h a l f b a k e r y
Loading tagline ....
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
During 2007 or 2008 I read that there was software that
could process MRIs to know which part of a persons body
was looking at. I suggest that technique treated as a
database creates the opportunity to compare say the size
of the livers of 10,000 people from existing datafiles,
if liver size correlates with reduced susceptibility to
cancer. a plausible hypothesis as the liver makes
that process xenobiotics, some of which are regulated as
As such this big database is a place to find genetic
immunity or resistivity to diseases. It is possible that
people with big pancreases are less likely to be
functionally diabetic as they might make more enzymes.
Thus people with a family history of diabetes could IVF
other technique to choose an embryo likely to be
to any genetic susceptibilities to disease.
so really its just a database applied to this MRI system
finder technology I read about. Although as a database
could also be explored to find numerically suggestive
to create valid hypothesis. like big liver goes with less
cancer is kind of obvious, the database might find things
like lung branching fractal number suggests immunity to
asthma or something where the numbers lead part of the
research. Or possibly complete length of arteries (divided
size predicts cardiovascular well being, yet can be linked
to a genetics of arterial length.
<funny> its mass throughput non brain phrenology at
p<.001! </funny> It could also work. It also makes
genetic medicine more attractive. as people could
physically reduce cancer, heart disease, diabetes all with
one database. also this voluntary medical technology
benefits more than just one treated person, it benefit all
||What if it turns out that the comparative size of individual
organs have no correlation whatsoever to disease
susceptibility? If you must assume things, try to do it near
the end of an idea, rather than predicating the entire idea
on a single unsupported assumption.
||well the thing is that the system searches to find
such correlations at P<.01 or better. Then humans
can decide if they have plausability or not. The
idea is the DB software
||Also it works pretty well, it is published that
women get drunker from the same amount of
alcohol mg/kg because of bodyfat percentage. If
people didn't previously know that this software
would detect it.
||Do people with larger livers metabolize
xenobiotics more rapidly, its likely yet I do not
know. It is published that the very elderly make
less p450 enzymes which strongly affects the
length of time drugs reside at their systems, thus
there is some strong preexisting data supporting
that this db could actually figure out big livers
||Is there a database of all MRI's ? obvious beneficial analysis/mining diagnostic possibilities.
||// Is there a database of all MRI's ? //
||Theoretically. With patients' consent, imaging and other
information can be made available anywhere via various
med records networks. Collating the data would be a legal
and logistical nightmare.
||It's not implausible, and I'll defer to those who know better
than I, but I think this idea is sketchy.