"In China, A.I. Is Finding Deadly Tumors That Doctors Might Miss"
So says this NYT headline (gift link). In reality, and in the article itself:
The tool might also be more useful for trainee doctors than for experienced specialists, said Dr. Diane Simeone, a pancreatic surgeon at the University of California San Diego. Some of the tumors that the tool caught in the Nature Medicine study should have been “super obvious” to well-trained radiologists even without A.I., she said.
But she acknowledged that it could be a valuable backstop for hospitals where specialists are in short supply.
This is based on the data So yes, A.I. is finding deadly tumors that an overworked and/or undertrained doctor might miss. Which is valuable, but a different message altogether from the one that the headline was trying to convey.
Separately, is “in China” becoming the new “in mice”? The link is to a PLOS One blog from 2021. The most recent post there as of the time of my writing this is a scathing and rather unfair review of the science of Pluribus. I refrained from adding it to my feed reader. What assumptions do writers have, and what emotions do they raise in readers, when they report about things happening “in China”? Was it the same with the Soviet Union? Whenever someone fans the flames of mimetic rivalry, I grab my wallet.
With today’s Alphaville, I have never been more proud of paying for a (not cheap!) subscription. (ᔥJohn Gruber, who also provided some non-gift-link-requiring context)
Links for a Sunday afternoon, weekend print edition
- John Plender: How the bubble bursts, with some informative graphs. Remember Melania coin?
- Melissa Heikkilä: Computer scientist Yann LeCun: ‘Intelligence really is about learning’. LeCunn is leaving Facebook/Meta soon to chair a more Euro-centric startup. From how he describes the workings of Meta in this Lunch with FT, it seems to be a wise move.
- Jo Ellison: Please don’t talk about my generation, which in her case is Generation X. Our children apparently include generations Z, alpha and beta which is all you need to know about the usefulness of the model.
- Sam Anderson: Inside the Choreographed Chaos of ‘The Pitt’. We are in the middle of Season 1 and I can see the appeal, including the wonderful performance of Katherine LaNasa as the charge nurse. Glad to learn she received an Emmy for it!
Happy New Year, dear reader! Will 2026 be the year humanity makes it across the ravine without falling down? Let’s hope so.
A last-minute Financial Times gift link dump
- Guru Madhavan: Compulsive tracking doesn’t measure what really counts. And this is not even taking into account Goodhart’s Law
- Diana Mariska and A. Anantha Lakshmi: Move over, Tokyo — the world has a new biggest city. It is Jakarta, which its own citizens call — and I don’t know if they actually do or if it is an FT-ism but I find it delightful — the Big Durian.
- Stephen Bush: Creativity thrives with constraints. I nod my head in agreement even as the whole family is giddy in anticipation of what will inevitably be another polished turd to premiere on Netflix tonight at 8pm EST.
- Jonathan Vincent: How the AI ‘bubble’ compares to history. But why the scare quotes, oh FT?
- Janan Ganesh: The case for denial. It all makes sense until you find yourself missing the last train out of Berlin.
- Hannah Shuckburgh: Should you have a library in your loo?. Without getting too personal I would like to point out that my reading history would have been dramatically different — and poorer — had there been smart phones back in the day.
- Chloe Fox: **I opened a bookshop. It was the best, worst thing I’ve ever done **. A better way to keep books, though realistically the loo is more in my wheelhouse.
- Aimee Farrell: Green Knowe, the house that inspired a children’s classic. It is about the oldest inhabited house in Britain, which is all well and good with some great-looking photos but then I imagine walking in and hitting a wall of mustiness.
- Mark Ellwood: Instagram is coming for your house move. Good. Lord.
- Oliver Smith: I went in search of spiritual renewal in Japan — and ended up being dangled off a cliff. Good. Lord. Though in a different way.
Enjoy!
❄️ DC had its first snowfall today, which was so much earlier than usual that it surprised even some public school systems, which only had enough time to declare a 2-hour delay at most. DC Public Schools are operating on their regular schedule, because DC DOT can read the weather forecast and knows how to put salt on roads.
