3 ms·

This was good. It's good to be reminded of the complexity of things we might overlook. However the answer to any question around why something is expensive or

This was good. It's good to be reminded of the complexity of things we might overlook. However the answer to any question around why something is expensive or not is economics, specifically supply and demand, marketing and distribution channels, and barriers to entry. This is the technology sector. We have made a cottage industry out of taking things that used to be at the maximum level of complexity and turning them into household items. You could write a similar article about how web servers work -- there's an amazing amount of complexity in there, but we've commoditized all of it. Ultrasound tech will follow the same trajectory, although I have no idea how long that will take. In addition, ultrasound providers are marketing towards large, rich, healtchare providers who are operating in a tightly-regulated market. If I had a $1,000 ultrasound that only worked for a year, was quirky, might scald me or my patient, but was good for quick diangoses in the field in third-world countries? It might be all I would need. There is no universal "ultrasound" device that has to meet a ton of specs. That's just the way the market is configured currently. Good article. Lots of cool stuff in there.

phpnode 10y ago
Why is it ok to scald patients in third world countries? What if the quirks lead to misdiagnosis etc? If there was a way to produce this technology safely and cheaply people would be doing so
- DanielBMarkham 10y ago
  My point was that it might be better to accept a risk of scalding if it saves lives. A really cheap ultrasound could have all sorts of bad attributes -- and still be worth it to the people who are using it. It could make an incredible positive difference in people's lives. There is no universal set of standards. It varies a lot depending on particular circumstances.
- snovv_crash 10y ago
  If risk of scalding means the price can be reduced to a point to where every ambulance or high-speed paramedic car can have one, then it is worth it. If it means that every back-water third-world doctor can have one, great. Sometimes knowing if a patient has internal bleeding, and where, is worth the risk.
  - DanBC 10y ago
    Don't forget to balance that advantage with the risks and harms of over testing.

phpnode 10y ago

Why is it ok to scald patients in third world countries? What if the quirks lead to misdiagnosis etc? If there was a way to produce this technology safely and cheaply people would be doing so

DanielBMarkham 10y ago
My point was that it might be better to accept a risk of scalding if it saves lives. A really cheap ultrasound could have all sorts of bad attributes -- and still be worth it to the people who are using it. It could make an incredible positive difference in people's lives. There is no universal set of standards. It varies a lot depending on particular circumstances.
snovv_crash 10y ago
If risk of scalding means the price can be reduced to a point to where every ambulance or high-speed paramedic car can have one, then it is worth it. If it means that every back-water third-world doctor can have one, great. Sometimes knowing if a patient has internal bleeding, and where, is worth the risk.
- DanBC 10y ago
  Don't forget to balance that advantage with the risks and harms of over testing.