853 réponses à ce sujet

[goishen]

Yes? So I have 99% of the diagnosis by talking to the patient followed by physical examination. So you tell me how much more info will the blood sample give me? And if you would go the other way around how much pointless waste of blood sampling are you prepared to pay for? I mean there are companies out there that gladly take your money for RNA-sampling that will give just about as much useful information as your average Scientology scam.

 

 

You haven't been to a doctor, have you?  That's one of the first things that he does, take blood.

 

 

There is no such thing as blood sample A will tell you if you have disease x, y, a or not.

 

Blood sampling is for confirmation.

 

Implying that blood sampling could tell you if you have a disease, that it's all in the blood.  The diagnosis part was simply a guess.

 

Or am I incorrect?  Which one of these statements isn't true?

[correctamundo]

You haven't been to a doctor, have you?  That's one of the first things that he does, take blood.

 

Implying that blood sampling could tell you if you have a disease, that it's all in the blood.  The diagnosis part was simply a guess.

 

Or am I incorrect?  Which one of these statements isn't true?

 

Somehow I get the feeling we are not speaking the same language here. The blood sample confirms what we already know.

[goishen]

Right, but if I were to post this picture...

 

https://upload.wikim...ickle_cells.jpg

 

 

What do you think that most doctors would agree to as the diagnosis?

 

EDIT :  Also, please drop the snark and the shortness with me, as I'm hitting you with kiddy gloves right now.  I'm not dragging you down to the street.

[Killroy]

Somehow I get the feeling we are not speaking the same language here. The blood sample confirms what we already know.

Then why is "broad spectrum blood analysis" a thing?

[Fade9wayz]

That mandate is actually part of driving up costs, at least here in the US. Anyway, don't they send some of that electronically? Email isn't "sticking 'em up on the internet."

All the lab results I have ever received were either through snail mail, or, more often, directly from my doctor during appointments, since they usually are the ones who get the results first. That said, when two doctors need to share data about a mutual patient, I'm sure some of them do so through e-mails and such. This is a subject of debate here. Hospitals and doctors know they need to take the digital step, but the truth is there still isn't any real safe way to store and share such datas yet. I, for one, do not wish to have my medical informations stored in one of google's super servers on american soil.
 

Look, I'm not saying there can't be provisions there for it to not be accessed.  There can be.  Say a social security number, driver's license number, and a photo ID check.   But it is a whole lot more secure than Joe the programmer down the street who programs medical stuff and is easily worked around.

Banks have security measures to ensure that, yet some were still hacked. The hackers threatened to publish the customers datas if they didn't get the ransom they asked for. Other companies have seen their servers locked until payment just because one of their employees opened the wrong e-mail. Many of the doctors I know are hopeless when it comes to computer security, this is not an exaggeration. Associations of medical doctors are very aware somethings needs to be done, but as it is a very political matter, it will have to come from the state. At least in my country.
Meanwhile, medecine is still progressing.

[correctamundo]

Then why is "broad spectrum blood analysis" a thing?

 

Beats me. People tend to put too much credence in blood samples.

[correctamundo]

Right, but if I were to post this picture...

 

https://upload.wikim...ickle_cells.jpg

 

 

What do you think that most doctors would agree to as the diagnosis?

 

EDIT :  Also, please drop the snark and the shortness with me, as I'm hitting you with kiddy gloves right now.  I'm not dragging you down to the street.

 

That picture is pointless without the symtoms and signs. Most people with the sickle cell trait don't suffer from it. But if you get a sickle crisis the consequences can be extremely severe. We have very few people here that run the risk of severe sickle crisis.

[Killroy]

Beats me. People tend to put too much credence in blood samples.

And by "people" you mean doctors?

[goishen]

Beats me. People tend to put too much credence in blood samples.

 

 

I'll completely agree with this.  But the lack of the "internet of everything" denies those doctors from seeing a sample being taken from a patient six months ago.  If you have to and see a doctor, a specialist, and get a second opinion on what the specialist finds, you had better get your arm ready and be prepared to wait about 6-8 weeks for appointments and blood tests to come back.  And pray that whatever you have doesn't kill you.

[In Exile]

I'll completely agree with this.  But the lack of the "internet of everything" denies those doctors from seeing a sample being taken from a patient six months ago.  If you have to and see a doctor, a specialist, and get a second opinion on what the specialist finds, you had better get your arm ready and be prepared to wait about 6-8 weeks for appointments and blood tests to come back.

 

There are lots of regulatory reasons we do that, and they are good reasons. The system needs to be made more efficient, but the solution isn't the one you're seeing - anyway, that's not really a gameplay point?

[correctamundo]

And by "people" you mean doctors?

 

No, I mean people. Doctors use different sources of information to in order to make sound judgements but blood samples just aren't a sound basis for it. Anamnesis - i.e. patient history, the patients symtoms and the signs the patient is presenting are the basis and should give the diagnosis 99 times out of 100 (roughly).

[ElitePinecone]

Cool discussion about Mass Effect Andromeda, everybody 

[correctamundo]

I'll completely agree with this.  But the lack of the "internet of everything" denies those doctors from seeing a sample being taken from a patient six months ago.  If you have to and see a doctor, a specialist, and get a second opinion on what the specialist finds, you had better get your arm ready and be prepared to wait about 6-8 weeks for appointments and blood tests to come back.  And pray that whatever you have doesn't kill you.

 

Well I agree that if your country don't have a system where the medical professionals cannot have your medical history easily accesible over some kind internet solution they should get it. We have.

