7 ms·

Your first post was one of the more interesting I've ever seen here at hn. Lots of good discussion about an issue way more important than database normalizatio

by edw519 16y ago

Your first post was one of the more interesting I've ever seen here at hn. Lots of good discussion about an issue way more important than database normalization, encryption, or valuations. And while I appreciate the follow-up to that great thread, I caution you to proceed carefully. Engaging a caring community of bright minds can be very cool, but please beware crossing that thin line into crowdsourcing your health care. I sincerely hope you find the help you need, but dude, find a good health care practitioner. If you haven't yet, keep looking. We're not it.

oliveoil 16y ago
On the other hand, the story is not upvoted to the top of HN for no reason.
- grandalf 16y ago
  I think it's due to a fascination with the failure of medical science to "fix" this guy after 18 years. If there is one bias that intelligent, technologically oriented people suffer from, it's an over-confidence in medicine and an excessively mechanistic view of the human body. The body is more like an aquarium full of a variety of species than an engine in which a part may or may not function.
  - ledger123 16y ago
    Homeopathy takes the body as a whole instead of independently working parts (hearts, lungs, brain etc.). You cannot prescribe correct homeopathy medicine for headache, for example, without taking into account all the mental and physical symptoms. Though I am not going to start another controversial thread (about homeopathy), I just wonder why the mainstream medical science does not looks at human malfunctioning as a whole system. In other words why there are so many organ/tissues/functions specialists? May be (with main stream medical science) we are on wrong path and have made things so complicated that it has impossible to consider the whole human body in one shot in any particular disease. Though we fully know that analyzing/treating the parts in a complex system won't take us too far.
    - amalcon 16y ago
      Though I am not going to start another controversial thread (about homeopathy), I just wonder why the mainstream medical science does not looks at human malfunctioning as a whole system. In other words why there are so many organ/tissues/functions specialists? I'm only answering this part, because I also don't want to get involved in a homeopathy debate. They do look at human malfunctioning as a whole system. The people who do this are called "internists". Your primary doctor is probably one of them. The reason that there are so many specialists is that the human body is really complicated. As much as we would like it to be simple, there's just too much to know about it for any one person to know everything, even if all the information is available. For the same reason that mechanical engineers specialize in things like mechanism design, aerodynamics, or materials, doctors specialize in different areas of the body. An internist simply does not know enough to figure out everything that could possibly be going wrong with a person's body. To my mind, the big problem is not with the specialization; it's with the coordination. All of the above specialties, and more, were involved in the design of any given vehicle you're likely to encounter, from a performance bicycle to the Concorde. Yet, it's really hard to get doctors from different specialties to collaborate to tackle a complicated disease. This is not a problem with medical science, so much as a problem with the way things are done right now.
      - grandalf 16y ago
        That is true, however even your internist is interested in your "primary complaint". There is this idea that one problem should be addressed at a time.
        amalcon 16y ago
        Not so much for anything serious or unusual, in my experience. If you have multiple complaints, the first thing doctors look for (in my experience) is something tying them all together. If you only have one complaint, they often ask if you're having other symptoms that you've just overlooked. I found out that a number of... corner cases that my body has just always had, were not normal, because of this. (There was fortunately nothing serious). Of course, for very common symptoms (like headache and nausea), they usually just treat the symptom.
  - hariis 16y ago
