= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ChristianKl comments on We have the technology required to build 3D body scanners for consumer prices - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (13)
The FDA might shut down the independent App developers but I don't think the would shut down the Apple Watch for being able to run those Apps.
I don't think a breast cancer screening study would cost hundreds of millions. You could go to a hospital that does breast cancer screening and let every patient scan themselves with a device while they are in the dressing room.
Then you can gather the statistics of whether the software can reliably produce the same diagnosis as the existing technology.
Yes. Especially at the beginning you would have most of the software being developed by the company who sells the device. Business wise that means it might be very worthwhile for a company who develops this technology because they might have a monopoly on the marketplace.
That's the wrong analogy; we're talking separately selling a device that tells you some metric, not a diagnosis like breast cancer. So presumably you have to compare it against some existing way to measure that metric.
I don't know how much testing & FDA approval normally costs for nontrivial "metric only" devices (e.g. glucometers), but on the outside view, I doubt it's cheap as you say, because everyone in the system has incentives to raise the price, just like for drug trials.
And product wise that would result in the same kinds of products we have now, i.e. extremely conservative and slow moving. And approved and marketed for just a few uses, instead of being open-ended like you suggested.