6 ms·

> they spend $1000s of dollars testing for The subtext you're missing here is that GPT with access to the entire corpus of medical data could undermine the ent

> they spend $1000s of dollars testing for The subtext you're missing here is that GPT with access to the entire corpus of medical data could undermine the entire money printing machine (referring to US healthcare here). What test would cost thousands of dollars if the only human cost to run it is drawing some blood and putting it in a machine?

Retric 3y ago
Abstractions like that are meaningless. Why is the large hadron collider so expensive it’s just throwing stuff at each other and looking at what happens? Random teens could do that… The actual process of doing blood work is often surprisingly complicated.
- hef19898 3y ago
  I see a resurected Theranos on the horizon. This time powered by by ChatGPT. What could go wrong?
  - alexb_ 3y ago
    Funny enough, I'm actually developing an AI-powered biomedical technological breakthrough that's about to disrupt the medical industry. It uses wearables to enable a blockchain-enabled data management system that also functions as a cloud based SaaS provider, linking with ChatGPT and NFTs to create value for those who are underprivileged, all with only 1 drop of blood. If you want to further this please give me a few billion dollars and I promise something might come :)
    - snovv_crash 3y ago
      I'm only interested if the blood is delivered by drones.
    - Firmwarrior 3y ago
      Sounds like it's not very eco friendly..
  - chaxor 3y ago
    Theranos wasn't a bad idea, and is actually possible. It is extremely unfortunate that it was so badly mismanaged.
    - hef19898 3y ago
      Theranos was a fraud, selling a service based on technology that simply doesn't exist.
      - chaxor 3y ago
        Of course... that's absolutely true, and I didn't say otherwise. However, the basic idea actually is possible, but only for a very select few of the tests they proposed (which they still unfortunately didn't really get right of course). My point is that, unfortunately, the tests that are possible to do now won't get a company to form out of it - simply because they ruined the scene for everyone. Anyone trying to get a company going in this area and raising money for it will be met with a complete block of resistance because of the precedent set, even if the technology is actually completely reliable.
    - Retric 3y ago
      No, the variability between individual drops of blood are too high for the precision needed to do most of the tests they were proposing even before you look at the tiny fraction of a drop you would be working with to preform multiple tests. Worse you get excessive contamination between blood and other substances from a finger prick. So, no very quickly people were calling Theranos either incompetent or fraudulent.
      - chaxor 3y ago
        "the tests they were proposing" - yeah, I would agree that some (probably most towards the end) of the tests they were trying to make part of the product were a big part of why they were so fraudulent. I agree that it was a bad company. My point is that the general idea was not a bad idea, and because it was so badly mismanaged (trying to add too many products and run before walking, using other companies' tech illegally, etc, etc) we now are worse off because few people want to attempt doing the possible ideas in this space (because people think none of it is possible - which is simply not true). The company that could reliably be made is far less 'attractive' of course, but it would still be quite beneficial.
  - 77pt77 3y ago
    Chatgpt can't get pregnant when things go wrong in order to soften the blow.
- chaxor 3y ago
  The last test someone I know had done cost $600 at the physician. We looked it up and it cost a little less to *buy the FDA approved equipment for your house, and run the test every day for an entire month*. It's absolutely heinously broken - almost completely due to insurance companies. Insurance should be made illegal and obsolete due to the insane hindrance it is to progress in humanity.
  - Retric 3y ago
    There’s often many tests for the same things with various levels of accuracy and cost. You really didn’t provide enough information for a more detailed analysis, but for example there’s a reason hospitals don’t just use the cheap COVID tests and call it good.
    - chaxor 3y ago
      It wasn't a viral test, and I didn't lay out details here because I don't want to put all my health information on display exactly, but I have several graduate degrees in both engineering and in biology related fields, so I'm quite certain that my analysis of the equipment and technical parameters is correct. It's the financial aspect of healthcare that is horribly wrong, not the science (only let down there is an academic one, as it's awfully basic and antiquated technology that makes it to the clinic, but that's not a bug - it's a feature for safety). There is a reason I mentioned FDA approved equipment though - it is substantially more expensive to have that label (despite being able to purchase items that claim similar parameters, those need to be exhaustively tested). Despite this, the statement that purchasing some types of equipment for your home and using it regularly, is still often far cheaper than going to the physicians office and getting a test once. I suppose I am a bit out of the typical demographic though, as I would rather use my own TEM made in my garage to do quick analyses of lab materials than take it to my colleagues across the hall and sign up for a slot on their more resolute EM. Being able to work independently and have your own data is a nice thing sometimes.
Firmwarrior 3y ago
I hate doctors and pharmaceutical companies as much as anyone, but those tests are serious business. There's a lot of very hard science and engineering involved in them When they're cheap outside the USA, it often just means the companies aren't attempting to recoup any r&d costs outside the US
- hkt 3y ago
  Surely it isn't pharmaceuticals companies doing blood tests in the US? In the UK people's bloods get done in hospital labs (phlebotomy doesn't always occur in hospital though)
  - throwaway049 3y ago
    Some of that lab work is contracted out of the NHS, but your NHS doctor is largely steered by clinical guidelines rather than profit or ass-covering. Eg https://www.synnovis.co.uk/about-synnovis https://www.synnovis.co.uk/about-synnovis
  - sammax 3y ago
    The tests are done using proprietary hard- and software, though it is generally made by biotech and not pharmaceutical companies.

