Live data from Hacker News

Midjourney Medical

midjourney.com

561–570 of 927 posts

Re: Midjourney Medical

#562
post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly - I had switched to a one meal per day setup and have been mostly following it for a few years. Then after a routine “heart health” check all my indicators were super out of whack - the doctors thought I was on my deathbed - but I am perfectly happy pain free, in shape, physically active person… Then _i myself_ had to dig into all these tests and figure out that they were measuring the wrong thing - since the…

Sorry to branch out: How does this one meal per day work for you? There is recommended calories for a person, do you have to follow it somehow to make sure you have enough energy and exercise?

One meal ... many snacks?

Re: Midjourney Medical

#563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really get what this means. A false positive causes issues inherently - you don't know if it's right or wrong. It's noise which is bad for care, and it's anxiety-inducing for patients which is also bad. It produces worse outcomes for everyone. There isn't a "choice" or assumption here, you respond to a positive as if it's accurate until you know it isn't. This is a known issue. Hell Scrubs did an episode abou…

The medical industry should NOT be paternalistic towards patients. People have a right to decide for themselves and be treated as adults capable of informed consent. Thankfully that model is starting to change, although there is much inertia. Any test that is approved for use would have a better-than-random outcome distribution. Preconditioned on that, a test result is still useful no matter how uncertain. It is neve…

Well now we’re going down a different path. Telling people to go burn through mountains of cash to get tests they don’t need is not ethical.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#564
post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that both MRIs and ultrasounds do not introduce problems.

MRIs by themselves no, but depending on what you want to actually see you need to inject a contrast agent which is probably not something you want to do too frequently.

Nobody is proposing this though

Re: Midjourney Medical

#565
I have thought that extremely accessible, portable, non-radiation imaging would be revolutionary. Imagine every doctor - or even every person - had a handheld thing they could wave over your affected area to get a high res 3d image of the issue. Of course we have mri, xray, and ultrasound, but those are big and expensive. Obviously there are engineering reasons that is the case, but It seems like a concerted effort to make imaging more portable and accessible, coupled with ai to help analyze could bring about all sorts of follow-on health improvements. Your regular practitioner could check you for heart blockages, clots that lead to stroke, cancers etc as a matter of course. I’m not sure stepping into a golden vat of water is what I have in mind but medical imaging does seem like a possible area for drastic innovation.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The pivot to do things they want as AI research lab is perfectly understandable, but also..weird, like their loyal userbase are mostly creative people, and this pivot have ZERO things to do with those audience at all. It also gives a vibe that they gives zero damn about to those creatives audience, or the things that made name for them in the past anymore, or that what I feel as their subscriber... I know that David…

to be fair I wouldn't call people operating AI Image generators creative people. At best they're people curious about the technology itself, anybody willing to learn and do it for the sake of being creative does it themselves.

This is just complete nonsense.

You really think creative people are not interested in new forms of visual expression?

This as simply being ignorant of art history.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#567
I used to work in ultrasound, and full body scans with the body underwater is definitely feasible and probably a good idea. Bit of a weird direction for them to take though??

Also there's absolutely no way that it will be as good as MRI. In general ultrasound imaging is shit. The main reasons it is used are because it is very cheap and completely harmless. The actual images you get are mostly just speckle. If MRI was cheap then nobody would use ultrasound. Full body ultrasound will definitely give better images because you have a wider aperture and can do fancier beamforming (probably "full matrix capture" and then beamforming in software; normally ultrasound probes do it in hardware). But it's still not going to be as good as MRI.

The exception to that is pregnancy - that is a super ideal case because you are imaging a nice clean interface in a fluid and there are no pesky bones in the way. Most of the body isn't like that at all.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#568
post #560

I find the technology side intriguing and worth a deeper dive. But I'm not convinced about their view of having people casually going to a spa every week and getting a full body scan. AFAIK, some doctors tend to avoid full-body scans. The reason is that each body is different and has its own quirks. If you do a scan for no reason other than "I can do it fast", chances are that the scan will show something unusual. Bu…

I learned this from watching House. I am certain that it's true, but I also kind of wonder how much backpressure there is against this kind of thing because the scanners are also insanely expensive to run per minute.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#569

I have thought that extremely accessible, portable, non-radiation imaging would be revolutionary. Imagine every doctor - or even every person - had a handheld thing they could wave over your affected area to get a high res 3d image of the issue. Of course we have mri, xray, and ultrasound, but those are big and expensive. Obviously there are engineering reasons that is the case, but It seems like a concerted effort t…

Actually doctors tend to frown on people getting full body MRI scans with no symptoms because they tend to cause many false positives.These false positives often trigger a stressful cascade of unnecessary follow-up imaging, bloodwork, and invasive biopsies.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#570
post #560

I find the technology side intriguing and worth a deeper dive. But I'm not convinced about their view of having people casually going to a spa every week and getting a full body scan. AFAIK, some doctors tend to avoid full-body scans. The reason is that each body is different and has its own quirks. If you do a scan for no reason other than "I can do it fast", chances are that the scan will show something unusual. Bu…

Why can't we do full body scans, learn about these "quirks", and document them in the wider science literature?

I understand there are many benign tumors that doctors prefer to ignore in people, but eventually when scanning becomes portable and safe enough having regular access to scans could really help a lot of conditions.

Post reply on HN