features rather than (just) price or other factors. Those are…

[deleted]

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#118

Post by jacobwilliamroy »

ineedasername wrote: post #115
jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car safety is an example of government regulation. Full stop. No free market anything involved. If the market was free, then it wouldn't be regulated. You're doublespeak-ing.

Are you saying there is no such thing as a free market? Or simply that it's not a "pure" free market? I'd go with the later. Whatever you want to call the part of the economy that functions in part on competition between businesses, that competition has played a part in car safety. When businesses are marketing safety features, they are competing on safety features rather than (just) price or other factors. Those are…

You'd go with the latter because it still has the word "free market" in it, though the U.S. economy is not a free market. Again, this would be doublespeak, and you would be a liar. I'm just trying to maintain a grip on the real world here and it's pretty tough when you are so committed to gaslighting yourself and others. Honestly I'm only getting hung up on this right now because I think it's for your own good. You clearly have a loose grasp on reality if you're so eager to ignore government intervention, and you're going to get got sooner or later if you keep on with this irrational belief in free markets.

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#119

Post by hilbert42 »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #54
andybak wrote: post #6

I'm 49 and I'm sure I remember there still being machines in stores when I was 7 or 8. Is that possible? I don't recall them actually in use - but they were visibly present. (I'm in the UK) EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoe-fitting_fluoroscope#Regul... Looks possible.

I wonder if you and/or others might be confusing the x-ray machines with the mechanical foot measuring machines. I'm middle aged and remember Clarks (probably in Sheffield, UK) having what looked like a crushing machine with steel plates that closed - very gently - on to the feet and gave a read out of size and width. (See image at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32738088#_=_ under "Appropriate measures", left ha…

Well the ones I saw at that age definitely were the xray type. However they weren't being used when I tried to get measured.

Re: When X-Rays were used at the Shoe Store

#120

Post by ineedasername »

jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #118
ineedasername wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying there is no such thing as a free market? Or simply that it's not a "pure" free market? I'd go with the later. Whatever you want to call the part of the economy that functions in part on competition between businesses, that competition has played a part in car safety. When businesses are marketing safety features, they are competing on safety features rather than (just) price or other factors. Those are…

You'd go with the latter because it still has the word "free market" in it, though the U.S. economy is not a free market. Again, this would be doublespeak, and you would be a liar. I'm just trying to maintain a grip on the real world here and it's pretty tough when you are so committed to gaslighting yourself and others. Honestly I'm only getting hung up on this right now because I think it's for your own good. You c…

You are lowering a conversation into a name-calling flame war. It isn't necessary. I'm fine with not calling "the later" a free market. It is not, strictly speaking, a free market. But that term is also not used uniformly. Some use it strictly to refer to a hands-off market, others use it more generically to refer to something like "market forces". If you don't like that loose usage, it would be perfectly acceptable to say "Hey, that's not really a free market, that term means something else."

Or do you take issue with me saying there is a concept of a "free market" and another concept of a "(not pure) free market"? Honestly I don't know because you haven't taken the time explain your point of view before resorting to personal attacks, and calling someone a liar or irrational because they use a term more loosely than you'd prefer is an excellent way to shut down productive conversation. You have taken that path, so I won't bother to converse further unless you're willing to back off the flame-war rhetoric and explain your point of view without insults. If don't want to take the time for that, that's fine, I'm not entitled to your detailed explanations, in which case I wish you well, and ask you simply not to respond if that response will consist of insults.

Post reply on HN