Jump to content

In other news...


tkdguy

Recommended Posts

It's a new technology, and if it can be done for 25 bucks a test, it's about 5-10% of the price of current tests that do the same thing, so that's pretty cool.

 

How useful would it be? For high risk patients (like transplant patients) we already do this type of test, but that's not for diagnosis. It's for planning future treatment. The drawback of this new test (like the old tests) is that it relies on antibodies. Normally, it takes 2-3 weeks for your body to generate a measureable antibody response. So the test will tell you what you've had, but not necessarily what you have right now.

 

That could still be useful - especially as we collect more information on how individuals respond to infection and long term risks of infection - but probably won't have an immediate effect on medical practice.

 

Cheers, Mark

Given the claims that inflammation may be involved in many of our disease processes, I wonder if this might aid in tracking causes?   Probably not enough info, but even so...

 

I Also wonder about systemic infections that people might not even realize they have... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the claims that inflammation may be involved in many of our disease processes, I wonder if this might aid in tracking causes?   Probably not enough info, but even so...

 

I Also wonder about systemic infections that people might not even realize they have... 

 

Oh, I'm sure it'll prove to be useful. As you note, we are finding more and more diseases (allergy, cancer, heart disease, asthma, etc) can have an infectious cause, or at least trigger) so more information will help us plan for better health. But that's more long-term research: it's not likely to have any impact on how people interact with their doctors in the immediate future.

 

It's kind of like the hoopla around personal gene sequencing. Companies were promising "better control of your health" and similar scams if you paid to have your genome sequenced, but without far more information, your genetic sequence usually tells you little or nothing about your health or prospects. One day, that probably won't be true, but we're not there yet: we simply don't know enough to put most of that information in context.

 

So, in both cases, big steps forward in the accessibility of a useful technology, but some way away from practical applications. Even though we're not there yet, we're close enough to be able to see how this will likely play out, in .... let's say 10-15 years. You can get a genome sequence (that's your baseline), an infectious disease/vaccination profile (that's your immune history) and a sequencing of a sample from your bowel and mouth/sinuses (that's a glimpse of your current microflora) and from that collection of information plus a checkup and a diet/exercise checklist generate a "health profile" (what your risks are) and a "druggable profile" (how you will likely respond to different classes of medication).

 

We're actually kind of doing much of this, right now, in a baby-steps sort of way, but at the moment there's no way to combine all that information into a coherent whole. It's like all the groups working on this are each writing one page of a single novel - but without page numbers and in different languages/editions/size formats. It's going to take a while to synthesise it correctly so that we can read the novel.

 

cheers, Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read once about a Georgia bar without a sign. The regulars called it the "No Name Beerjoint" and the owner wouldn't tell what the official name was. That added to the 'ambiance" and "mystique."  The reason I mention this here is that the joint had a raccoon for a regular. About the same time every night, it would come in through an open window (or scratch at the door until let in). The patrons would put a little beer in ash trays and let him drink. About half drunk, that was one mean coon!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of the men using Ashley Madison, I'd feel sorry for maybe %2 of them.

As for the company itself, if they really promised to scrub records, we could be seeing lots of lawsuits its way. Which I wouldn't feel sympathy for it at all

 

Also, the company has been given a choice. The Impact Team has told Avid Life Media that if they pull the plug on AshleyMadison, the user account information won't be released.  Basically AshleyMadison is toast anyway at this point so it is unclear why they aren't giving in to the hackers' demands and saving their users a lot of grief.  I can only suspect that when it comes down to it the people of AshleyMadison feel is little sympathy for the predicament of their cheating clientele as we do.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the company has been given a choice. The Impact Team has told Avid Life Media that if they pull the plug on AshleyMadison, the user account information won't be released.  Basically AshleyMadison is toast anyway at this point so it is unclear why they aren't giving in to the hackers' demands and saving their users a lot of grief.  I can only suspect that when it comes down to it the people of AshleyMadison feel is little sympathy for the predicament of their cheating clientele as we do.  

 

Given that AM would charge users $20 to delete their accounts, and then not delete them, your last sentence is probably correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know...?

 

 

According to the hackers, although the “full delete” feature that Ashley Madison advertises promises “removal of site usage history and personally identifiable information from the site,” users’ purchase details — including real name and address — aren’t actually scrubbed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...