Kim Kardashian's boob?
But then again, who'd want to look like Kanye West?
Wrinkle up your nostrils and ask yourself if you like your nose... Well, in the not-too-distant future you might be able to 3D print yourself a new one. Professor Kevin Shakesheff passed a 3D-printed nose, the bone part, around the audience at a Zurich Future History Now presentation in London on 28 November. Shakesheff is …
I like scientists. I'm married to one, and I greatly respect the disclipline required for quality research as well as their willingness to take career limiting/ending risks to devote everything to a project.
That being said, some scientists are awfully stupid. It's like they've never seen sci-fi movies or read the books. How do you grow up to be a scientist without spending at least some of your youth lost in those stories? I'm just a big dumb engineer and even I know that every fucking time scientists start dicking around with 'stem cells in a suspension' and using machines to create tissue it goes horribly, horribly wrong. Just so wrong.
Mark my words, someday a bunch of scientists wil be hanging out getting stoned on lab chemicals and some goofy mishap will see radioactive dinosaur DNA (they've got that in all labs) fall into the 'stem cell suspension' and the next thing that gets printed will morph into a science super monster that'll eat the hell out of an entire small town before some super secret government agency captures it and keeps it alive for study. Effeciently setting the stage for the sequel.
Dumbasses. How can they not see this?
Thumbs up for such flexibility.
Personally I think a lot of the organ replacement process will be handled by a different process. This is the idea of taking a "template" organ, washing out the living cells and seeding it with "precursor" cells found around the same organ of the patient.
The last I checked a team in Spain (oddly lead by a US doctor) had got the "washing away the living cells" bit up to to a pig and the "seeding with precursor cells" with a rat.
It's an amazing sight to watch such a heart starting to beat spontaneously once fully populated and fed with nutrients.
BTW while this whole process is tricky finding which chemicals the cells follow is the ultimate key to making it work.
That's taken a lot of finding.
I know they been working on making replacement ears and the such. The issue has been making the latices to allow the cells to grow.
Seems like very positive technology. I know someone who lost their nose through cancer, this type of stuff could really change their lives for the better.
No idea why someone down voted you.
It is undoubtedly very cool stuff, and we are just getting started with. The de novo synthesis of cardiac tissue is very impressive.
My synthetic biology work is at the molecular level i.e. the design of protein biosensors that match a patient with a particular illness, and can then be tested against known safe pharmaceuticals looking for a therapeutic match.
In my travels one of the very best supporting explanations for the utility of this technology (organ printing etc.. ) is one of personalisation. Everyone is unique, but more specifically , all our organs shapes are unique too. Although organ donation availability is by far the top driver for synthetic organs, there is also a strong argument for autoimmune compatibility and the ability to match the organ sizes. As it stands you are luck if they find an organ, luckier still if they find the right HLA match, and even luckier if the organ will fit in your body, all within the time frame both you and the organ are viable....
"Although organ donation availability is by far the top driver for synthetic organs, there is also a strong argument for autoimmune compatibility and the ability to match the organ sizes. "
The technique of taking an existing organ, washing out the cells and using it as a template for precursor cell growth (from the patient) avoids the autoimmune problem.
Once you don't need a cell match for the organ itself you can concentrate on getting one the right size and shape. I was amazed at how much of the organ is not actually made of living cells, and could survive them being washed away.
Of course once you can have "custom" organs built for you with no rejection the possibilities are limitless....
Personally I've always wondered why people don't make more of an effort with eyes. Complex, lots of faults, and plumbed straight into the brain, yet the best that can be done is corneal transplant, which TBH, is a bit lame.
yes I am familiar with that technique. Leaving a protein scaffold for new cells. Quite a nice procedure if I do say, as it nicely sidesteps the massive challenge of inducing self-assembly into cells of unknown state.
The eye is part of the brain, hence , growing one is quite a challenge..!! In mice where genomic plasticity has been engineered it is possible to mutate all sorts of cells, but with eyes we can knock them out (induce blindness ) , change their proteins (for sight problems), but the actually structure is quite subtle and dynamic.
It is one of the overarching mysteries of biology that all cells have the same potential (i.e. DNA) but different actual states. Very difficult to measure, but slowly we are getting there (RNAseq etc...).
And it would be effectively impossible without computers.... (IT angle)
"The eye is part of the brain, hence , growing one is quite a challenge..!! In mice where genomic plasticity has been engineered it is possible to mutate all sorts of cells, but with eyes we can knock them out (induce blindness ) , change their proteins (for sight problems), but the actually structure is quite subtle and dynamic."
True. However I think the picture is changing.
Historically DNA has been viewed (quite literally) like a paper tape.
But with the discovery that some of those codes control what's being read rather than are being read directly you're now looking at a Turing machine.
That changes everything.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021