4 ms·
If you need 12k$ for a single tumor diagnosis, then we should consider MRI imaging. Those cost significantly less than that. And as of right now, the positive e
by HeadsUpHigh 6y ago
If you need 12k$ for a single tumor diagnosis, then we should consider MRI imaging. Those cost significantly less than that. And as of right now, the positive effects of chemotherapy on such early cancers would be debatable. Still a useful development though.
- 488643689 6y agoWorth noting an MRT is of low value for prevention. Small lesions would be invisible and you could very well progress from nothing visible to seriously sick in 6 month. We really need some marker for before we get unhindered growth. Even if we had 100% precise AI assisted image analysis, once a year fullbody MRI... the MRI resolution would still not catch the "before things escalate quickly" pre stage of cancer. With imagery catching _most cancers early is inherently a thing of mostly luck.
- patall 6y agoYou misunderstand. 12k$ (or some number in that ballpark) would be per postive test for testing everyone. Your 12k$ for MRI would check a single person. That's something totally different. The point is that treating a cancer patient easily costs tens or of hundreds of thousands plus dire consequences for the patient themselves. So there is a lot of room for improvement if the diagnosis is made that much earlier.