6 ms·

A biopsy is predicated on the idea that you can identify good from bad. You might not be able to identify the origin cell but you would be able to pick out meta

A biopsy is predicated on the idea that you can identify good from bad. You might not be able to identify the origin cell but you would be able to pick out metastasization. You certainly can take pictures. And not to be too reductive: cells are visible in a light microscope. The point is that the scale that cells are at is not really at the quantum level. People have been interacting with individual cells for decades: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTiKFCkPaUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTiKFCkPaUE I also have a degree in physics but in addition I have a degree in computer science. 36 Trillion is not a very large number for modern computers anymore. I am sure even today we could build machines that would filter the cells in your blood by images and do it at 10s of millions per second.

Zenzero 2y ago
Imagine thinking you're teaching a pathologist anything about evaluating neoplastic cells.... Like even as a doctor who's not a pathologist I wouldn't dare because I know just how much I don't know compared to them. A CS grad thinking they can jump in on that is peak tech-centric hubris.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  We get pretty arrogant for sure, but from an outsider point of view at least this looks more like somebody pitching a perpetual motion machine to physicists, rather than typical tech-centric hubris.
- petermcneeley 2y ago
  Appeals to authority tend not to fly in a hacker community which is all about questioning authority and the status quo. It is usually much better to respond with logic and refutation.
  - bowsamic 2y ago
    I think you’ve misjudged the culture here
    - petermcneeley 2y ago
      Well more just the specific audience. A physician is basically the inverse of a hacker.
      - bowsamic 2y ago
        Despite the name it isn’t so much a hacker culture here but rather a general intelligentsia one
      - Zenzero 2y ago
        Yes. There are regimented silos within medicine that allow hacking in ways that attempt to minimize patient harm. Attempting to circumvent them is a good way to land in court.
  - Zenzero 2y ago
    I really can't tell if you're trolling at this point but in the chance you aren't, I'll bite. Appealing to the authority of a pathologist is safe in my book given the subject matter and the education of the counterparty. There is a lower bound of requisite knowledge beneath which it's not worth even trying to entertain your claims about just "find and destroy rogue cells". You can't even begin to respond with logic and refutation if you haven't achieved anything close to the level of expertise required to be certified as a pathologist. Coming in here trying to play the angle of "well just model with supercomputers" isn't the winning ticket. Contrary to stereotypes of computer-illiterate doctors, there are some wicked smart people working in medicine (I've met and befriended many) and I guarantee your genius approach was considered and abandoned decades ago.
    - killjoywashere 2y ago
      Looking through his comments, I think he's young and, as tends to go with youth, frustrated. This comment elsewhere in thread suggests he may be coming around: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40895503 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40895503
      - petermcneeley 2y ago
        I am not that young. If you go back far enough in the comments you will see that I completed my physics degree 15 years ago. I studied quite a bit of biology and I personally know multiple doctors. I am more bored than frustrated.
        locopati 2y ago
        i truly hope you never have to experience cancer treatments for a loved one where the treatments end up not working in the end. it is humbling and eye opening.
    - petermcneeley 2y ago
      Where did I say "just model with supercomputers"? Thats the biology problem it is super hard! I am literally saying that avoiding the hard problem is going to work in the general case. I would argue that radiation therapy is in this vein.
  - jghn 2y ago
    I'm assuming you realize that the cancer community has been inundated by people from other domains for decades, right? If only those cancer researchers could think of this one idea that'd solve everything. And yet, somehow it persists.
  - slowmovintarget 2y ago
    Terence Howard has some platonic solids for you.
glial 2y ago
Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/793/ https://xkcd.com/793/
- ericjmorey 2y ago
  How did I miss this xkcd until now?
exact_string 2y ago
The information you can get from light miscroscope images is quite limited though. On the other hand, maybe it would be enough to filter out every cell that is not identified as a blood cell. This should be an easier task. Probably we could direct only a small part of blood into this filtering machine at a time. Sounds like it would be still more like a machine detecting if there are cancer cells present in the bloodsteam rather than a machine eliminating metastasization. I think the "cure cancer without biology" approach makes somewhat sense (I assume you would still need some biology :) ). Don't many surgeries already fall into this category? Let's say we made an automated colonoscopic machine that scanned the whole intestine and destroyed all abnormal colonic crypts. Now if this machine worked well, you would essentially cure at least those colon cancers that go through some aberrant crypt stage.

