Live data from Hacker News

"AI will cure cancer" misunderstands both AI and medicine

rachel.fast.ai

171–180 of 207 posts

Re: "AI will cure cancer" misunderstands both AI and medicine

#172
post #5

Saying "AI will cure cancer" is like saying "science will cure cancer" or "doctors will cure cancer". In general, all three statements are true about technological progress. > Second, AI is used to disproportionately benefit the privileged while worsening inequality. That's bullshit. Computers and other gadgets always start out as toys of the rich, but they quickly trickle down to everyone else. Compare the multi-tho…

> Computers and other gadgets always start out as toys of the rich But is this a function of moore's law? I have to say that OpenAI's training costs seems to be growing exponentially, not declining exponentially.

Open source models seem to be lagging by about a year. But for the end user with a powerful enough computer, you can do GPT 3.5 level work for no additional cost right now.

Re: "AI will cure cancer" misunderstands both AI and medicine

#174
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kind of feel like that's exactly why AI is helpful here: - Grab a cancer (or virus, bacteria, etc.) - Sequence it - AI will develop a custom therapy for that cancer In broad strokes, it's not hard to develop a therapy for any specific cancer or other disease in a specific individual. There are several broad strategies: - A targeted, custom phage to kill a bacteria (or extrapolate to killing a type of cells) - A cus…

> sequence it How? You’re hiding a ton of complicated work in these 2 words > AI will develop a custom therapy This statement suggests you really don’t know what you’re talking about with regards to AI. AI doesn’t develop treatments magically. Work needs to be don’t to curate a dataset of treatments and diseases, BUT even then AI can’t create new treatments for existing untreatable cancer as we don’t have any data to…

> How? You’re hiding a ton of complicated work in these 2 words

DNA sequencing has been following a Moore's Law style curve. It is cheap and easy now.

> > AI will develop a custom therapy

>

> This statement suggests you really don’t know what you’re talking about with regards to AI.

>

> AI doesn’t develop treatments magically. Work needs to be don’t to curate a dataset of treatments and diseases, BUT even then AI can’t create new treatments for existing untreatable cancer as we don’t have any data to go off of.

No one is suggesting it can. AI is very good at pattern-matching. There is a cookbook of techniques here:

1) Create a phage which is very good at injecting into a specific type of cell

2) Create antibodies which can latch onto a specific type of cell, virus, or cancer, so the immune system can attack them

3) Create a vaccine, which is much the same as the above

None of these are hard in of themselves. What is hard is that there isn't a virus called "AIDS" or "flu" or "cold," but a very, very large family of viruses. Ditto for cancer and bacteria. This is the exact type of pattern matching problem ML excels at. Curing a specific virus isn't hard; what's hard is because of all the variations. That kind of adaptation is exactly what ML excels at.

Once covid was sequenced, the actual creation of a vaccine took -- literally -- a couple of days (of work by the world's best scientists). What took much longer was validation, regulatory approval, getting manufacturing up, etc.

> You’re too cavalier in hand waving away the real work by saying things like “AI will do this. Ez. 2 years”

You're attacking a strawman here. Step zero of this process will be:

- Collect a dataset of bacteriophage DNA and of bacteria they're good at attacking (this is a massive undertaking)

- Something very similar with DNA and antigens (much of this exists / has been done, but was a huge undertaking; see "protein folding")

This is a few years in itself. That's when we can start to begin training an AI. There are many other similar-sized steps along the way. "AI will cure cancer" doesn't mean "AI will cure cancer tomorrow." However, I can see all the steps along the way, and no fundamental hurdles.

It's like the Apollo Program or the Manhattan Project on day 1. Yes, it's a major undertaking, but there's every reason t believe it will work. That's exciting.

So far, aside from calling me an idiot, no one in this thread suggested where the flaw in the above lies (and none of the comments suggested the poster had any understanding to do so). I responded to your comment since it was closest.

Re: "AI will cure cancer" misunderstands both AI and medicine

#175
post #21

I do think AI has a chance to make healthcare, for cancer and other diseases, a lot more proactive. Even though we know prognosis is much better for cancer, and many other diseases, if you catch it early, we do essentially nothing to catch it early. My understanding is that this is because: 1. Administering regular MRIs, blood panels, etc. is expensive, in terms of the initial data collection 2. It’s also expensive,…

False positive and negatives are unlikely to be improved by AI significantly. They are mostly based on a trade off between catching more, and making sure those you catch are accurate, and a limitation of the test itself. Sure, AI might marginally make some tests better by interpreting more variables more reliably, but it’s going to be marginal rather than solved. For example, for PSA a blood test for prostate cancer, it doesn’t matter how much AI you through at it, it’s just not a great test. It’s elevated outside cancer commonly, and is normal in a significant percentage of prostate cancers. Just have to deal with its limitations.

Re: "AI will cure cancer" misunderstands both AI and medicine

#177
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sequence it How? You’re hiding a ton of complicated work in these 2 words > AI will develop a custom therapy This statement suggests you really don’t know what you’re talking about with regards to AI. AI doesn’t develop treatments magically. Work needs to be don’t to curate a dataset of treatments and diseases, BUT even then AI can’t create new treatments for existing untreatable cancer as we don’t have any data to…

> How? You’re hiding a ton of complicated work in these 2 words DNA sequencing has been following a Moore's Law style curve. It is cheap and easy now. > > AI will develop a custom therapy > > This statement suggests you really don’t know what you’re talking about with regards to AI. > > AI doesn’t develop treatments magically. Work needs to be don’t to curate a dataset of treatments and diseases, BUT even then AI can…

You really don’t understand what you are talking about. Cancer is not an infection. You can’t sequence it and treat it as you would a pathogen.

Re: "AI will cure cancer" misunderstands both AI and medicine

#179
post #21

I do think AI has a chance to make healthcare, for cancer and other diseases, a lot more proactive. Even though we know prognosis is much better for cancer, and many other diseases, if you catch it early, we do essentially nothing to catch it early. My understanding is that this is because: 1. Administering regular MRIs, blood panels, etc. is expensive, in terms of the initial data collection 2. It’s also expensive,…

“AI invents cures for different types of cancer” seems like a moonshot

What about AlphaFold? It’s just one piece of a very large puzzle but it’s not like AI needs to do it all.

I don’t think AI will be a complete solution for much of anything but I do think that it will be a part of the solution for just about everything.

Post reply on HN