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

Midjourney Medical

midjourney.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 927 posts

Re: Midjourney Medical

#311

Post by ipsum2 »

drum55 wrote: post #257
gpt5 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find using tens of thousands of ultrasonic chips, submerged underwater to provide you a radiation free full body scan, all while processing a petabyte of data per scan a pretty ambitious and cool project. I hope they make it work.

1 petabyte per 60 second scans implies a kind of comical data rate to storage, even at RAM speeds that’s implausible. Imagine we need to write these to hard drives, they happily sustain 150Mb/s on the high end, which would imply you’d need 115,000 hard drives to absorb that amount of writes. Even with top end NVMe drives you’d need a thousand of them writing simultaneously.

There's probably compute done on ram to reduce the file size before it hits disk. Definitely going to be redundant information in the scan.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#312

Post by captainbland »

I think it's a bit odd to compare this to an MRI. The physics are totally different and there are things it fundamentally won't image in the same way because it's basically just ultrasound.

The approach sounds like something which appears in a few research articles from the 2010s (ultrasound computed tomography), although submersion to make the ultrasound transmission more efficient seems novel.

It's possible the "spa" approach is used because it's hard to achieve the level of cleanliness required in a typical health facility using a shared bath.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#313

Post by amirhirsch »

oliyoung wrote: post #134
jawns wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm scratching my head about why they would venture into an entirely different field like this, one with tremendous regulatory hurdles, if they know (and surely they must know) that radiologists are going to pan the results. It's like if LeBron announced he was switching to bowling and was going to revolutionize the sport, then rolled a gutter ball.

> I'm scratching my head about why they would venture into an entirely different field like this Never underestimate the audacity of a software engineer with a new toy > It's like if LeBron announced he was switching to bowling and was going to revolutionize the sport, then rolled a gutter ball. Well, if you replace LeBron with Jordan, and Bowling with Baseball ..

The founder of midjourney is not a software engineer.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#314

Post by ricardobayes »

arcticbull wrote: post #273
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #233

I think a lot of medical diagnosis could be solved with mass data collection if it was cheap enough. Right now, blood draws are somewhat routinely done because they provide a lot of human-interpretable indicators from a small number of values, and there is some evidence that e.g. "dogs can smell cancer" etc. (i.e. some diseases cause detectable odors). With a big enough data set of [all kinds of bio values, including…

Don’t make me tap the sign. Bayes Theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes'_theorem There’s a very good reason we don’t test asymptomatic people in low incidence populations. Basically all positives are false positives when you do that, no matter how accurate the test is. When you’re testing healthy randos for everything the odds of a positive being false have so many 9s it would make an SRE weep. Unless this is…

Medicine is not a statistical field. I've seen many times doctors dismissing someone "you're young, you can't have X". Although there is some truth in what you're saying: full body CT scans are on the rise now.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#315

Post by [deleted] »

ricardobayes wrote: post #314
arcticbull wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t make me tap the sign. Bayes Theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes'_theorem There’s a very good reason we don’t test asymptomatic people in low incidence populations. Basically all positives are false positives when you do that, no matter how accurate the test is. When you’re testing healthy randos for everything the odds of a positive being false have so many 9s it would make an SRE weep. Unless this is…

Medicine is not a statistical field. I've seen many times doctors dismissing someone "you're young, you can't have X". Although there is some truth in what you're saying: full body CT scans are on the rise now.

[deleted]

Re: Midjourney Medical

#316

Post by jibal »

sroussey wrote: post #305
convnet wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a controversial and complicated idea. The downside, and the reason why most doctors do not recommend full body scans, is that every human body is a bit weird and there will almost always be something "wrong" that will be visible in a full body scan. This can lead to unnecessary testing, anxiety, and even unnecessary procedures. Many of these oddities flagged by the scan would never have caused any actual issues…

If the whole population had a full body scan every quarter, the “weird” things would feel more like the noise they are. But we would have great data over time, both individually (weird tends to only matter if they are changing) and as a population.

The fundamental problem is that you generally can't diagnose simply from shapes. Scans show shapes, shapes cause concern, concern leads to invasive procedures, results are negative.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#318

Post by ricardobayes »

krzat wrote: post #297
arcticbull wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t make me tap the sign. Bayes Theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes'_theorem There’s a very good reason we don’t test asymptomatic people in low incidence populations. Basically all positives are false positives when you do that, no matter how accurate the test is. When you’re testing healthy randos for everything the odds of a positive being false have so many 9s it would make an SRE weep. Unless this is…

If this argument was as solid as you say, then all routine checks would be pointless. I don't know about traditional blood testing, but a permanent implant which checks HR, pressure, glucose, temperature & oxidation would be pretty useful, not necessarily to diagnose anything, but to provide data for doctor when patient has actual symptomps.

They kind of are. Spain doesn't have yearly physicals, and during a GP visit, they don't even take your blood pressure. Blood tests are extremely uncommon, unlike in British medicine, where they take your blood pressure every time and blood tests are so prevalent people usually request one from time to time despite having no symptoms. Spain's example showed the above (or the lack of) doesn't increase all-cause mortality and even excelling in longevity statistics.

https://www.rieti.go.jp/en/columns/a01_0455.html This japanese article found "No clear-cut evidence exists to determine whether undergoing health checks leads to greater longevity and/or lower medical expenditures."

Re: Midjourney Medical

#319

Post by captainbland »

adonovan wrote: post #51

Can someone with expertise explain what kinds of medical imaging are theoretically possible with this kind of sensor?

More just interested in medical imaging in general but: unobstructed soft tissue imaging is possible with this, e.g. abdomen. You can get reasonably good differentiation between types of tissues using ultrasound in this context although there is the potential for ambiguous findings where further scans like MRI will be required to get less ambiguous information about it.

Chest cavity, brain tissue scanning etc. will likely remain unrealistic as ultrasound waves won't penetrate bone and the ribs and skull will interfere.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#320

Post by Beijinger »

convnet wrote: post #287
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #233

I think a lot of medical diagnosis could be solved with mass data collection if it was cheap enough. Right now, blood draws are somewhat routinely done because they provide a lot of human-interpretable indicators from a small number of values, and there is some evidence that e.g. "dogs can smell cancer" etc. (i.e. some diseases cause detectable odors). With a big enough data set of [all kinds of bio values, including…

It's a controversial and complicated idea. The downside, and the reason why most doctors do not recommend full body scans, is that every human body is a bit weird and there will almost always be something "wrong" that will be visible in a full body scan. This can lead to unnecessary testing, anxiety, and even unnecessary procedures. Many of these oddities flagged by the scan would never have caused any actual issues…

"It's a controversial and complicated idea. "

It is neither controversial nor complicated to detect some cancers by scent.

Taking the "headspace" of something is also not really complicated.

There are people who can reliably smell/detect Parkinson:

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/23/8202745...

Post reply on HN