Buttons840 t1_irffar6 wrote
This reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridology
I have a family member who believes in iridology and I've argued against it, asking why a problem in our kidney would change a specific part of our eyeball. That would be an extraordinary thing and I need to see some evidence.
I know the retina is different than the iris, but it seems equally extraordinary that a heart problem would show up in the eyeball. I guess we'll wait and see. Hopefully we get some good scientific answers and reproducible results along the way.
def_1 t1_irfjh8j wrote
I'm not sure about this discussion AI but I'm an eye doctor and the eyes definitely can tell a lot about someone's health. We can see signs of diabetes, hypertension, systemic inflammation, etc. I'm assuming the AI is looking at retina arteries and signs of diabetic and hypertensive changes to qualify the rush of heart attack.
If you are curious what diabetes in the eye looks like just Google diabetic retinopathy.
Iridology is bs though
[deleted] t1_irgfa4d wrote
[deleted]
hobbers t1_irhbgtc wrote
I doubt it's a "heart problem showing up in your eyeball". Rather, it's likely that the eyeball is just a convenient place to non-invasively look at the structure of small blood vessels. And various cardiovascular conditions show up in small blood vessels all over your body. It likely has nothing to do with your eyeballs specifically. I.e. if a portion of your upper arm were translucent, this same methodology could likely be applied there as well. It's just that a translucent upper arm is not part of most human's biology.
There are already well established methods of examining the back of your eyeball for other evidence of other conditions.
rysworld t1_irm45zr wrote
A translucent upper arm isn't part of MOST humans' biology? Who are you hedging for, Susan Storm?
[deleted] t1_irhe5cn wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments