Slashdot Mirror
Nano Subs in your Blood
Noryungi writes "The BBC is reporting about bacteria-propelled nano-subs that can be used to deliver drugs in the bloodstream. Interesting part is that (a) salmonella bacteria are ideal for this and (b) that prototypes could be just one year away. Nano-VaporWare?" Somehow, I think the one-year estimate seems a bit optimistic.
Let's not put the cart before the horse, people.
$ man reality
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Antibiotics are drugs which kill bacteria. These can be either natural (Pennicillin) or synthetic (like Amoxicillin, or any other variation).
Antibodies are cells(?) produced by the immune system that mark and immobilize antigens (invaders) so that white blood cells can more easily capture and destroy them.
It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
--Scott Adams
are you on drugs? What is blood but cells? Red blood cels, white blood cels etc. If your sub is the size of a blood cell, how are you going to 'paint' that sub with blood exactly?
You can't handle the truth.
I think that, for the first few days anyways, Salmonella reproduces *much* faster than your body can destroy it. Your body rarely ignores any foreign material that is put inside of it (opening for lame jokes here). Once the immune system gets ramped up, and figures out how to make the antibodies, the salmonella doesn't stand much of a chance.
It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
--Scott Adams
We've all read Fantastic Voyage, and know the problems those guys had with antibodies... (not to base my theories on a scene in a novel or anything:)
I think that it's worth bearing in mind that the book was written by Issac Asimov, that's Professor Asimov of the UMass Department of Biochemistry. Whilst I'm not saying he wouldn't use a bit of artistic license I'm think he'd probably be closer to the facts, as known at the time, than certain random Sci-Fi authors who make it up as they go along.
IIRC in the book a major feature of the sub was that it could mimic the electric field produced by the antigens of the bodies own cells, this being how the immune system recognises self from non-self cells. Something like this would probably be needed if the nanites were going to spend long in the body (eg the classic Cyberpunk idea of nanites lying dormant until need to fix a wound type of thing), you could probably get away without it for short jobs as by the time the immune system had geared up enough to seriously impede the work the job would be finished. From what I recall of my biochemistry course it takes several hours at least for the immune system to fully respond, less time for re-infections.
Stephen
"Don't write down to your readers, the only people less intelligent than you can't read" - Sign on Newspaper Office Wall
????????
Everything that gets into your blood is coated with your blood. Hopefully your body recognizes virii, bacteria and these subs as foreign, otherwise you're screwed.
You can't handle the truth.
Bacteria are not cute. Abuse of animals which are not cute doesn't count. For instance, you can abuse a rat and it's ok. Rats are not cute. OTOH hamsters are cute, so don't even dream about abusing one without PETA (that other PETA) screaming bloody murder. Hope it helps.
--
He was saying, what keeps the immune system from attacking the sub. He doesn't expect the sub to be and antibody.
Spencer Ogden
While nature does not provide the perfect solution, it does provide the one best one that it has tailored up to that point (natural selection). The point to make here however is that humans (and life on Earth for that matter) are the solution to what? All we are is the end result of an evolutionary chain - there are lots of other animals on this planet, and if you like we can say that all they (and us) have really done is promoted the spread of life, adapting to our environment. Now, I know that human progress is very good at designing things and whatnot, but evolution has had one thing that we haven't - billions of years of trial and error!
I agree that natures solutions are often limited to their respective environments, this is the key of evolution (being able to adapt to your particular environment), so it is quite obvious that trying to make a bird fly on a 10 g planet would be rather interesting. The point to make here however is that evolution has created some very interesting devices on the cellular, tissue and organ levels. I believe they are simply using the flagella of the bacteria here - there is nothing advanced about a tail that can wiggle - but can we make anything like that yet? Our sensory perception organs are yet to be matched by anything man-made and as for computing power, well, we still can't even understand our own minds.
I really liked your last line, however I think it would be more coherent if it was presented as the following:
While early effort will get an immense head start by apdapting existing systems, I believe that in the future superior systems will be designed that bear little resemblance to our present biological ones.
I guess the concept of completely artificial doesn't make any sense to me. If we make something, it was 'in the end' crafted by the evolution of our biology. Ah well, just my 2 cents...
UBU
The movie "Fantastic Voyage" is just a screen adaptation of the novel by Isaac Asimov.
[
It was called inner space..
Official GOD FAQ.
First of all, how are they planning to steer these nano-subs. I don't want one of these things inside me taking a wrong turn, and ending up dropping drugs in the wrong place, or even worse, puncturing a capillary, or other body organ.
Second, how would they retrieve the sub once it finished it's work. I'd hate to think of these things degrading inside my body, and releasing all their chemicals and left-over bio-products.
Also, what if one of the nano-subs gets transferred to another person through an open wound. It would start delivering its drugs to the wrong person, with potentially serious results. In that same vein, what if the person was in an accident, and during an emergency surgery, the nano-sub was disabled, or accidentally moved to another part of their body. How would the doctors be able to track them? Don't get me wrong, though, I really like this idea. Assuming that they get everything working, this could mean that people could simply have a little port on their body where they get the nano-subs put in, and then could have the drug delivered over a long term period. It could be great for people on continuous medication, because they would only have to get one injection, and then could go on with their life.
Just my $0.02
Second, how would they retrieve the sub once it finished it's work. I'd hate to think of these things degrading inside my body, and releasing all their chemicals and left-over bio-products.
They don't retreive it - the flagella only have the energy to keep going for an hour or so, and then they die. I'd assume that they would have thought of this problem - plenty of stuff already gets filtered out of your bloodstream anyway, so I doubt it would be that difficult to design a non-toxic solution.
Also, what if one of the nano-subs gets transferred to another person through an open wound.
Again, because they have such a short lifespan this isn't a problem. They're not going to be able to do any damage - after all the whole reason for this is precision targetting of drugs rather than saturation, so there won't be that many of the things in your body at any one time.
This is the sort of thing I think we'll be hearing a lot more of in coming years - a marraige between our increasing ability to design and manufacture things at a sub-microscopic level and Nature's vast wealth of tried and tested designs for all kinds of systems.
It makes far more sense for scientists to utilise a design that is commonly found in Nature than it is to design their own. After all, evolutionary pressures mean that the propeller design of bacterium like salmonella has undergone a far more rigorous selection procedure than even the most quality-conscious engineering team will ever adhere to. Why waste so much effort in designing a likely-inferior system?
It makes a lot of sense to adapt existing systems to our purposes rather than designing everything from scratch. You can bet that prototypes would be a lot further away than a year without this synthesis of man and Nature. Very interesting indeed.
Och aye!
Someone had to put all that chaos there!
______ "Our 'n about"
\_bi_/
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Its sole job is to seek out and destroy foreign organisms in the body. At the very least, I would expect it to attempt to immobilize and then flush out this nano-sub, if it could not destroy it. We've all read Fantastic Voyage, and know the problems those guys had with antibodies... (not to base my theories on a scene in a novel or anything:)
If the only way to avoid this is by taking harsh immuno-suppressant drugs, there had better be huge benefits for me before you can convince me to have these things injected into my bloodstream. That said, cool tech!
It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
--Scott Adams
The one year estimate is for *prototypes*. Now, while people in the computer business have a tendency of confusing prototypes with the final product, that's not the case outside our field.
A prototype in one year looks pretty much a viable estimate. All technologies involved are well known, and it's "just" a matter of combining them.
(8-DCS)