Factor X have we finally found the fountain of Youth?

[ladajo]

I was thinking that the difference is it does apparently currently come with the inferface connecty bits. It is just the specific tissue type. No nerves, no vascular, sheathing, etc.
That would mean it is decidedly not like doing a transplant. As a transplant comes with the connecty bits.

Unless I am wrong in my understanding.

[williatw]

I was thinking that the difference is it does apparently currently come with the inferface connecty bits. It is just the specific tissue type. No nerves, no vascular, sheathing, etc.
That would mean it is decidedly not like doing a transplant. As a transplant comes with the connecty bits.

Unless I am wrong in my understanding.

The first 3D printed organ -- a liver -- is expected in 2014
Printed tissue could vastly improve drug testing

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/ ... ed_in_2014

Computerworld - Approximately 18 people die every day waiting for an organ transplant. But that may change someday sooner than you think -- thanks to 3D printing.

Advances in the 3D printing of human tissue have moved fast enough that San Diego-based bio-printing company Organovo now expects to unveil the world's first printed organ -- a human liver -- next year.

Like other forms of 3D printing, bio-printing lays down layer after layer of material -- in this case, live cells -- to form a solid physical entity -- in this case, human tissue. The major stumbling block in creating tissue continues to be manufacturing the vascular system needed to provide it with life-sustaining oxygen and nutrients.

Living cells may literally die before the tissue gets off the printer table.

Organovo, however, said it has overcome that vascular issue to a degree. "We have achieved thicknesses of greater than 500 microns, and have maintained liver tissue in a fully functional state with native phenotypic behavior for at least 40 days," said Mike Renard, Organovo's executive vice president of commercial operations.

The posted link acknowledges that issue and their contention is that they think they have solved it (to a degree).

[ladajo]

I wonder about the actual implant part. One thing to keep it alive in a dish full of nutrients or chem brew, another to get it to knit together and sustain with like tissue and the body.

But, none-the-less, a great advance I think.

[williatw]

Harvard team successfully reverses the aging process in mice



http://www.gizmag.com/telomerase-aging- ... res/17107/

The aging process - it's undignified, unwanted, and many would say unnecessary. After all, the cells in your body are constantly replacing themselves – why can't they do it without causing progressive degradation of organs that lead to discomfort, weakness and death? Well, perhaps they can. Harvard scientists have discovered that by controlling certain genetic processes in mice, they can not only slow down the aging process, but "dramatically" reverse it throughout the body. It's a massive discovery, but it won't be able to be used in humans yet without some pretty scary consequences.

Telomeres

The Harvard study focused on part of the cell division process called 'telomere shortening.' If you picture a chromosome as an X-shaped unit of DNA, the telomeres are the little caps at the end of each strand.

As cells divide, their DNA splits in half to form two new cells – but a bit of genetic information is lost at the end of each strand with each division. That's what telomeres are for – they contain a bunch of useless DNA that acts as a buffer zone so that no important DNA is lost from our chromosomes. Gradually, over time, the telomere erodes away to a level where each cell division actually starts destroying bits of important DNA – and this gets to a point where the cell can no longer reproduce itself. You can imagine what that starts doing to bodily organs as time goes by.

So in a way, telomeres are there as a built-in limit to how many times a cell can divide itself – they're part of the built-in biological clock that causes aging, body deterioration and death.

The Harvard Study

And that's where this recent study was focused. Ronald DePinho and a team of Harvard colleagues experimented on mice to see what happens when steps are taken to stop telomeres from shortening.

The group looked at the enzyme telomerase, which can replenish the telomere after replication and effectively lengthen it so that a cell can live for longer.

They bred a group of genetically-engineered mice that lacked the ability to produce telomerase – and watched as these mice showed rapid and very early onset symptoms of aging.

Then, they gave the mice injections to re-activate the telomerase enzyme – expecting to see the aging process slow down to normal levels. Instead, they watched in astonishment as the mice appeared to age backwards, their withered organs repairing themselves even to the point of new neurons beginning to sprout in their brains.

In essence, repairing the telomeres seemed to be able to reverse the aging process and make the mice physiologically younger, despite already suffering the ravages of age.

But it's not so simple for humans

While this study was a huge step forward in our understanding of how telomeres and telomerase impact the aging process, there's a big issue preventing this sort of treatment from going straight into human testing.

Mice produce telomerase all throughout their short lives, but the enzyme is switched off in adult humans with our longer life spans, because when our cells are allowed to divide and replicate unchecked, they have a nasty habit of developing into cancers.

Although a telomerase-activating compound was recently discovered, telomerase rejuvenation in adults is directly linked to the development and spread of cancers throughout the body – so while a telomerase-based anti-aging treatment might produce valuable results in older humans, scientists also believe it would kick the risk of cancer up several orders of magnitude.