Retric 3y ago

Abstractions like that are meaningless. Why is the large hadron collider so expensive it’s just throwing stuff at each other and looking at what happens? Random teens could do that… The actual process of doing blood work is often surprisingly complicated.

hef19898 3y ago
I see a resurected Theranos on the horizon. This time powered by by ChatGPT. What could go wrong?
- alexb_ 3y ago
  Funny enough, I'm actually developing an AI-powered biomedical technological breakthrough that's about to disrupt the medical industry. It uses wearables to enable a blockchain-enabled data management system that also functions as a cloud based SaaS provider, linking with ChatGPT and NFTs to create value for those who are underprivileged, all with only 1 drop of blood. If you want to further this please give me a few billion dollars and I promise something might come :)
  - snovv_crash 3y ago
    I'm only interested if the blood is delivered by drones.
  - Firmwarrior 3y ago
    Sounds like it's not very eco friendly..
- chaxor 3y ago
  Theranos wasn't a bad idea, and is actually possible. It is extremely unfortunate that it was so badly mismanaged.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    Theranos was a fraud, selling a service based on technology that simply doesn't exist.
    - chaxor 3y ago
      Of course... that's absolutely true, and I didn't say otherwise. However, the basic idea actually is possible, but only for a very select few of the tests they proposed (which they still unfortunately didn't really get right of course). My point is that, unfortunately, the tests that are possible to do now won't get a company to form out of it - simply because they ruined the scene for everyone. Anyone trying to get a company going in this area and raising money for it will be met with a complete block of resistance because of the precedent set, even if the technology is actually completely reliable.
  - Retric 3y ago
    No, the variability between individual drops of blood are too high for the precision needed to do most of the tests they were proposing even before you look at the tiny fraction of a drop you would be working with to preform multiple tests. Worse you get excessive contamination between blood and other substances from a finger prick. So, no very quickly people were calling Theranos either incompetent or fraudulent.
    - chaxor 3y ago
      "the tests they were proposing" - yeah, I would agree that some (probably most towards the end) of the tests they were trying to make part of the product were a big part of why they were so fraudulent. I agree that it was a bad company. My point is that the general idea was not a bad idea, and because it was so badly mismanaged (trying to add too many products and run before walking, using other companies' tech illegally, etc, etc) we now are worse off because few people want to attempt doing the possible ideas in this space (because people think none of it is possible - which is simply not true). The company that could reliably be made is far less 'attractive' of course, but it would still be quite beneficial.
- 77pt77 3y ago
  Chatgpt can't get pregnant when things go wrong in order to soften the blow.
chaxor 3y ago
The last test someone I know had done cost $600 at the physician. We looked it up and it cost a little less to *buy the FDA approved equipment for your house, and run the test every day for an entire month*. It's absolutely heinously broken - almost completely due to insurance companies. Insurance should be made illegal and obsolete due to the insane hindrance it is to progress in humanity.
- Retric 3y ago
  There’s often many tests for the same things with various levels of accuracy and cost. You really didn’t provide enough information for a more detailed analysis, but for example there’s a reason hospitals don’t just use the cheap COVID tests and call it good.
  - chaxor 3y ago
    It wasn't a viral test, and I didn't lay out details here because I don't want to put all my health information on display exactly, but I have several graduate degrees in both engineering and in biology related fields, so I'm quite certain that my analysis of the equipment and technical parameters is correct. It's the financial aspect of healthcare that is horribly wrong, not the science (only let down there is an academic one, as it's awfully basic and antiquated technology that makes it to the clinic, but that's not a bug - it's a feature for safety). There is a reason I mentioned FDA approved equipment though - it is substantially more expensive to have that label (despite being able to purchase items that claim similar parameters, those need to be exhaustively tested). Despite this, the statement that purchasing some types of equipment for your home and using it regularly, is still often far cheaper than going to the physicians office and getting a test once. I suppose I am a bit out of the typical demographic though, as I would rather use my own TEM made in my garage to do quick analyses of lab materials than take it to my colleagues across the hall and sign up for a slot on their more resolute EM. Being able to work independently and have your own data is a nice thing sometimes.

Firmwarrior 3y ago

I hate doctors and pharmaceutical companies as much as anyone, but those tests are serious business. There's a lot of very hard science and engineering involved in them When they're cheap outside the USA, it often just means the companies aren't attempting to recoup any r&d costs outside the US

hkt 3y ago
Surely it isn't pharmaceuticals companies doing blood tests in the US? In the UK people's bloods get done in hospital labs (phlebotomy doesn't always occur in hospital though)
- throwaway049 3y ago
  Some of that lab work is contracted out of the NHS, but your NHS doctor is largely steered by clinical guidelines rather than profit or ass-covering. Eg https://www.synnovis.co.uk/about-synnovis https://www.synnovis.co.uk/about-synnovis
- sammax 3y ago
  The tests are done using proprietary hard- and software, though it is generally made by biotech and not pharmaceutical companies.