Any important disease whose causality is murky, and for which treatment is ineffectual, tends to be awash in significance.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It's far more important to know what person the disease has than what disease the person has.
Disease is the retribution of outraged Nature.
The plausible outcomes range from the gradual and benign to the more precipitous and damaging.
We know from our clinical experience in the practice of medicine that in diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment, the individual and his background of heredity are just as important, if not more so, as the disease itself.
The fact that I was fortunate enough to escape contagion, in spite of frequent, sometimes daily contacts with the disease, was because I soon guessed how it spread.
Therefore in medicine we ought to know the causes of sickness and health.
By definition, big data cannot yield complicated descriptions of causality. Especially in healthcare. Almost all of our diseases occur in the intersections of systems in the body.
Drug misuse is not a disease, it is a decision, like the decision to step out in front of a moving car. You would call that not a disease but an error of judgment.
It is much more important to know what sort of a patient has a disease than what sort of a disease a patient has.
It is more important to know what sort of person has a disease than to know what sort of disease a person has.