But it really wasn’t that early. We had November snow as recently as 2018 (November 15, 1.4 inches), so December 5 doesn’t even crack the the top 20. The earliest? October 10 1979, 0.3".
BREAKING: “rage bait” is the Oxford Word of the Year 2025. And before you comment:
We’re not rage baiting you by choosing two words—though that would be in keeping with the meaning of the term!
The Oxford Word of the Year can be a singular word or expression, which our lexicographers think of as a single unit of meaning.
I approve.
An interesting series of biotech headlines
- June 25, 2024: Inside the controversy over FDA’s recent gene therapy approval
- July 18, 2025: Analysts demand transparency after Sarepta’s roundabout disclosure of 3rd patient death
- July 18, 2025: FDA Requests Sarepta Therapeutics Suspend Distribution of Elevidys and Places Clinical Trials on Hold for Multiple Gene Therapy Products Following 3 Deaths
- July 30, 2025: Prasad Resigns From Top FDA Post Amid Fallout Over Sarepta Dispute.
- August 7, 2025: The Sarepta Scandal: Laura Loomer, Vinay Prasad, and the history of pharma’s latest attempt to reassert control at Trump’s FDA
- November 3, 2025: Sarepta’s Duchenne confirmatory trial fails, but biotech will ask FDA for full approval anyway
All this for drugs that cost millions of dollars per dose from a company with $2B in revenue. Neutral people in the know have their opinions too. Know me by my enemies indeed.
Rejoice: our national nightmare is over, at least until March.
There is a major paradox underlying the US drug development strategy and if it is not resolved soon China will continue eating its lunch
The story of the United States Food and Drug Administration is a story of mismatches.
Mismatch one: cramming both food and drugs regulation into a single agency. Humans have been making food since the beginning of time — it is in fact one of our defining characteristics — and while the methods have become more and more intricate and our definition of food wider and wider to now include some decidedly unfood-like substances it is not a field where people expect too much experimentation and adding risk to production yields absolutely no reward to the end user. Drugs as used now — aspirin aside — are a modern invention. We learned about DNA less than a century ago and cell & gene therapy weren’t even an idea until late into the 20th century. An eye-blink, compared to food. And when it comes to production, risk is very much encouraged for those who need the drugs, particularly for rare diseases without approved therapies.
That is the second mismatch, one within the Drug section of the FDA: generic drugs that have been used for decades are more like food, unapproved, experimental treatments are quite the opposite. This is a source of constant tension that leaves much room for improvement. To be clear: Europe is worse. EMA requires drugs tested at any stage to be manufactured in a fully audited manufacturing facility; FDA allows for “phase-appropriate GMP compliance”. This still requires major investment, lest you leave yourself exposed to the whims of a random audit.
The third mismatch, one written up in STAT this morning, is one of management. Regulation of food and established drugs requires a certain mindset and personality type; regulation of experimental drugs is something else entirely. There is a paradox here: while most of FDA’s work is focused on the first two — it is the baseline activity absolutely essential for proper functioning of society — the focus of the public is mostly on the third. Unless, of course, something goes wrong which it amazingly rarely does considering the amounts of food consumed in this country. But the culture has been determined by this baseline activity, and I imagine people going to work at the FDA self-selected for that kind of culture: steady, stable, contemplative, detail-oriented and intentionally boring.
Which is to say, I am not at all surprised about reactions like this, where I can absolutely see both sides of the story and in fact agree with both. But the tie-breaker is this: the steady-as-she-goes leadership of what should be the leading edge of innovation has led to the US getting further and further behind China all while its taxpayers are bankrolling said innovation. This state of affairs is untenable and all the policy memos in the world won’t help unless this root mismatch is resolved.
If you figure out a way to do it — and do it with urgency — that does not involve breaking up the FDA into at least two pieces, do let me know.