Nanotech Living-Cell Treatment Medicine Tested In Rats

Brian Wang writes: "Precursors of the nanotech medical cures are being tested in rats. Mem capsules with 7 nm holes let out insulin from cells inside the capsule. The holes allow nutrients in to keep the cells alive but keep out the immune system cells to keep the cells alive. Since the cells and the capsules last basically the lifetime of the person, they are effectively a cure. They will take some years to go through long term small animal trials and then to monkey and finally to human trials. The technique can be applied to other diseases. Parkisons, hemophilia etc ..."

Comments

Biocapsules safety not yet studied?

[Wills]

One issue that really stands out is the potential for these super-tough biocapsules to act as safe harbours for a dangerous infectious agent like a virus or prion. The hole diameter in these biocapsules is 7nm. Deadly prion particles capable of causing BSE (mad cow disease) readily slip through 7nm holes. Once a biocapsule is hosting a virus or prion the body's immune system is useless against the invader because it can't reach inside the biocapsule ("It's a challenging tightrope act because if the nanopores are too small, they can't let nutrients in, like sugars and oxygen, to keep the cells alive. But if they're too big, the antibodies can get in and kill the insulin cells", Desai said.)

No sane researcher would risk a bet against virii below the biocapsule's hole size (7nm) being found; years ago the smallest known virus was Hep.B (35nm), a few years ago it was Parvovirus (25nm), now it's Gemini (15nm).

The safety issues need thorough research. Academic research does not have to address safety issues, although most researchers do it as a matter of good practice at the pre-commercial stage which gives more time for potential problems to be identified and debated in the academic community. However Desai does not discuss safety issues in any of her three published papers on biocapsules. This omission is quite surprising because following the gene therapy tragedy at U.Pennsylvania universities have toughened the faculty guidelines and policies on a wide range of safety issues in medical research. Responsible publications have similarly tightened their refereeing policy. Like most referees I'd normally expect authors to address relevant safety issues in submitted papers, otherwise I'd recommend rejection.

Apparently Desai has a patent on biocapsules and is developing it into a therapy with a company called iMEDD in Columbus, Ohio. Obviously the FDA will ensure the technology goes thru safety testing (Phase 2 trials etc) to comply with FDA licensing requirements, but I hope the company actively encourages Desai to follow up and make good her omission of detailed safety research with publications in the academic literature (including safety-related work under NDAs).