Medicine in the 24th century

[DaystromDropout]

Do you think by the 24th century they finally knew "what is brain"?

Is "what is brain" a quote from one of the shows? I recall Bones saying in an episode that the brain was still hard to figure out.

 

[Tuskin38]

Is "what is brain" a quote from one of the shows? I recall Bones saying in an episode that the brain was still hard to figure out.

It's from TOS yes.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

It's from TOS yes.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The best line in all of Star Trek

 

[RAMA]

The 24th-century science should be much more advanced, and yes we already have things now that are superior to some of those they used, but they always had to deal with tech that seemed too 'magical": for example, if they had shown the full potential of nanotech in "Evolution", it would have changed the face of the entire show! So it's ultimately a balance.

RAMA

It always strikes me while watching TNG how inconsistent the development of medical technology seems to be: we frequently see people undergo drastic physical transformations through surgery, Picard has a fully-functioning artificial heart that rarely malfunctions, lifespans have been greatly extended with it being seemingly the norm to live past 100, and normal sickness appears to have been all but eliminated, at least within Starfleet and in affluent parts of the Federation...

But then some stuff appears to have been changed very little. No major advances in birth control, it seems, given how often accidental children seem to pop up (you'd think at least the implant would be mainstream by then); it's hugely inconsistent how we can deal with disability (Geordi's VISOR allows a blind person to see, but there's nothing like a mechanical exoskeleton that could allow Worf full mobility after he's paralyzed, for example); and we see people die from injuries less severe than Picard suffered in his academy days all the time.

I know the answer to pretty much any discrepancy is "because plot" or "because different writers," but is any of this addressed in any of the fiction?

 

[Oddish]

And liver, what is liver?

Really yucky.

One of the things Rick Berman did right was push for the casting of Patrick Stewart as Picard. Not saying that absolves all his mistakes, but proves he wasn't wrong all the time.

Regarding medicine... why did Beverly Crusher (or anyone) ever have to do an autopsy on anyone (an issue in "Man of the People" and "Suspicions"? Given that transporters can completely molecularize a person, can't she just do a molecular scan which would leave no trace whatsoever and tell her far more than physically gutting the corpse?

 

[NCC-73515]

For the same reason they still do surgery instead of beaming stuff in and out

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

For the same reason they still do surgery instead of beaming stuff in and out

And why is that, you'd think by the 24th Century surgery would be a literal thing of the past. So much super science on show and they still have to cut people up.

 

[Timo]

Regarding medicine... why did Beverly Crusher (or anyone) ever have to do an autopsy on anyone (an issue in "Man of the People" and "Suspicions"? Given that transporters can completely molecularize a person, can't she just do a molecular scan which would leave no trace whatsoever and tell her far more than physically gutting the corpse?

At least they stay consistent about it: in "The Passenger", Bashir points out that sensor tech doesn't work all that well on the dead. And then fumbles big time with sensor tech on a character presumed dead, both proving his point and establishing that people of the future are still people, with failings and blind spots.

It could be autopsies are a "First make sure the patient really is dead" thing, the only way to be sure. If you cut open a patient and he springs back to life, 24th century medicine can easily uncut him...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

At least they stay consistent about it: in "The Passenger", Bashir points out that sensor tech doesn't work all that well on the dead. And then fumbles big time with sensor tech on a character presumed dead, both proving his point and establishing that people of the future are still people, with failings and blind spots.

It could be autopsies are a "First make sure the patient really is dead" thing, the only way to be sure. If you cut open a patient and he springs back to life, 24th century medicine can easily uncut him...

Timo Saloniemi

But that's terrible..

 

[Oddish]

Similar things have happened. I heard a story about a jockey who sustained a head injury and was pronounced dead at the scene. He revived in the morgue, fortunately before the autopsy could begin, and his freaking out fortunately attracted hospital personnel.

 

[Captain Zog]

The best line in all of Star Trek

Second best. After Kirk iconic "What does God need with a starship?"

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Second best. After Kirk iconic "What does God need with a starship?"

Obviously God needs to get around. Hey they had spaceships in the book of Ezekiel