Discuss

13 Responses to “Virtual dissection table is fascinating, useful, and just a little creepy”

  1. Dan Hibiki says:

    she’s wide awake and looking at you while you cut her open. WTF is wrong with the developers?!

    • Snig says:

      I think you’re being glib, but most doctor/patient interactions occur with a conscious patient.  It’s essential for a lot of diagnosis by examination and many treatments to be able to picture what’s where on the patient, so it’s not just a surgical tool.  Anyone with thin veins knows what I’m talking about.  The one disadvantage is that you can’t learn as much in the way of palpation.  Looking forward to the Mark X version where it integrates haptic feedback as well, so they can finely hone orthopedic test positives and negatives, nodule/lump finding skills, etc.  

      • Dan Hibiki says:

         Not with a freaking surgeon.

        This shit shouldn’t happen unless you’re a neurosurgeon or Hannibal Lecter.

    • Boundegar says:

      Wouldn’t that be virtual vivisection? Just a thought…

  2. Gulliver says:

    That is so cool! I’d love to have an interactive 3D model of my own body, albeit without the whole dissection step.

    Now all we need is the holographic doctor!

    @Dan Hibiki

    Yes, it’s much better if medical professionals are encouraged to think of their patients as unconscious slabs of meat.

  3. jerwin says:

    Not safe for work? I think this could make work a lot safer– provided that you work in a hospital.

    As for the “perfectly heathy naked lady”, doctors need a point of reference.

  4. It’s going to be so cool once Moore’s Law brings down the price enough to use it as a coffee table.  (“Care for a ladyfinger?”)

  5. JoshP says:

    I’m pretty sure they mean to call it the ‘Angelinator’ when they are rolling out that long multi syllabic tech speak.

  6. Dr_Zachary_Smith says:

    I’m thinking that they need to upgrade the graphics card a lot…..that sucker is sloooooow.

  7. OldBrownSquirrel says:

    The technique reminds me less of cutting and more of imaging.  I see this less as a tool for training surgeons (though it has some utility in that regard) and more as a tool for training radiologists.

    • Snig says:

      Yes and no.  While all docs learn some radiology, historically a big component of being a radiologist is taking one or more two dimensional images and translating what they mean in three dimensions.  This makes it much easier for a non-radiologist to see.  Also, measure twice, cut once.  

  8. robuluz says:

    Apple patent infringement at 1:48!

Leave a Reply