Hacker News Reader

Comment by qrbLPHiKpiux | Hacker News Reader

Ask your dentist to take an x-ray of the cable you may be concerned about. We're all digital and it only takes a second. If your guy is cool, he'll do it.

View on HN

Used dental X-Ray equipment can be surprisingly cheap (obligatory "don't try this at home if you don't know what you're doing" warning applies). I know some guys who are mad enough to buy and operate it: https://twitter.com/FauthNiklas/status/1123745053032292357 and https://twitter.com/FauthNiklas/status/1113902554931449858

You can find a few examples of x-ray images they took on their twitter feeds as well: https://twitter.com/FauthNiklas/status/1125606579540246528 and https://twitter.com/JanHenrikH/status/1127033349246279680 and https://twitter.com/FauthNiklas/status/1149386796352069633

That won't be much good against random third-party cables from Amazon, where you don't have a "it should look like this" scan to compare against.

I told you _my_ dentist was cool. This is a 3rd party Amazon cable.

https://i.imgur.com/RdxDYF4.png

Just acquired.

Nice! How about the other end?

Here's the other end:

https://i.imgur.com/RioQXMn.png

haha that's great. You really have a good dentist.

Try it with a USB-C. They all have chips in them as part of the spec. Identifying a rogue chip will be a bit harder.

My dad's a radiologist, so access to scans isn't an issue, but the sticking point would be knowing what's normal and what's not.

That looks like a bog-standard USB cable, but Apple's Lightning and USB-C cables are far more complicated, with actual chips onboard.

https://www.chipworks.com/blog/systems-analysis-apple-lightn...

I don't think there's much possibility of me vetting one of these sorts of third-party cable based on an x-ray, or even a physical teardown.

Make sure the implant chip is completely inside the metal shield, you say? :)

No, you can vary the contrast to look more, I was lazy and didn't do it before - Here's the same image adjusted contrast:

https://i.imgur.com/uf6AJ4M.png

Where do you find these "cool doctors"? I once tried to bribe six different doctors in my area with $3000 in exchange for agreeing to allow me to get an exploratory MRI and they all said no.

You gotta be one!

An exploratory MRI has inherit risk (even if minuscule) to your life, and thus their livelyhood. A very big difference from asking for an x-ray of a cable.

> An exploratory MRI has inherit risk (even if minuscule) to your life

As far as I've ever heard, an MRI without contrast has no risk itself, and any risk comes from acting on the data.

That is not true. It doesn’t involve ionizing radiation, so not a dose risk like CT. But look up PNS and SAR (peripheral nerve stimulation and specific absorption rate), for example. This is mostly handled well for standard pulse sequences of course, but not “zero risk”.

Beyond that, there is a reliance that you do not have any implants etc., even some tattoos. And you tell the truth about it. From the clinics point of view too risky.

I don't think that's what they're especially worried about; those are fairly minor.

Instead, think about interacting with someone who a) is so convinced that they need an exploratory MRI but b) can't convince a doctor of that need. I'd be afraid that either I'll be stuck dealing with someone perseverating over a totally normal anatomical variation (and everyone has a few). If they get sick later, I might also get dragged into a debate over whether I should have noticed something on that scan, done a different scan, or whatever, possibly with big legal implications.

This is why our techs will happily scan a fruit or something, but don't run an ad-hoc clinic.

I agree that in the parent comment case, there is no reason to risk a review or lawsuit which is probably mainly why a clinician wouldn't do it; I alluded that that in another comment.

This one was specifically a comment about "zero risk" on MRI, it's not true. Low risk, sure. But people have been hurt.

I also suspect any clinician is going to look askance at a low risk action that isn't necessary, but the potential liability is the kicker here.

It's pretty close.

Nothing is totally risk free, but compared to most medical procedures--and most activities of daily living--MRIs are a walk in the park. For a subject with no implanted devices, I would bet the drive to the scan center is much more dangerous. I just flipped through MAUDE (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfMAUDE/d...) and I couldn't find any adverse events that were more severe than a small burn or blister.

Agree it's low risk, I was being pedantic.

There have been deaths of course, also, but not due to normal operation.

From the FDA:

> The magnetic fields that change with time create loud knocking noises which may harm hearing if adequate ear protection is not used. They may also cause peripheral muscle or nerve stimulation that may feel like a twitching sensation.

> The radiofrequency energy used during the MRI scan could lead to heating of the body. The potential for heating is greater during long MRI examinations.

Minimal, perhaps negligible? Absolutely. Worth risking a license for a mere $3k? Probably not.

I get that a CAT scan would have an inherent risk, but why would an MRI?

It doesn’t.

CT scans are far more dangerous than MRIs, and yet doctors recklessly schedule CT scans for everything, to the point where they treat you like you're crazy if you try to avoid CT scans. One could argue that every single thing a doctor does has inherent risk to the patient's life, so by your logic, doctors should simply not do anything, ever.

I suspect many would be far more open to clearly non medical usage of machines they actually own or lease. What you were asking for isn’t any, and had perceived risk for them.

If I was a random clinician there is no way I would have helped you either.

If you do want a MRI done out of curiosity your best bet is to go through biomedical imaging research group who needs subjects, I would guess. Unless you happen to live near a manufacturer.

I don’t know anything, but I would not be shocked to learn that malpractice insurance does not cover "exploratory" practices paid in cash under the table.

Because that opens them to a giant slew of malpractice claims. Your 3000$ doesn’t come close to covering the risk.

Every single thing they do opens them to a giant slew of malpractice claims. By your logic, doctors should simply not do anything, ever.

I also lied for the sake of brevity. In reality I wanted an MRI in order to look for evidence of diverticulitis. They all said I needed to either get a CT scan or get lost. CT scans are more dangerous than MRIs. Doctors can't possibly be exposed to more malpractice risk from a harmless MRI than from a dangerous CT scan.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com