3 ms·
Agree on sci-fi, but medical imaging has really been born in the last 30 years and may prove to be a game-changer in diagnosis and localized treatments over th
by dhimes 14y ago
Agree on sci-fi, but medical imaging has really been born in the last 30 years and may prove to be a game-changer in diagnosis and localized treatments over the next 70. Also, the invention of PCR techniques allow much better testing and drug development. So I think we'll look back 70 years from now and make the same claim about medicine.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Retric 14y agoMRI's is another 'old' tech, and PCR is barely inside that 30 year window as it was developed in 1983. In 1952, Herman Carr produced a one-dimensional MRI image as reported in his Harvard PhD thesis. Meanwhile, Paul Lauterbur expanded on Carr's technique and developed a way to generate the first MRI images, in 2D and 3D, using gradients. In 1973, Lauterbur published the first nuclear magnetic resonance image.[25][26] and the first cross-sectional image of a living mouse was published in January 1974. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging Granted, improve things enough and you end up with qualitative differences. AKA wind power is near parity with coal which is a game changer.
- dhimes 14y agoI don't disagree that the foundations of this technology were laid earlier than 30 years ago (NMR->MRI); there was, of course, even other medical imaging long before that (x-rays, PET, etc). I still think that in 70 years we're going to be able to look at this 30 year span and say it was 'game-changing.' And 100 years from today "we'll" (you maybe- I'd be 150 years old!) look at the years 2010-2040 at "game changing." Look at 1800-1830 from the point of view of 1900: steam engines. Anyway, it's fun to think about.