    All the ancient treatment modalities treat the body as a whole. It only makes sense. Holistic care is what is missing in the Western medicine. Having said that, no one modality is better than the other. Each one has its own place. There is one more striking difference also between the Western and other modalities and You made it clear by using the word "fix". For certain conditions, "fixing" does not work. If my arm is broken, sure you can fix it but for chronic conditions, certain lifestyle changes will have to be made and that requires the individual to be willing to undertake shifts in their behavior. For example, what you eat, when you eat, where you eat, how the food is cooked, when you sleep, the ambiance of your work, home and not to mention exercising etc. So in that sense, the holistic medical practitioner becomes more like a guide and the individual takes on a active role. For most people, this is too much to do. So they prefer Western Medicine where the mindset is, someone is going to "fix" me while I am busy with my life getting stressed up. The role is passive. Big difference. It is funny that Western Medicine practitioners are called doctors whereas holistic practitioners use the term heal and are called healers. (The root of the word heal is related to whole)
    - philwelch 16y ago
      To be fair, Western medicine has completely eradicated multiple fatal viral epidemics, developed a rather good series of antibiotics to handle bacterial infections of all kinds, kept a lid on flu epidemics year after year, and made vast strides in the treatment of multiple cancers. Now that Western medicine has got most of the low-hanging fruit and is now banging its head on the hard problems, it may appear to fall short in the "what have you done for me lately?" sense. But that's just because we take it for granted that we aren't going to get polio or smallpox.
      - dgordon 16y ago
        I thought that was the parent's point -- Western medicine has done superb work for acute diseases and injuries, but doesn't have solutions yet, and may not even have the right approach, for chronic ones.
        16y ago
spuz 16y ago
You can't deny the power of that collective wisdom though. Perhaps a startup in there somewhere? :)
- huherto 16y ago
  It really seems like doctors could start cooperating more; specially with rare diseases.
  - amichail 16y ago
    Do doctors always use computers as part of the diagnosis process? Shouldn't it be a criminal offense not to do this? In fact, if the diagnosis differs from what the computer says, then this should always be reported. Failure to do so should be considered a criminal offense.
    - scott_s 16y ago
      What do you mean by "use computers"?
      - amichail 16y ago
        I'm referring to using an officially mandated automated diagnosis system.
        scott_s 16y ago
        Does such a thing even exist? That sounds like a very hard problem.
        ars 16y ago
        Actually it does. It's fed with data that says: Condition X is usually caused by Y with Z% probability, etc etc. Then you feed it all the symptoms, sometimes it asks questions, and gives you a list of causes sorted by probability. It works almost exactly like this game http://www.guessthename.com/ http://www.guessthename.com/ Apparently the biggest problem with it is that doctors won't use it. The second problem is feeding data - you basically have to parse every medical paper ever published.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
xenophanes 16y ago
I read the first thread. Then I wanted to know the answer! I hope he keeps posting updates to satisfy my curiosity. I didn't interpret the update which said he had been to a doctor and had another appointment soon as him expecting us to have too large a role.
savemylife 16y ago
edw519, I hesitated for a day before posting this update (and a good couple of weeks before my original post) for exactly that reason. I realize that this is Hacker News, and not a medical web site. So I truly apologize if what I've done is inappropriate. HN is a great place, and I'd never want to abuse it. In the end I rationalized my decision by thinking that if my post isn't actually appropriate, that it simply wouldn't get voted up. It's a community site, and in the end the community chose to vote it up. I think that's worth something, though I certainly do see your point. I'd make one correction to your argument though- I'm trying to crowdsource a diagnosis, not my medical care. There is a big difference.
- mike-cardwell 16y ago
  I'd suggest that if anyone wants to follow your progress further, they subscribe to your website feed. There's no need to keep posting updates here.
  - w1ntermute 16y ago
    I don't agree. That's no different from suggesting that we only need to link to one article on TechCrunch or the NYT site, for example, since if people are interested in reading more of their articles, they'll subscribe to the TechCrunch and/or NYT site feeds. And like edw519 said, the first post was much more interesting than the average HN post, so I say keep 'em coming.
- seasoup 16y ago
  And you are crowdsourcing it as a last resort, you've seen the medical professionals and they have failed to provide a diagnosis.
- qeorge 16y ago
  I don't think he meant it was inappropriate to submit, but that he's concerned for your health. It sounds like you've got it under control, but it is really good advice - smart people w/ Google can make good guesses at most questions, but you shouldn't bet your life on it. Its a very interesting case and I've enjoyed following it, so please keep updating us. And best of luck with your continued recovery!