 

But, yes we are derailing the thread so I will just leave that there.

[Killroy]

No, I mean people. Doctors use different sources of information to in order to make sound judgements but blood samples just aren't a sound basis for it. Anamnesis - i.e. patient history, the patients symtoms and the signs the patient is presenting are the basis and should give the diagnosis 99 times out of 100 (roughly).

You realize that just saying something doesn't make it true, right?

[goishen]

Well I agree that if your country don't have a system where the medical professionals cannot have your medical history easily accesible over some kind internet solution they should get it. We have.

 

But, yes we are derailing the thread so I will just leave that there.

 

 

And we don't.  We have one of the most backwards medical systems in the US.  All primarily because of the AMA.  We still have boomers on that board who don't even know how to use a Blackberry.

 

EDIT :  Also, he's in a different country Killroy.  Doctors there prolly don't rely so much on blood samples as they do here in the US. 

[Killroy]

EDIT : Also, he's in a different country Killroy. Doctors there prolly don't rely so much on blood samples as they do here in the US.

They don't take blood donations in his country? Blood testing is pretty advanced and accurate, otherwise people would still be getting AIDS and such from blood transfusions.

[goishen]

They don't take blood donations in his country? Blood testing is pretty advanced and accurate, otherwise people would still be getting AIDS and such from blood transfusions.

 

 

I'm just stating that they might not rely on it as much.  I have no idea of what country he/she's from, but I'm sure that they take needed precautions and take blood when they need to.  It's not like here where you walk in for the flu and it's an automatic "roll up your sleeve".

[Killroy]

I'm just stating that they might not rely on it as much. I have no idea of what country he/she's from, but I'm sure that they take needed precautions and take blood when they need to. It's not like here where you walk in for the flu and it's an automatic "roll up your sleeve".

Hundreds of illnesses present with flu-like symptoms. Why should the doctor take a patient's self-diagnosis as fact?

[78stonewobble]

Hundreds of illnesses present with flu-like symptoms. Why should the doctor take a patient's self-diagnosis as fact?

 

And presumably in a large percentage of cases it actually is a cold or flu.

[Addictress]

I probably shouldn't answer this while semi-drunk, but oh well... Saying that all areas of technology don't progress at the same rate (which is somewhat debatable) is different than asserting that huge domains of science such as medecine or material sciences have not progressed. This is flat out wrong. Those faster and better ways to kill each other use new materials. There are researches in better bullet-proof materials. My brother's military equipment is way lighter than my father's was, again thanks to the introduction of new materials, and I live in a country where military expenses have constantly decreased, while pharmacology is one of our most powerful industry.

HIV is still there, sure, but when it broke out, more than 20 years ago, it was a sure death sentence. Nowadays, there are treatments that allow infected people to keep on living. It's not ideal, but they keep on researching to finally cure it, which is complicated with the fact it has mutated. Last year in the city I live in, there were testing of a HIV vaccine on human beings. Now young women can benefit from vaccine against cancer of the uterus. It's available to all young women in my country. Again, the argument that because medecine hasn't yet cured everything, it means it hasn't progressed isn't a valid argument. At all. It's like saying informatic hasn't found a way to allow me to telepathically communicate with other people, therefore it hasn't progressed. It's silly.

I have never said technology was uniform across all industries and scientific areas. How did you ever come up with that? What I have said is that progress in one scientific area enables another to progress as well, which is quite evident.

I should go sleep

Did I ever ****ing say medicine has not progressed?

My argument was that techs don't progress all at the same rate. And medicine is behind, backwards. Of course it's progressed, but compared to other areas?

It makes me angry when people completely twist words.

[Addictress]

So as I was saying. Simply.

Space magic. To reduce the space magic in Andromeda.

[Addictress]

In the original trilogy, they had magnetic boots. You say, "why don't they use eezo?" But the magboots grounded me. It's familiar.

They need a few familiar anchors like that sprinkled about.

[Valhallix]

Aslong as this game is nothing like Dragon Age Inquisition i'm good. The few maps that were shown have me a little concerned. They look just like the open levels in Inquisition that had nothing in them and that's just not Mass Effect. Unfortunately I think this game is gonna get Inquisitionized.

[Laughing_Man]

Unfortunately I think this game is gonna get Inquisitionized.

 

I doubt it, Inquisition was a glorified single player MMO, it felt like that and played like that.

The PC moved like a character in an MMO, the combat didn't have enough weight, the enemies were dangerous only because of their ludicrous HP bars, etc.

 

Unless they ignore all established gameplay from previous Mass Effect, the system is simply different, so concerns and failings will

probably be different as well.

 

Besides, it's not the open world in itself that was the problem with Inquisition, it's more the tedious meaningless side quests

and the very small number of interesting things that populated the world.

 

Exploration can be made fun if it's not just a long monotonous chore but rather interrupted by meaningful and interesting things.

 

It can be interesting data and alien relics, an ambush by a thresher maw, seeing some really weird wildlife, meeting some primitive stone-age natives that look at you like gods, listening in the Mako to some interesting and setting-appropriate radio talk show,

and many more things that can add to immersion and break monotony.

 

It's not that you can't make it work, the only question is whether the guys in charge care enough and are competent enough,

and whether EA is going to let the game actually complete its development.

[Addictress]

I think it is best for you to stay off from commenting on medical science and progress because you are so way off it is embarrassing to read.

nvm sorry. *chops some trees*