What is Digg?66 Comments
- kevman459, on 07/01/2008, -1/+45That's great news for the survival rate of large-breast genes.
- chadillak, on 07/02/2008, -0/+29Dugg for teaching me the phrase "dense breasts".
- AmyVernon, on 07/01/2008, -0/+25this is so important. i know so many people who've had breast cancer or have moms or sisters who've had breast cancer. caught early enough, it's completely treatable. not caught in time, it's so deadly and painful.
- orangekid13, on 07/02/2008, -2/+25save the boobies!
- SpongeBad, on 07/02/2008, -2/+20Breast cancer is a deadly killer. This is why I offer to give my wife an exam every time I feel like it.
- chrisvc86, on 07/02/2008, -1/+15DENSE BREASTS.
- Borgcube636, on 07/02/2008, -0/+13They're dense, like... bags of sand!
- inactive, on 07/01/2008, -0/+13finally some good medical news. Good job scientists.
- dashdingo, on 07/02/2008, -2/+13Is "dense breasts" code for "huge *****?"
Alllriiiight. - taylorblue, on 07/01/2008, -0/+11what a great thing...my family has a history of cancer...and my aunt has even had it..this is great news!
- TwinTurboMike, on 07/02/2008, -0/+8"Hey Peter, man, check out channel 9, check out this chick..."
- MCA2142, on 07/02/2008, -2/+9Who has two thumbs and is all about keeping boobs alive?
This guy!!! (points thumbs at myself) - aforce369, on 07/02/2008, -0/+5But this might make the "traditional mammogram" obsolete...
THEN WHAT WILL MY PICK UP LINE BE?! - inactive, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4there was a company called R2 that tried (and failed) to make computerized radiography of mammograms standard... good to see the torch is being picked up.
- Meursault, on 07/02/2008, -1/+5You are my density!
- watklax, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4terrific news. makes me feel better.
- XBunnyRacer, on 07/02/2008, -2/+6I saw a pink shirt that said "Save The Ta-Tas"..
- BenBenMan, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4Office Space FTW
- anchora, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Save the boobies!
...Mine in particular! - whatsthatsmell, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3Part of the hold up on Digital Mammography is the cost. Due to extremely strict regulations and requirements (because of the amount of attention to detail needed) Cost of equipment is rather high. Check out the Barco Coronis 5MP Dual grayscale LCD and video card setup. http://www.opraxmedical.com/Equipment/Digital/Disp ... Although i've seen it elsewhere for as low as $27,000 and change. For today's digital mammography, anything less than filmless perfection is unacceptable. Mammography imaging requires unmatched accuracy and high contrast images that guarantee the correct display of each pixel. Images should be displayed with consistent, film-like precision and without visible noise or disturbances from the electronic pixel structure. The luminance of CORONIS® 5MP MAMMO covers an extremely high dynamic range reaching up to 600 Cd/m2. According to the DICOM curve, this high dynamic range represents more than 700 Just Noticeable Differences, the smallest luminance steps your eye can perceive. Only 1024 simultaneous shades of gray, offered by Barco's true 10-bit architecture, allow you to render each individual gray level. No information is lost in the process.
No, i don't sell Barco, we just use them at my work. - inactive, on 07/02/2008, -2/+5so good news... i hope never get cancer ....
- grimward, on 07/02/2008, -0/+3See? this is why we can't have any girls in the intarwebz :(
- Idiggapony, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Digital mammography is now in routine clinical use, though still available only at a minority of centers. There is some evidence to suggest that digital mammography provides superior detection of breast cancer in some women, compared to film mammography.
http://www.breastcancer.org/symptoms/testing/new_r ... - grimward, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Any progress in the field of cancer battles is welcome, let's hope these people get it right.. and that it can be adapted to other forms of cancer too :)
- yurishoujo, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2Awesome. I hope this someday leads to making the mammogram obsolete. Squished titties ain't fun. ):
- Idiggapony, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2It's an interesting development, but digital tomosynthesis is a more advanced technique that, I think, will prove much more useful in the end.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2007/0907-pain_ ... - nzhamstar, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2creepy...
- Laminarcissus, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2And what will happen to my part-time job as a post-mammogram breast re-fluffer?
- inactive, on 07/02/2008, -2/+4I'll give you a 3D mammogram.
Also known as"feeling you up." With my hands. - somaddict, on 07/02/2008, -1/+3God, bless these breasts. Do it for the children.
- BigSax, on 07/02/2008, -0/+2My DSP professor at UF worked on a project years ago to better mammogram technology. The scanner they made worked amazingly. He showed us some comparision shots of the same person from the standard tech most hospitals have and with the one his team made. A room full of electrical engineers in training who had never looked at a mammogram before were easily able to identify a mass in the image from his teams device. The old tech mammorgram looked like a stringy grey blob with no distinct features. At the time he said the product never took hold for 2 reasons.
1) As has been mentioned in this thread already, it was expensive.
2) The people who read the current scans are highly trained to be able to make any sense out of the blurry images and would be out of a job if anyone could successfully read a mammogram. - Idiggapony, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1No. Rather the opposite, usually.
- petebot, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1...and the milk went sour?
- furi0us1, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1dugg for the back to the future reference
- Aldhelm, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Breast cancer gets the biggest funding despite the high rates of survival even in cases where it is discovered to late. People unlucky enough to get uncool cancers like Pancreatic and Bone cancers have less then 1% of being alive after 5 years. They also get the least funding.
- gtlogic, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I'll happily apply to determine if breasts qualify as dense for the study.
- forceuser, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2NIKO NOW WILL WE HAVE MORE HEALTHY AMERICAN TEE TEES!
- Idiggapony, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1If the abnormal mass was easily identifiable by non-radiologists in the digital image, but not in the film image, then the comparison was rigged. And there's nothing about digital mammographic images that obviates the need for an experienced reader. Your professor wasn't speaking the truth.
On the other hand, digital mammography does lend itself nicely to "computer aided diagnosis," in which a computer helps the radiologist by scanning for suspicious findings that the radiologist then looks at carefully to see if they're worthy of concern. It seems like an excellent idea to me. Mammographers have to scan lots of visually complex images for findings that are often very tiny and easy to miss. It takes a lot of training, experience, and solid judgement to know what to do about the findings once you see them, but having a computer to help you find them in the first place sounds like a good idea to me. - tomsentest, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Ain't that true for all cancers...
- petebot, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I feel really stupid, but I didn't even know there was a bone cancer. Which I guess goes to prove your point.
- PDF84, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Tough titty said the kitty, but the milk still good
- Metasquares, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1If you're interested in this sort of thing, there's an entire conference on mammography coming up in two weeks: it's called the International Workshop on Digital Mammography and I wouldn't be surprised if this study was being presented there.
- obilon, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Two things that make me happy about this article. One, breast cancer needs to be eliminated and this will help save my favorite part of the female anatomy, bar none. Second, the idea of dense breasts makes me happy.
- denizen42, on 07/02/2008, -1/+2Cafreful, they might be man-boobies
- JasonCox, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1You know, for an article about *****, the top comments are surprisingly... well, mature.
- bblande, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1Bah...this newfangled technology is no match for my hands. They'll find the cancer in those dense breasts.
- leenie42, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0Are you people on here serious, or what? there are so many ridiculous comments about such a serious issue, are you kidding me, and for all of you, it's breast cancer, NOT BOBBIE CANCER, that is so frigging stupid, grow up. It's offensive to everyone with this cancers sensibility, get a LIFE
- leenie42, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0stupid ass comment
- leenie42, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0ugh!
-
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is