In specific clinical situations, nuclear medicine diagnostic (imaging) procedures, able to quantify regional function and metabolism, are methods of first choice: this applies to the estimation of thyroid function, split renal function in obstructive uropathy, perfusion and ventilation in pulmonary embolism and obstructive lung disease, early detection of bone metastases, osteomyelitis, diseases of the adrenal glands, function of lacrimal and salivary glands, gastric emptying and some diseases in haematology [24]. Nearly all these investigations can be performed using conventional nuclear medicine techniques [planar scintigraphy, single-photon emission tomography (SPET)]. Especially for the assessment of perfusion and viability of the left ventricular myocardium, new tracers and SPET techniques have been developed during the last two decades. In selected cases, however, myocardial segments defined as non-viable (scar) by these techniques have shown a significant improvement in contractile function after revascularization. Positron emission tomography (PET) has been of particular help in this context.PET occupies a unique position within nuclear medicine, but PET is expensive and needs one of the highest logistic backgrounds in scientific and clinical medicine. Not least because of the present economic climate, the German Scientific Board (Wissenschaftsrat) has recently confirmed the statement from 1988, that PET is primarily a scientific instrument whose clinical usefulness has not yet been established. Peter Ell (1990) has written about the favourable characteristics of SPET in this context. Crucial answers from the PET community are still awaited; here we shall discuss the transfer from PET to SPET using the example of cardiology. One should not forget the inherent advantages of PET, the physiology of positron emitters, the spatial resolution of about 4 ram, the possibility of quantification and the higher sensitivity compared with SPET by a factor of about 50-100.