This sounds like a very naive view of biological systems. The complexity of the most complex thing computer science has created (I would argue that is the Internet) is still trivially simple compared to the brain.
What that means is the search space is huge, much larger than any space I've dealt with in computer science.
However, there may be something to what you are saying (I don't know enough about medical research to know whether they are already doing this or not). In public key cryptography, you have a huge key space to try if you want to brute force a key (2^64 for a 64 bit key, unsurprisingly). However, you can break a 64 bit key in about 2^40 operations if you use the right technique [1]. Are we spending enough time looking for those techniques? I certainly hope so. There are a lot of smart people in medicine.
This sounds like a very naive view of biological systems. The complexity of the most complex thing computer science has created (I would argue that is the Internet) is still trivially simple compared to the brain.
I am not naive about the difficulty of the problem.
Are we spending enough time looking for those techniques?
We aren't necessarily looking for better techniques all the time. It could simply be streamlining a step or two in order to make medical research loop tighter. It could mean eliminating a process or two that shouldn't be running.
Whatever the case, our researchers should be thinking about novel solutions to the problem instead of mechanically running the lab. The world fastest machine might not be able to make an intractable problem tractable, but it shouldn't be a bottleneck.
I have a brother who was working towards a phd at a good biology/neuroscience research institutes. Here is one thing I totally agree with... A lot of people who are the "researchy/analytical mindset" underestimate the value of automation. The mantra should be "no human shall do what a robot can do". The problem with biology is that most of the time spent by the researcher is in "doing" rather "thinking" or figuring things out. And even more work and money in pushing paperwork.
What that means is the search space is huge, much larger than any space I've dealt with in computer science.
However, there may be something to what you are saying (I don't know enough about medical research to know whether they are already doing this or not). In public key cryptography, you have a huge key space to try if you want to brute force a key (2^64 for a 64 bit key, unsurprisingly). However, you can break a 64 bit key in about 2^40 operations if you use the right technique [1]. Are we spending enough time looking for those techniques? I certainly hope so. There are a lot of smart people in medicine.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meet-in-the-middle_attack