Slashdot Mirror
New Device to Detect Skin Cancer From A Picture?
JonathanGCohen writes "News.com is reporting on a new machine that can tell you all about your skin's unique features (excessive oil, UV damage, etc.) using an image scan and software to analyze it. Its inventors plan on developing a version that can even detect skin cancer." From the article: "Apart from numbers, the technology, called Clarity Pro, can depict the depth and severity of wrinkles in a 3D chart, show the extent of bacteria-filled pores in a graph, or represent UV damage in purple dots scattered about your face in a white-light image. It can also calculate how long a person can be exposed to the sun, in minutes or hours a day, before incurring more UV damage."
That's absolutely amazing. Very cool. They should also research the dogs that can sniff out cancer. I'm sure that would be a much cheaper (and more fun) solution for patients.
Developers: We can use your help.
Utilizing spooky action at a distance, it would be possible to analyze every particle that comprises a living organism. Comparing the being's current structure (in a particular biological system) with multiple "healthy" models of the various systems, or "baseline" snapshots of the patient's previous states as stored in the global molecular structure databases, diagnoses become trivial. Oh damn! It's only 2006 and I keep forgetting to keep my mouth shut. Never mind.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Compare the test results of George Hamilton against Dick Clark!
[Now, I'm off to lift my le... Um, visit... at another place.]
Company uses dubious technology to demonstrate another company's product is effective. Both companies praise each other. Companies make press releases picked up by magazine. Excitement all round!
-- SIGFPE
I've noticed a trend in medical devices that clinics are marketing now for "peace of mind". There are scans for your heart, lungs, and now your skin. While I find the devices neat, they really don't fix anything. They seem just like another way for clinics to seperate money from you.
http://religiousfreaks.com/UV damage pictures have been around for a long time. I remember watching a short piece on the news at least a decade ago.
Some UV damage examples
Cool - now I can detect which porn stars have cancer :P
As CmdrTaco stated, we are human, errors are bound to happen from time to time. Any author can be reached via their name@slashdot.org for specific questions. However, the most efficient means of communication with a live body who can fix something immediately is daddypants@slashdot.org this will notify whomever is currently watching the site and can be corrected as soon as possible.
We always appreciate assistance in making Slashdot a better place to be, and are all hoping to see much more admin/user participation in the near future. Thanks for the heads up. ~SM
For those of us that are at a high risk for skin cancer, this may be the beginning of something very good.
My father was diagnosed with non-melanoma skin cancer when I was 16 and had to have a fair bit of skin from his legs removed. I went to see a dermatologist shortly afterwards who told me, and I quote, "You'll get skin cancer, it's just a matter of when." When you're 16, this is a pretty scary thing to hear from a doctor, but it's the best thing she could have done. Because of her warning, I check myself regularly (and have others check where I can't from time to time). I go see a dermatologist once a year for a checkup.
At the age of 32, I noticed a mole that wasn't quite right. Turned out to be squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). I was living on the beach in Southern Mexico at the time which probably isn't the best place for a person of my skin type, but I'm generally pretty careful about sun exposure. Anyway, the doctor told me he had never had anyone catch one so early. Had it not been for the doctor warning me 16 years earlier, I may have waited long enough that a simple excision wouldn't have been possible.
I've known two people who have had melanoma. One died before his 20s and the other just barely caught it in time but has huge scars on his back from where it was removed. Early detection is crucial for those of us at risk. Melanoma is one of the most virulant and fatal forms of cancer. Caught early, it's very treatable, but the difference between early and too late can sometimes be a matter of just weeks.
If this technology can become widespread and people at risk are given access to it, I have little question that it could save a lot of lives.
Another reason to outlaw collecting biometrics...
How cool: it can analyze a photo of you... and then your medical insurance provider can deny you medical insurance or charge you a higher premium due to your being in a higher "risk group".
Just like they can look at whether you have an attached or detached ear lobe, and know whether or not you have a family history of coronary artery disease, or look at your thumb print, and know whether or not you have one of the three identified high risk genes for liver cancer, or see that you're black, and so have a higher risk of sicle cell.
Unfortunately, a given gene can express in more than one way, including ways which are visible to biometric devices, or even the naked eye of a trained person. This is just another reason why biometric information should not be allowed to be collected or disclosed except under very specific conditions (e.g. HIPPA rules keep your doctor's office from selling information to drug companies or, worse, insurance companies).
-- Terry
Or, they could use it to find out you're in spectacular health and offer you a lower premium. Everyone pays an inflated rate and you can present your privately-obtained biometrics to bargain for a better rate.
I think everyone should have decent healthcare, bad genetics or not, but why ignore that some people spent every summer baking on the beach or a portion of the population is at higher risk for heart disease because they eat tons of fast food and smoke?
It's not going to be the popular opinion around here, but why should the insurance companies get shafted on covering your self-inflicted damage?
A picture of Michael Jackson revealed something truly shocking. He is in fact black. Apparently the rumors were true.
Imaging-based skin diagnostics is an obvious and useful thing to do, but a lot of research and clinical studies still need to be done in order to develop, test, and validate it. If this company's patents stand, it will ensure that none of that is going to happen, because they themselves are not equipped to handle it or finance it even under the rosiest of forecasts, and nobody else has any reason to work on it if they can't use it afterwards.
Insurance already discriminates. Those under age 25 are in a higher risk group on the road, they pay a premium. Males are even higher risk, they pay a premium. Too many years working in IT with a bad posture has taken it's toll on my back requiring regular chiro to make life enjoyable, so I have to have a spinal exclusion on my income protection policy. Thankfully I'm relatively young and qualified, with a white collar job so that helps reduce my premiums.
The whole industry works by pooling the funds of many in the hope that you never actually have to use it, but when you do it is subsidised by others. It's essentially a lottery, if you never need your insurance you are ultimately out of pocket and handed over your money for nothing. If you do need it though, you "win" by reducing how much it costs you.
Those who are more likely to take benefit from the fund have always been expected to pay more.
Glenn
The Smrt way to trade CFDs on the ASX