Steve/MT:
My off-the-cuff thought here is that a central database, organised on some
open source basis getting medical professionals continually to contribute and
update, which would enable people to immediately get a run-down of the major
possible causes (and indeed minor possible ones - anything that has been
proposed) - for any given illness or set of symptoms, would be a great thing -
assuming somesuch doesn't already exist. That would leave the user to make his
choices.
Those words could have come from my own fingers ~3 years ago. Since then I
have come to realize just how profoundly insecure these guys really are.
Several attempts to sell this into various settings have run into
insurmountable people-problems, though there has been no significant technical
problems.
Steve,
I can loosely appreciate the problems of persuasion, but, given your
enthusiasm for this field, I would urge you to keep trying - there has to be a
way round them.
Surely, the angle has to be something like a
super-medical-wiki-but-with-professional-standards has to be of universal use
to MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS as well as the layperson, (and the layman will still
need professional advice on the info. provided). The immediate marketing angle
that occurs to me is: this will keep you, the medico, up-to-date and ensure
you don't give out-of-date unprofessional advice (and will give your advice an
imprimatur in that you will always be able to say you checked the most reliable
source). [No doubt there may be many other angles].
My guess is an awful lot of medicos WON'T be up-to-date. For example, last
year there was a discovery re CFS & how it's down to a stomach virus - which
looks right, and fits the symptoms. I'll bet an awful lot of medicos aren't
up-to-date on that yet but the sufferers still looking for a reasonable
treatment, will sure as heck appreciate the info.
And if you could work out a super-pro-wiki framework, it would probably be
applicable to many fields.
Re the general problem-solving issue, I was groping for an essentially
philosophical discussion [because that's what it has to be] of some kind of
general problem-solving language/ set-of-concepts, such as we already have -
"problem", "idea," "theory", "evidence," etc. I think this is the sort of
area AGI-ers take for granted but is actually majorly difficult.
P.S. Wouldn't medical insurers have the greatest interest of all in
establishing a super-medical-wiki?
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=103754539-40ed26
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