So the study isn't the sort of breakthrough that will lead directly and immediately to any sort of treatment for humans – but it's another step forward in science's inevitable march towards human immortality. Imagine what a gift it would be for an 80-year-old to be given an injection that could tell the cells in his body to rebuild itself in the physical health he enjoyed as a 25-year-old, knowing everything he knows.

There are already debates flaring over the ethics of extending lifespan, and the question of whether humans should submit themselves to the long-accepted ravages of aging and death or use our amazing command of science to avoid them. But the fact is, we're going to work out how to do it sooner or later, whether or not it involves this sort of telomere repair process, and a significant number of people will want to use such a technology to repair their bodies and see what life is like in the next few centuries.

Would you be one of them?

[Betruger]

By Loz Blain

November 29, 2010

[williatw]

By Loz Blain

November 29, 2010

Yes I noticed it was over three years old when I posted it. I remember hearing about the Telomerase enzyme making a big splash in the late '90's, but this is the first I heard about whether Telomerase therapy just might cause whole body rejuvenation. I think the Cancer fear is overblown, cancer cells already are "immortalized", though I suppose it might increase likelihood, don't know. I think a company called Sierra Sciences specializes in telomeres, haven’t heard anything from them in a while.

http://www.sierrasci.com/

[williatw]

Gartner Says Uses of 3D Printing Will Ignite Major Debate on Ethics and Regulation

Rapid Development of 3D Bioprinters Will Spark Calls to Ban the Technology for Human and Nonhuman Use by 2016

Escalation of 3D Printing Capabilities Will Change Retail Models and Threaten Intellectual Property

The technology of 3D "bioprinting" (the medical application of 3D printing to produce living tissue and organs) is advancing so quickly that it will spark a major ethical debate on its use by 2016, according to Gartner Inc. At the same time, 3D printing of non-living medical devices such as prosthetic limbs, combined with a burgeoning population and insufficient levels of healthcare in emerging markets, is likely to cause an explosion in demand for the technology by 2015.

"3D bioprinting facilities with the ability to print human organs and tissue will advance far faster than general understanding and acceptance of the ramifications of this technology," said Pete Basiliere, research director at Gartner. Already in August 2013, the Hangzhou Dianzi University in China announced it had invented the biomaterial 3D printer Regenovo, which printed a small working kidney that lasted four months. Earlier in 2013, a two-year-old child in the US received a windpipe built with her own stem cells.

Mr. Basiliere added: "These initiatives are well-intentioned, but raise a number of questions that remain unanswered. What happens when complex 'enhanced' organs involving nonhuman cells are made? Who will control the ability to produce them? Who will ensure the quality of the resulting organs?"

Nevertheless, the day when 3D-bioprinted human organs are readily available is drawing closer, and will result in a complex debate involving a great many political, moral and financial interests.

As 3D printing technology continues to mature, its ability to build customized human anatomical parts has pervasive appeal in medical device markets — especially in economically weak and war-torn regions — where it addresses high demand for prosthetic and other medical devices. In addition, increasing familiarity within the material sciences and computer-augmented design services sectors, and integration with healthcare and hospitals, will further increase demand from 2015 onwards.

"The overall success rates of 3D printing use cases in emerging regions will escalate for three main reasons: the increasing ease of access and commoditization of the technology; ROI; and because it simplifies supply chain issues with getting medical devices to these regions," said Mr. Basiliere. "Other primary drivers are a large population base with inadequate access to healthcare, in regions often marred by internal conflicts, wars or terrorism."

http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2658315

[Skipjack]

Gartner Says Uses of 3D Printing Will Ignite Major Debate on Ethics and Regulation

Rapid Development of 3D Bioprinters Will Spark Calls to Ban the Technology for Human and Nonhuman Use by 2016

Escalation of 3D Printing Capabilities Will Change Retail Models and Threaten Intellectual Property

The technology of 3D "bioprinting" (the medical application of 3D printing to produce living tissue and organs) is advancing so quickly that it will spark a major ethical debate on its use by 2016, according to Gartner Inc. At the same time, 3D printing of non-living medical devices such as prosthetic limbs, combined with a burgeoning population and insufficient levels of healthcare in emerging markets, is likely to cause an explosion in demand for the technology by 2015.

"3D bioprinting facilities with the ability to print human organs and tissue will advance far faster than general understanding and acceptance of the ramifications of this technology," said Pete Basiliere, research director at Gartner. Already in August 2013, the Hangzhou Dianzi University in China announced it had invented the biomaterial 3D printer Regenovo, which printed a small working kidney that lasted four months. Earlier in 2013, a two-year-old child in the US received a windpipe built with her own stem cells.

Mr. Basiliere added: "These initiatives are well-intentioned, but raise a number of questions that remain unanswered. What happens when complex 'enhanced' organs involving nonhuman cells are made? Who will control the ability to produce them? Who will ensure the quality of the resulting organs?"

Nevertheless, the day when 3D-bioprinted human organs are readily available is drawing closer, and will result in a complex debate involving a great many political, moral and financial interests.