by edw519 16y ago

oliveoil 16y ago

On the other hand, the story is not upvoted to the top of HN for no reason.

grandalf 16y ago
I think it's due to a fascination with the failure of medical science to "fix" this guy after 18 years. If there is one bias that intelligent, technologically oriented people suffer from, it's an over-confidence in medicine and an excessively mechanistic view of the human body. The body is more like an aquarium full of a variety of species than an engine in which a part may or may not function.
- ledger123 16y ago
  Homeopathy takes the body as a whole instead of independently working parts (hearts, lungs, brain etc.). You cannot prescribe correct homeopathy medicine for headache, for example, without taking into account all the mental and physical symptoms. Though I am not going to start another controversial thread (about homeopathy), I just wonder why the mainstream medical science does not looks at human malfunctioning as a whole system. In other words why there are so many organ/tissues/functions specialists? May be (with main stream medical science) we are on wrong path and have made things so complicated that it has impossible to consider the whole human body in one shot in any particular disease. Though we fully know that analyzing/treating the parts in a complex system won't take us too far.
  - amalcon 16y ago
    Though I am not going to start another controversial thread (about homeopathy), I just wonder why the mainstream medical science does not looks at human malfunctioning as a whole system. In other words why there are so many organ/tissues/functions specialists? I'm only answering this part, because I also don't want to get involved in a homeopathy debate. They do look at human malfunctioning as a whole system. The people who do this are called "internists". Your primary doctor is probably one of them. The reason that there are so many specialists is that the human body is really complicated. As much as we would like it to be simple, there's just too much to know about it for any one person to know everything, even if all the information is available. For the same reason that mechanical engineers specialize in things like mechanism design, aerodynamics, or materials, doctors specialize in different areas of the body. An internist simply does not know enough to figure out everything that could possibly be going wrong with a person's body. To my mind, the big problem is not with the specialization; it's with the coordination. All of the above specialties, and more, were involved in the design of any given vehicle you're likely to encounter, from a performance bicycle to the Concorde. Yet, it's really hard to get doctors from different specialties to collaborate to tackle a complicated disease. This is not a problem with medical science, so much as a problem with the way things are done right now.
    - grandalf 16y ago
      That is true, however even your internist is interested in your "primary complaint". There is this idea that one problem should be addressed at a time.
      - amalcon 16y ago
        Not so much for anything serious or unusual, in my experience. If you have multiple complaints, the first thing doctors look for (in my experience) is something tying them all together. If you only have one complaint, they often ask if you're having other symptoms that you've just overlooked. I found out that a number of... corner cases that my body has just always had, were not normal, because of this. (There was fortunately nothing serious). Of course, for very common symptoms (like headache and nausea), they usually just treat the symptom.
- hariis 16y ago
  All the ancient treatment modalities treat the body as a whole. It only makes sense. Holistic care is what is missing in the Western medicine. Having said that, no one modality is better than the other. Each one has its own place. There is one more striking difference also between the Western and other modalities and You made it clear by using the word "fix". For certain conditions, "fixing" does not work. If my arm is broken, sure you can fix it but for chronic conditions, certain lifestyle changes will have to be made and that requires the individual to be willing to undertake shifts in their behavior. For example, what you eat, when you eat, where you eat, how the food is cooked, when you sleep, the ambiance of your work, home and not to mention exercising etc. So in that sense, the holistic medical practitioner becomes more like a guide and the individual takes on a active role. For most people, this is too much to do. So they prefer Western Medicine where the mindset is, someone is going to "fix" me while I am busy with my life getting stressed up. The role is passive. Big difference. It is funny that Western Medicine practitioners are called doctors whereas holistic practitioners use the term heal and are called healers. (The root of the word heal is related to whole)
  - philwelch 16y ago
    To be fair, Western medicine has completely eradicated multiple fatal viral epidemics, developed a rather good series of antibiotics to handle bacterial infections of all kinds, kept a lid on flu epidemics year after year, and made vast strides in the treatment of multiple cancers. Now that Western medicine has got most of the low-hanging fruit and is now banging its head on the hard problems, it may appear to fall short in the "what have you done for me lately?" sense. But that's just because we take it for granted that we aren't going to get polio or smallpox.
    - dgordon 16y ago
      I thought that was the parent's point -- Western medicine has done superb work for acute diseases and injuries, but doesn't have solutions yet, and may not even have the right approach, for chronic ones.
      - 16y ago

spuz 16y ago

You can't deny the power of that collective wisdom though. Perhaps a startup in there somewhere? :)

huherto 16y ago
It really seems like doctors could start cooperating more; specially with rare diseases.
- amichail 16y ago
  Do doctors always use computers as part of the diagnosis process? Shouldn't it be a criminal offense not to do this? In fact, if the diagnosis differs from what the computer says, then this should always be reported. Failure to do so should be considered a criminal offense.
  - scott_s 16y ago
    What do you mean by "use computers"?
    - amichail 16y ago
      I'm referring to using an officially mandated automated diagnosis system.
      - scott_s 16y ago
        Does such a thing even exist? That sounds like a very hard problem.
        ars 16y ago
        Actually it does. It's fed with data that says: Condition X is usually caused by Y with Z% probability, etc etc. Then you feed it all the symptoms, sometimes it asks questions, and gives you a list of causes sorted by probability. It works almost exactly like this game http://www.guessthename.com/ http://www.guessthename.com/ Apparently the biggest problem with it is that doctors won't use it. The second problem is feeding data - you basically have to parse every medical paper ever published.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

xenophanes 16y ago

I read the first thread. Then I wanted to know the answer! I hope he keeps posting updates to satisfy my curiosity. I didn't interpret the update which said he had been to a doctor and had another appointment soon as him expecting us to have too large a role.

savemylife 16y ago

edw519, I hesitated for a day before posting this update (and a good couple of weeks before my original post) for exactly that reason. I realize that this is Hacker News, and not a medical web site. So I truly apologize if what I've done is inappropriate. HN is a great place, and I'd never want to abuse it. In the end I rationalized my decision by thinking that if my post isn't actually appropriate, that it simply wouldn't get voted up. It's a community site, and in the end the community chose to vote it up. I think that's worth something, though I certainly do see your point. I'd make one correction to your argument though- I'm trying to crowdsource a diagnosis, not my medical care. There is a big difference.

mike-cardwell 16y ago
I'd suggest that if anyone wants to follow your progress further, they subscribe to your website feed. There's no need to keep posting updates here.
- w1ntermute 16y ago
  I don't agree. That's no different from suggesting that we only need to link to one article on TechCrunch or the NYT site, for example, since if people are interested in reading more of their articles, they'll subscribe to the TechCrunch and/or NYT site feeds. And like edw519 said, the first post was much more interesting than the average HN post, so I say keep 'em coming.
seasoup 16y ago
And you are crowdsourcing it as a last resort, you've seen the medical professionals and they have failed to provide a diagnosis.
qeorge 16y ago
I don't think he meant it was inappropriate to submit, but that he's concerned for your health. It sounds like you've got it under control, but it is really good advice - smart people w/ Google can make good guesses at most questions, but you shouldn't bet your life on it. Its a very interesting case and I've enjoyed following it, so please keep updating us. And best of luck with your continued recovery!