de Kerviler et al. Fat suppression techniques in MRI: an update. Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomédecine & pharmacothérapie (1998) vol. 52 (2) pp. 69-75

Ma. Dixon techniques for water and fat imaging. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (2008) vol. 28 (3) pp. 543-558

Ross. Magnetic resonance imaging provides new insights into the characterization of adipose and lean tissue distribution. Canadian journal of physiology and pharmacology (1996) vol. 74 pp. 778-785

Shen et al. Adipose tissue quantification by imaging methods: a proposed classification. Obesity (2003) vol. 11 (1) pp. 5-16

Song et al. Sarcopenia and increased adipose tissue infiltration of muscle in elderly African American women. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2004) vol. 79 (5) pp. 874-880

Kim et al. Comparative MR study of hepatic fat quantification using single-voxel proton spectroscopy, two-point dixon and three-point IDEAL. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (2008) vol. 59 (3)

Heymsfield. Development of imaging methods to assess adiposity and metabolism. International Journal of Obesity (2008) pp. S76-S82

Gallagher et al. Adipose tissue distribution is different in type 2 diabetes. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2009) vol. 89 (3) pp. 807

Liu et al. Sonographic measurement of mesenteric fat thickness is a good correlate with cardiovascular risk factors: comparison with subcutaneous and preperitoneal fat thickness, magnetic resonance imaging and anthropometric indexes. International Journal of Obesity (2003) vol. 27 (10) pp. 1267-1273

Kellman et al. Multiecho dixon fat and water separation method for detecting fibrofatty infiltration in the myocardium. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (2009) vol. 61 (1)

Horger. Fat suppression in the abdomen. Magnetom Flash (2007) (3) pp. 114-9

Huang et al. Fat and water separation in balanced steady-state free precession using the Dixon method. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (2004) vol. 51 (2) pp. 243-247

Yoshizumi et al. Abdominal fat: Standardized technique for measurement at CT. Radiology (1999) vol. 211 (1) pp. 283-286

Tien. Fat-suppression MR imaging in neuroradiology: techniques and clinical application. American Journal of Roentgenology (1992) vol. 158 (2) pp. 369-379

Dixon. Simple proton spectroscopic imaging. Radiology (1984) vol. 153 (1) pp. 189-194

Delfaut et al. Fat suppression in MR imaging: techniques and pitfalls. Radiographics (1999) vol. 19 (2) pp. 373-382

Szumowski et al. Phase unwrapping in the three-point Dixon method for fat suppression MR imaging. Radiology (1994) vol. 192 (2) pp. 555-561

from pure self-interest, it makes sense to punish only if there is going to be a repeat game. it also makes sense to punish for altruistic reasons, or guided by “emotional” fairness reasons.

but personally, i would be mad not at the other player, but at the experimenters, for not giving me the chance to play the donor. why should i be the recipient ? was that choice made fairly ? and if it was (e.g. by a coin toss), then i would treat myself as the middle man while the other player won a lottery.. he would have to pay me commission to claim his money. as long as he paid me enough to make *me* happy, irrespective of what he is getting, i would let him claim his share. of course, $1 (out of $10) doesn’t cut it.. the outcome of the game would be different if played for a total of $10,000 of which he offered me $1000…

*Article reviews
*Book reviews
*Discussion of computational methods
*Some random DTI data…

Beverly Rockwell plans to seek compensatory and punitive damages on behalf of her son, Trevor A. Drake, who died after an injection of Magnevist. Rockwell claims that Magnevist, made by Bayer, was responsible for her son’s death. The lawsuit alleges…..

Concerning the photomultiplier tube problem, the two solutions are optical coupling and avalanche photodiodes. In optical coupling, the electromagnetic radiation is detected within the magnet and coupled optically to the PMT’s outside the magnet. Avalanche photodiodes are silicon devices that simulate the cascade effect of PMT’s but are virtually unaffected by high magnetic fields.

Also, I saw that you mentioned that ISMRM had very few talks on MRI/PET last year. Unfortunately, it looks to be the same this year. However, you should check out SNM this year. Most of the interest in MRI/PET systems will be there.

Lauterbur’s university decided not to file patent applications based on his work. “The company that was in charge of such applications decided that it would not repay the expense of getting a patent,” Lauterbur said in 2003. “That turned out not to be a spectacularly good decision.”

Talk about losing a good source of revenue…