Slashdot Mirror
NIST Working On "Deathalyzer"
coondoggie writes to mention that a new optical technique for sensing small amounts of molecules in a person's breath has been developed by a researcher for the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The goal is to create a fast, low-cost method for detecting disease. "In this approach, NIST researchers analyze human breath with 'frequency combs,' which are generated by a laser specially designed to produce a series of very short, equally spaced pulses of light. Each pulse may be only a few million billionths of a second long. The laser generates light as a series of very narrow frequency peaks equally spaced, like the teeth of a comb, across a broad spectrum."
... the machine keeps declaring that everyone has "Stupidity"...
I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
. . . this morning - I think he's gonna die real soon.
What?
I can see how this could affect premiums, let alone offerings.
"None for you, deathbreath!"
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Officer: I'm sorry sir, the deathalyzer says you're too far over the legal 'dead' limit to be driving. What do you have to say for yourself?
Passenger: But officer, he can't say anything he's dead.
Officer: Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that your friend here is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.
Passenger: What's that?
Officer: Go through his clothes and look for loose change.
I wonder how well this technology could be adapted for other applications, such as detecting contraband in travelers' luggage, or detecting explosives. Perhaps for detecting survivors or casualties during disasters?
Could we be seeing the demise of the drug/bomb sniffing dog with this new tech?
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Will this deathalizer tell me if someone is only mostly dead?
More
Is that a few thousandths or a few quadrillionths?
They better be careful before someone sues for patent violation for detecting "old stench".
The human nose can detect the particles accurately as you walk through a nursing home or hospital.
Like marijuana or cocaine? Wasn't one of the primary complaints against legalizing marijuana from a law enforcement perspective the lack of ability to monitor the level of intoxication of a user? Well there you go. Hippies rejoice. It's a step toward your green [smoke] goal. Tree hugging anyone?
Speak for yourself.
The article is vague on how it works, but as a once upon a time chemical analyst (way way back), this sounds like it is doing the equivalent of an infra red scan, using rapid chopping the frequency the vibrations. Dunno. I just used the machines, I'm not a physicist. It may be a better way of doing it.
But the concept of detecting for a whole bunch of compounds at once has been around for many decades, as is the idea that you can detect health and sickness states with it. The ideas all seemed to bog down in reality. Pattern detection relies an a massive reliable database. In the article, they focussed on asthma. As a (once) chemist, I noted that hydrogen peroxide was now hydro-peroxide, and the nitrite and nitrate ions were somehow volatile. Not show stoppers, but cause for questioning what they actually were detecting. And rather hi-tech compared to a cardboard peak flow meter.
The social impact if it works is rather similar to gene scanning. If an employer tests applicants for jobs, then not only being a smoker can be detected. Maybe a whole bunch of disease risks. The individual risk increases may not be enough to diagnose a specific disease (so no use to a clinician), but a doubled risk of asthma, heart conditions etc would all ad up to a statistical bad risk. Life insurers also might like the idea.
So you may find it threatening. On the other had, if you are healthy, why have high insurance premiums. Oh well. Definitive tests for disease have been invented before. And people very sharply fall into the Want-to know or Don't-tell-me camps. Having the info acquired under a form of blackmail makes for problems.
I'm sure we're many of us familiar with the story of a few months back about the nursing home dog (perhaps cat?) that appeared to be able to smell impending fatality amongst the residents. And I personally will not forget the smell of cancer on my father's breath before he died early.
It's not beyond reason that the chemical composition of the breath might be detectably altered by disease. Nor that sensitive enough equipment might be able to detect this early and cheaply enough to be usable as a screening method.
In the hands of medics, sworn to confidentiality, this could help avoid considerable suffering and early, pointless death.
I don't see it as a threat to civil liberties. It's like the hypodermic. It's been used for many years as a tool in the psychiatric opression of political dissidents, been used to murder, been used to torture and so on and so forth.
But would you honestly rather the hypodermic had never existed? Of course not.
A hammer can be used to hurt you. Would you have them banned?
Personally, I'm hopeful about this one.
Why are you looking at me like that?