In fact, Apple is not the only technology giant aiming at the medical cake. IBM has also spent a lot of money, but it has fallen into the dilemma of Internet medical care. Compared with other technical fields, the medical field is notoriously complicated and slow. The research and development of a new drug often takes several years or even ten or twenty years. side effect.
In 2016, IBM launched Watson for Oncology, a tool that uses natural language processing (NLP) to summarize patients’ Electronic health records and provide doctors with treatment recommendations by searching the powerful database behind it. Unfortunately, oncology experts do not buy it. Some oncologists say they trust their own judgment more than Watson telling them what to do based on so-called big data.
The same thing happened to Apple. When Apple launched an electrocardiogram product for the Apple Watch Series 4 last year, many doctors and medical practitioners outside Apple reacted negatively to the news. The heart monitored by ECG is still a chronic disease, and some people in the medical profession have already held objections. If Apple, like IBM, provides treatment recommendations for specific diseases such as tumors and AIDS, it is difficult for medical experts to accept it.
In addition, Apple’s long-standing work model is not in harmony with the medical community. Apple has a reputation for high secrecy, keeping its projects under wraps until a product is released. However, this confidentiality model is not used in the medical field. The development of the medical field is usually based on various clinical studies, and it is necessary to maintain constant dialogue and communication with industry elites. Technology products focus on product iterative updates, and the medical industry focuses on prudence and product efficacy. It is destined to be a difficult journey to achieve compatible development between the two.
In fact, Apple is not the only technology giant aiming at the medical cake. IBM has also spent a lot of money, but it has fallen into the dilemma of Internet medical care. Compared with other technical fields, the medical field is notoriously complicated and slow. The research and development of a new drug often takes several years or even ten or twenty years. side effect.
In 2016, IBM launched Watson for Oncology, a tool that uses natural language processing (NLP) to summarize patients’ Electronic health records and provide doctors with treatment recommendations by searching the powerful database behind it. Unfortunately, oncology experts do not buy it. Some oncologists say they trust their own judgment more than Watson telling them what to do based on so-called big data.
The same thing happened to Apple. When Apple launched an electrocardiogram product for the Apple Watch Series 4 last year, many doctors and medical practitioners outside Apple reacted negatively to the news. The heart monitored by ECG is still a chronic disease, and some people in the medical profession have already held objections. If Apple, like IBM, provides treatment recommendations for specific diseases such as tumors and AIDS, it is difficult for medical experts to accept it.
In addition, Apple’s long-standing work model is not in harmony with the medical community. Apple has a reputation for high secrecy, keeping its projects under wraps until a product is released. However, this confidentiality model is not used in the medical field. The development of the medical field is usually based on various clinical studies, and it is necessary to maintain constant dialogue and communication with industry elites. Technology products focus on product iterative updates, and the medical industry focuses on prudence and product efficacy. It is destined to be a difficult journey to achieve compatible development between the two.
The Links: G270ZAN010 PM75CLA120