Zenzero 2y ago

Imagine thinking you're teaching a pathologist anything about evaluating neoplastic cells.... Like even as a doctor who's not a pathologist I wouldn't dare because I know just how much I don't know compared to them. A CS grad thinking they can jump in on that is peak tech-centric hubris.

bee_rider 2y ago
We get pretty arrogant for sure, but from an outsider point of view at least this looks more like somebody pitching a perpetual motion machine to physicists, rather than typical tech-centric hubris.
petermcneeley 2y ago
Appeals to authority tend not to fly in a hacker community which is all about questioning authority and the status quo. It is usually much better to respond with logic and refutation.
- bowsamic 2y ago
  I think you’ve misjudged the culture here
  - petermcneeley 2y ago
    Well more just the specific audience. A physician is basically the inverse of a hacker.
    - bowsamic 2y ago
      Despite the name it isn’t so much a hacker culture here but rather a general intelligentsia one
    - Zenzero 2y ago
      Yes. There are regimented silos within medicine that allow hacking in ways that attempt to minimize patient harm. Attempting to circumvent them is a good way to land in court.
- Zenzero 2y ago
  I really can't tell if you're trolling at this point but in the chance you aren't, I'll bite. Appealing to the authority of a pathologist is safe in my book given the subject matter and the education of the counterparty. There is a lower bound of requisite knowledge beneath which it's not worth even trying to entertain your claims about just "find and destroy rogue cells". You can't even begin to respond with logic and refutation if you haven't achieved anything close to the level of expertise required to be certified as a pathologist. Coming in here trying to play the angle of "well just model with supercomputers" isn't the winning ticket. Contrary to stereotypes of computer-illiterate doctors, there are some wicked smart people working in medicine (I've met and befriended many) and I guarantee your genius approach was considered and abandoned decades ago.
  - killjoywashere 2y ago
    Looking through his comments, I think he's young and, as tends to go with youth, frustrated. This comment elsewhere in thread suggests he may be coming around: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40895503 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40895503
    - petermcneeley 2y ago
      I am not that young. If you go back far enough in the comments you will see that I completed my physics degree 15 years ago. I studied quite a bit of biology and I personally know multiple doctors. I am more bored than frustrated.
      - locopati 2y ago
        i truly hope you never have to experience cancer treatments for a loved one where the treatments end up not working in the end. it is humbling and eye opening.
  - petermcneeley 2y ago
    Where did I say "just model with supercomputers"? Thats the biology problem it is super hard! I am literally saying that avoiding the hard problem is going to work in the general case. I would argue that radiation therapy is in this vein.
- jghn 2y ago
  I'm assuming you realize that the cancer community has been inundated by people from other domains for decades, right? If only those cancer researchers could think of this one idea that'd solve everything. And yet, somehow it persists.
- slowmovintarget 2y ago
  Terence Howard has some platonic solids for you.

glial 2y ago

Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/793/ https://xkcd.com/793/

ericjmorey 2y ago
How did I miss this xkcd until now?

exact_string 2y ago

The information you can get from light miscroscope images is quite limited though. On the other hand, maybe it would be enough to filter out every cell that is not identified as a blood cell. This should be an easier task. Probably we could direct only a small part of blood into this filtering machine at a time. Sounds like it would be still more like a machine detecting if there are cancer cells present in the bloodsteam rather than a machine eliminating metastasization. I think the "cure cancer without biology" approach makes somewhat sense (I assume you would still need some biology :) ). Don't many surgeries already fall into this category? Let's say we made an automated colonoscopic machine that scanned the whole intestine and destroyed all abnormal colonic crypts. Now if this machine worked well, you would essentially cure at least those colon cancers that go through some aberrant crypt stage.