As 3D printing technology continues to mature, its ability to build customized human anatomical parts has pervasive appeal in medical device markets — especially in economically weak and war-torn regions — where it addresses high demand for prosthetic and other medical devices. In addition, increasing familiarity within the material sciences and computer-augmented design services sectors, and integration with healthcare and hospitals, will further increase demand from 2015 onwards.

"The overall success rates of 3D printing use cases in emerging regions will escalate for three main reasons: the increasing ease of access and commoditization of the technology; ROI; and because it simplifies supply chain issues with getting medical devices to these regions," said Mr. Basiliere. "Other primary drivers are a large population base with inadequate access to healthcare, in regions often marred by internal conflicts, wars or terrorism."

http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2658315

So wait, it is more moral to hope that someone will die in order to harvest his (less fitting) organs for transplants than 3D printing them? In some extreme cases people even get murdered for their organs. Not to mention all the suffering and hanging in limbo for those on the (cruel) transplant lists, waiting for organs (and their families). People have some really strange ideas of morals.

[kurt9]

Luddite bioethicists (people who want to limit or ban this 3-D printing technology for medical use) can be used as a source of organs for transplants. That is their only value to the rest of society at all. If their organs are no good, at least they can be ground up and used as fertilizer for organic farms.

[williatw]

So wait, it is more moral to hope that someone will die in order to harvest his (less fitting) organs for transplants than 3D printing them? In some extreme cases people even get murdered for their organs. Not to mention all the suffering and hanging in limbo for those on the (cruel) transplant lists, waiting for organs (and their families). People have some really strange ideas of morals.

Luddite bioethicists (people who want to limit or ban this 3-D printing technology for medical use) can be used as a source of organs for transplants. That is their only value to the rest of society at all. If their organs are no good, at least they can be ground up and used as fertilizer for organic farms.

I think the issue is the same as those who are opposed to genetic engineering of people..."enhanced" organs in people would be in some people's eyes "playing god" or something, that's the primary reason for the objection. Admittedly perceptive of them to realize that given the ability to produce biologically compatable organs on demand, people wouldn't stop at merely replacing; they would inevitably want upgrades, ones better than the ones they were born with. And also the "rich" would of course be the best positioned to take advantage of it, at least at first.

[Skipjack]

I think the issue is the same as those who are opposed to genetic engineering of people..."enhanced" organs in people would be in some people's eyes "playing god" or something, that's the primary reason for the objection.

In other words a fantasy issue.

[zapkitty]

In other words a fantasy issue.

... to be more precise it's a potentially revenue-generating fantasy issue for Gartner Inc.

http://www.gartner.com

Gartner delivers technology research to global technology business leaders to make informed decisions on key initiatives.

[Diogenes]

http://www.technologyreview.com/review/524451/genome-surgery/

[GIThruster]

Gartner Says Uses of 3D Printing Will Ignite Major Debate on Ethics and Regulation

Rapid Development of 3D Bioprinters Will Spark Calls to Ban the Technology for Human and Nonhuman Use by 2016

Escalation of 3D Printing Capabilities Will Change Retail Models and Threaten Intellectual Property

The technology of 3D "bioprinting" (the medical application of 3D printing to produce living tissue and organs) is advancing so quickly that it will spark a major ethical debate on its use by 2016, according to Gartner Inc.
http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2658315

So wait, it is more moral to hope that someone will die in order to harvest his (less fitting) organs for transplants than 3D printing them? In some extreme cases people even get murdered for their organs. Not to mention all the suffering and hanging in limbo for those on the (cruel) transplant lists, waiting for organs (and their families). People have some really strange ideas of morals.

Sounds like a straw man argument made by Gartner. Real bio-ethics debates seldom have the vacuous basis he's here proposing. It is normally people in the life sciences who have no ethics training, nor intentions to honor any ethics, who catalyze such discussions. Obviously the biggest debate over the last decade has been the use of human embryo stem cells and what we found was they were never necessary to begin with. This didn't stop big business like Gartner from misrepresenting the argument regularly for many years. To this day, people still believe the bullshit put out by the bio-industry that using embryo's is illegal when in fact, all that happened was it was unfunded. Thank your modern bio-com for that ubiquitous misunderstanding they deliberately created.

Bio-ethics is probably the most complex subject in modern philosophy, but even given all the details, it is extremely unlikely any serious groups will object to bio-printing organs. railing against these non-existant groups is just part of the knee-jerk reaction Gartner wants. The question is why do they want it. Makes me wonder if they don't want to start cloning humans. There is a law against that in almost every civilized nation in the world, but even that is a mere inconvenience since Gartner can easily go to South Korea to clone people. Probably the issue is one of funding--who is going to pay for all this? Gartner would love to develop the technology with taxpayer dollars and zero investment. That may be the real issue.

[Skipjack]

I find the whole cloning scare a non issue as well. Oh and I am for embryonic stem cell research, pretty much anything that will safe lives is fair game.