Traditional treatment studies take a large population of patients and compare the success of a new treatment against a placebo (or the previous treatment). This makes perfect sense if everyone were identical. However, cancer research is showing that individual differences may be very meaningful.
If "ONLY" 5% of the subjects respond to a particular treatment, it might be that the treatment is not very effective. However, it might also mean that a particular genotype of the population (5% of the group) is completely cured by the treatment and other genotypes are not.
Big data and genetic analysis provide a unique opportunity to conduct studies to identify if there are subsets of the population that do respond well to a particular treatment. The day is coming when treatments will be customized to our genotype. It is already happening for some cancers.
>> Andy Grove, who has Parkinson's, has been driving treatment for Parkinson's around the industry
That is news to me that Andy Grove has Parkinson. This may be a better Moore's Law to crack. Intel should spare nothing to get this issue solved. Getting big data into the domain of chip design sounds interesting. Intel has an opportunity here to reshape this industry that has been software driven.
Although Intel said the smartwatch was not its recently acquired Basis sleep/motion tracker, the company said it's looking on ways to integrate Basis into future programs. I'm surprised they didn't conduct this study with Basis in the first place.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.