2 ms·

Sigh. The approach described in this post is an attempt to find a method of delivering better health outcomes than current mainstream health systems (in additi

Sigh. The approach described in this post is an attempt to find a method of delivering better health outcomes than current mainstream health systems (in addition to being one man's attempt to save his own life using whatever means available). Say all you want about how superior the conventional health system is: people keep dying of cancer, at increasing rates in come cases. This open-source approach may or may not yield better outcomes. Either way, won't it be interesting to see? Can't we wait to see some results before condemning it simply because acupuncture was allowed?

DanBC 14y ago
> Say all you want about how superior the conventional health system is: people keep dying of cancer, at increasing rates in come cases. I haven't said the conventional system is better. I've used to flaws of the existing conventional system to point out the flaws of the proposed system. > This open-source approach may or may not yield better outcomes. How will we know? Seriously, how can we tell? There's no rigour to this. It's just idle self-indulgent noodling. That's fine, it's his life and body and he can do what he likes with it, but don't pretend it's useful when there's no possible way of it actually being any use. > Either way, won't it be interesting to see? I doubt it. But I'm happy to be wrong. Please, what could be some interesting things to come from this? > Can't we wait to see some results before condemning it simply because acupuncture was allowed? Again, that's not why I'm condemning it.
- tomhoward 14y ago
  There's no rigour to this. It's just idle self-indulgent noodling. Seriously man. It's a lot of people and enough doctors working together to achieve something. Things like: - He is cured of cancer - Other people are cured of cancer - New things are learned about how to treat cancer more effectively ... and probably other things that can't be predicted, but which could possibly turn out to be far more valuable. That's the point to remember about innovation - which I consider this to be; you can't predict where things may lead, and often what you discover is different to what you expected. But to me that's why this is interesting; I've long thought that there could be place for the processes we see in open-source projects (as well as startup companies) in medicine.
  - illuminate 14y ago
    "It's a lot of people and enough doctors working together to achieve something. Things like: - He is cured of cancer" And without the proper rigor, this can not be possible to determine. That he has no cancer can more easily be determined, but the whys and hows may have nothing to do with his process.

DanBC 14y ago

> Say all you want about how superior the conventional health system is: people keep dying of cancer, at increasing rates in come cases. I haven't said the conventional system is better. I've used to flaws of the existing conventional system to point out the flaws of the proposed system. > This open-source approach may or may not yield better outcomes. How will we know? Seriously, how can we tell? There's no rigour to this. It's just idle self-indulgent noodling. That's fine, it's his life and body and he can do what he likes with it, but don't pretend it's useful when there's no possible way of it actually being any use. > Either way, won't it be interesting to see? I doubt it. But I'm happy to be wrong. Please, what could be some interesting things to come from this? > Can't we wait to see some results before condemning it simply because acupuncture was allowed? Again, that's not why I'm condemning it.

tomhoward 14y ago
There's no rigour to this. It's just idle self-indulgent noodling. Seriously man. It's a lot of people and enough doctors working together to achieve something. Things like: - He is cured of cancer - Other people are cured of cancer - New things are learned about how to treat cancer more effectively ... and probably other things that can't be predicted, but which could possibly turn out to be far more valuable. That's the point to remember about innovation - which I consider this to be; you can't predict where things may lead, and often what you discover is different to what you expected. But to me that's why this is interesting; I've long thought that there could be place for the processes we see in open-source projects (as well as startup companies) in medicine.
- illuminate 14y ago
  "It's a lot of people and enough doctors working together to achieve something. Things like: - He is cured of cancer" And without the proper rigor, this can not be possible to determine. That he has no cancer can more easily be determined, but the whys and hows may have nothing to do with his process.