Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[weenog]

Hey everyone,  I want to know: How do you feel about the idea of implanting genuine parts with artificial origins into human bodies?

For an example of what I mean: Suppose a person, Patient X, has bone cancer and needs to lose a femur (thigh bone). A sample of healthy bone cells is taken from X, cultured and grown until there's enough bone tissue for the job. Then the tissue is loaded into a sophisticated machine, which constructs a perfect replica femur for X, cell by cell, from X's own living tissue. This healthy, living femur is then put in the place of the bone destroyed by cancer.

What do you think about that?

What if X was you? Does the answer change?

---

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, here.  I've just been considering a possible investment that straddles manufacturing and medical technology fields, and I'm trying to get a feel for how people might react when/if this tech starts to bear fruit.

[HFS]

I see it as a good idea, and in fact I'd almost say that it's pretty much an inevitability at this point. The tech is already in development, no?

[alexandertnt]

Well, we already replace broken parts of the human body with artificial replacements. This would just be a better artificial replacement.

Seems like a good idea, and I would most definitely do it.

[shadenight123]

3D printers in the medical field would be awesome.

"Don't worry, we can rebuild him..."

"VRRRRMmmmm VRRRRRmmmmm" *3D printer starts working.

"We have the stem cells to do it!"

[anzki4]

Someone has already received a windpipe made by similar method. Here is a video about it. (The windpipe part comes at the end.)

[miauw62]

I don't see any reason to be against this. It's basically transplantation, except there doesn't have to be a donor.

[Zrk2]

I'd go for it.

[LordBucket]

What do you think about that?

I would have a strong preference for replacement parts grown individually from my own cells rather than plastic/metal or potentially chimeric parts grown on the backs of rats.

Red flags only really come up if you're cloning entire bodies, putting them in vats and cutting organs out of them as needed. If you can grow just the liver, for example, and use that...again, I'd prefer that over non-biological devices.

Also, would prefer stem cell base cultures over random tissue samples with already-depleted telemere chains. If you're replacing parts, you may as well replace with young ones.

What if X was you? Does the answer change?

The above is speaking to my own preference. I would personally feel more comfortable with the above. If other people want rat DNA or cyborb replacement parts in them...that doesn't particularly bother me unless culture shifts so radically that replacing original parts become socially expected. For example, girls in the US are expected to get their ears pierced. I wouldn't want to live in a world where having my heart cut out and replaced with a "more efficient" metal and plastic model was similarly expected. By all means, do consider the long-term implications of your work. But what you're describing happens to more closely match my personal preference than most of the alternatives.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I don't see how anybody could rationally be against such technology, especially considering we already started doing it.

I wouldn't want to live in a world where having my heart cut out and replaced with a "more efficient" metal and plastic model was similarly expected.

And what exactly do you have against having an improved organ, especially considering the failures of the one you used as an example is the one responsible for most early deaths?

[alway]

What do you think about that?

I think that's absolutely mundane and has been for half a century now. If you even want to approach something most would consider 'odd,' you need to go more in the original direction of the Cyborg; that is, body modification.

For example, the article which coined the term Cyborg: http://cyberneticzoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/cyborgs-Astronautics-sep1960.pdf In that article, it is suggested to use cybernetic modification to modify humans into a form capable of living in space as easily as we live on earth. No need for our current massive life support cans, because it would all be internal; that sort of thing. And even that is from over half a century ago; even before man first went into space.

Today, there are Biohackers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biohacking
Many of whom experiment with modification technologies on themselves (in some cases at substantial risk). A notable one from that group are magnets implanted in one's fingertips, giving you a tactile feel of magnetic fields: http://gizmodo.com/5895555/i-have-a-magnet-implant-in-my-finger

And in the more legit medical stuff, there's things like these: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-18/paralysed-woman-controls-robot-arm-with-brain/4432994
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/02/tech/innovation/bionic-robotic-arm-limb-amputee
And though, while they do see them as really cool, there are very few who would think badly of such a prosthetic limb. So you can go quite a ways further before things get interesting.

[Mrhappyface]

3D printers in the medical field would be awesome.

"Don't worry, we can rebuild him..."

"VRRRRMmmmm VRRRRRmmmmm" *3D printer starts working.

"We have the stem cells to do it!"

How horrifying a future where we need to depend on those hellish constructs known as printers.

[Bauglir]

I can think of no objections.

[freeformschooler]

How horrifying a future where we need to depend on those hellish constructs known as printers.

5

"Jack, it's too late! We can't save him! We've got to get out of here!"

4

"NO! If I can just... hit PRINT..."

3

"...THERE!"

2



1

"NOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooo..."

*everything explodes*

[weenog]

3D printers in the medical field would be awesome.

"Don't worry, we can rebuild him..."

"VRRRRMmmmm VRRRRRmmmmm" *3D printer starts working.

"We have the stem cells to do it!"

Yes, there is a  company already working on that. It, and a surprisingly vehement disagreement with my girl, got me wondering about possible public sentiment roadblocks to development and deployment.


I like the description as an organ transplant that doesn't require a donor.  I also like the idea of amputees getting limbs instead of prosthetics, drug and surgical technique tests being performed on real organs without risking anybody, and for myself, maybe getting a knee joint that doesn't hurt all the time because I wrecked it in an accident 20 years ago.  This might be a real, practically available thing in our lifetimes. I don't even care if the company I linked and am considering investing in is the one that succeeds, as long as it happens. I think this is exciting stuff, and could be a game changer for a lot of people.

[10ebbor10]

I have no problem with it. Provided, as said by lordbucket, they weren't creating full bodies then cutting out their organs.

Why would you do that. It's horribly inefficient. Also, what's the problem with full bodies, after all, they'd be brain death for all points and purposes.

((If they aren't, I'm afraid we stumbled into a Hollywood film.))